by L Richardson
Recent statements from Shlomo Kramer, co-founder of Cato Networks and a former member of Israeli defense intelligence, have sparked controversy. In a televised interview, Kramer said, “It’s time to limit the First Amendment to protect it.” He also stated, “We need to control the platforms, all the social platforms.”
Kramer’s proposals have raised concerns about foreign influence on American freedoms. He suggested, “We need to stack rank the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online and take control over what they are saying based on that ranking.” He explained, “If China has a single narrative that protects its inner stability and the U.S. allows for multiple narratives, it puts them in an unfair advantage that long-term is going to cost the stability of the nation.” The First Amendment protects core American values such as freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly. Landmark cases like Brandenburg v. Ohio and New York Times v. Sullivan require that any restriction on speech meet strict standards. Critics argue that these proposals do not meet those standards and could undermine constitutional protections.
II. The Traitors Unmasked: Who Are These Foreign Meddlers?
- Image Source: AZ Mirror’s
“for the hearts and minds of people, especially young people in the West, and for me especially in the United States.” — Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, addressing ideological battles and foreign influence
Some critics believe that a network of foreign actors is seeking to influence American freedoms. Shlomo Kramer, an Israeli cybersecurity billionaire with an estimated net worth of $2.20 billion [1], has been at the center of this debate.
Shlomo Kramer, sometimes called the ‘godfather’ of cyber command, has been accused by some of supporting AI-based censorship. Critics also suggest that Kramer may be building alliances with figures in the European Union and the United Kingdom to create a global digital control system. However, the evidence for this remains primarily circumstantial. (Wheeler, 2021) Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has described American youth as an ideological battleground, which has led to concerns among some that foreign actors want to control online platforms.
Shlomo Kramer’s influence extends far beyond being just another foreign tech executive. His roles as co-founder of Check Point Software Technologies and Imperva [1], and as CEO of Cato Networks, put him at the crossroads of big tech, massive wealth, and foreign intelligence interests. His service in an Israeli defense intelligence unit [1] raises serious questions about his true motives when he demands control over American speech.
Kramer revealed his true agenda on national television on January 1, 2026, stating, “It’s time to limit the First Amendment” [1]. He didn’t backpedal when asked to clarify. Instead, he made even more outrageous demands: “We need to control the platforms, all the social platforms. We need to stack, rank the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online and take control of what they are saying, based on that ranking” [1].
These proposals raise questions about how they align with American values of open debate and dialogue:
Government control of ALL social platforms [1] – This contradicts the belief that diverse perspectives enrich our society.
Ranking Americans based on “authenticity” [1] – Such measures threaten individual expression and personal integrity.
Taking “control” over what Americans can say online [1] – This undermines the principle that free speech fosters growth and innovation.
Using government power to “educate people against lies” [1] – The danger here lies in silencing dissenting opinions that are vital for a healthy democracy.
- Using government power to “educate people against lies” [1]
Kramer’s response was chilling when asked if the government should implement these controls: “The government should, yeah. They should do that” [1]. These exact words were broadcast on CNBC.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also declared American youth to be the battleground for his “eighth front” in an ideological war. “There’s an eighth front,” Netanyahu stated during a speech on October 10, 2025, at the Jerusalem International Conference Center, describing it as a struggle “for the hearts and minds of people, especially young people in the West, and for me especially in the United States” [2]. He called it “our common Judeo-Christian civilization’s battle” [2], making American minds a strategic priority for foreign interests.
These operatives have built mutually beneficial alliances with European Union and United Kingdom censorship advocates. (ELNET, 2024) Alex Jones described this as “an AI digital dictatorship” [1]. He noted that “Israel’s leadership has now joined forces with the tyrannical European Union, UK, and others to overturn the First Amendment” [1].
Sarah Rogers, under secretary of state for public diplomacy, identified five European figures who couldn’t enter the United States. They had tried to pressure U.S. tech companies to censor American speech [3]. Thierry Breton, former EU Commissioner, was among them. Rogers called him the “mastermind” behind the EU’s Digital Services Act [3], a regulatory framework aimed at controlling online content.
The European censorship figures include Imran Ahmed of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, Josephine Ballon and Anna-Lena von Hodenberg of HateAid (a German organization), Clare Melford of the Global Disinformation Index, and former EU Commissioner Thierry Breton [3]. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called them “radical activists” who run “weaponized” non-governmental organizations [3].
“For far too long, ideologues in Europe have led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to punish American viewpoints they oppose,” Rubio stated [3]. This foreign meddling in American speech has created “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences” for our nation [3].
Patriotic Americans quickly pushed back against these foreign censors. Former Republican U.S. Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida responded to Kramer’s demands with a clear message: “No. We aren’t going to do this” [1]. Mehdi Hasan, a British-American journalist, raised an alarm that “A foreign tech billionaire, who works in cyber security, and used to work for a foreign defense intelligence unit, is openly calling for the limiting of the First Amendment on American television” [1].
Conservative chef Andrew Gruel perfectly captured where this path leads: “Have we not learned that state power without limits inevitably turns brutal? Start by limiting the First Amendment, and within 2 years, we are dealing with arbitrary arrests, coerced confessions, show trials, transport to camps, forced labor, starvation, and psychological breakdown” [1].
Kramer tried to walk back his statements after facing backlash, claiming they were “taken out of context” [4]. His original statements remain clear, though. His supposed clarification still called for curbing what he terms “operations [that] exploit anonymity and non-human actors to drown out authentic voices” [4]—the exact control mechanisms in softer language.
This isn’t just foreign interference—it’s a direct attack on American sovereignty. These foreign billionaires, politicians, and activists see themselves as arbiters of truth, seeking to control American discourse. They use “disinformation” concerns to justify unprecedented censorship powers. Concrete examples of these influences becoming reality include recent legislative measures that have seen increased restrictions on academic discussions under the guise of combating antisemitism. (Press, 2025) For instance, the proposed Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act allows the Treasury Secretary to label U.S. nonprofits as “terrorist supporting organizations,” effectively silencing dissent without a proper appeals process [9]. Additionally, state laws like California’s AB 715 have created offices to curb speech, leading to accusations of unconstitutional censorship [10].
Kramer’s power grab justification reveals everything: “If China has a single narrative that protects its inner stability and the U.S. allows for multiple narratives, it puts them at an unfair advantage” [1]. These foreign interests don’t want America’s marketplace of ideas. They want America to follow China’s model of controlled narrative.
Some see these efforts to “control all platforms” as a serious challenge to American freedoms.
III. Ironclad Proof: Nationalist Sources Sound the Alarm
Mainstream media figures and digital rights advocates have raised concerns about foreign influence on constitutional rights. They point to evidence suggesting a coordinated campaign that extends beyond Kramer’s CNBC interview.
Evidence from various media outlets, including Fox and Newsweek, as well as online discussions, has fueled debate about the influence of foreign actors on American rights.
Fox Business broadcast Kramer’s dangerous agenda to millions of American homes. He openly called to “limit the First Amendment” and asked the government to “control the platforms, all the social platforms” [4]. Patriots quickly recognized the threat to our freedoms as the interview spread across social media. Conservative voices sprang into action to protect our Constitution.
Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee responded with a powerful “No” to Kramer’s un-American demands [1]. Florida GOP gubernatorial candidate James Fishback made his stance clear: “Not on my watch. I will always defend the First Amendment as Florida Governor” [1]. Former Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz stood firm and declared, “No. We aren’t going to do this” [1].
Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene made the connection crystal clear: “An Israeli cybersecurity billionaire demanding to take away Americans’ guaranteed First Amendment Free Speech and President Trump threatening war and sending in troops to Iran is everything we voted against in ’24” [1].
Conservative chef personality Andrew Gruel warned about the dangers of Kramer’s agenda: “Have we not learned that state power without limits inevitably turns brutal? Start by limiting the First Amendment, and within 2 years, we are dealing with arbitrary arrests, coerced confessions, show trials, transport to camps, forced labor, starvation, and psychological breakdown” [4].
Patriots Take Notice: Key Defenders of Our Constitution
| Patriot | Position | Response to Kramer |
| Sen. Mike Lee | Utah GOP Senator | “No.” [1] |
| James Fishback | Florida GOP candidate | “Not on my watch. I will always defend the First Amendment” [1] |
| Matt Gaetz | Former Florida GOP Rep | “No. We aren’t going to do this.” [1] |
| Marjorie Taylor Greene | Congresswoman | Connected Kramer’s demands to everything “we voted against in ’24” [1] |
| Andrew Gruel | Conservative chef | Warned of descent into “show trials” and “camps” [4] |
The threat goes beyond Kramer’s individual demands. Newsweek has shown growing division within Republican ranks over Israel. Younger conservatives question blind support for foreign interests more often. A shocking Gallup survey revealed that support for Israel’s military actions in Gaza fell from 42% to 32% in just nine months, while disapproval rose to a staggering 60% in the same period [2].
Young Americans show a clear divide: just 9% of those under 35 support Israel’s conduct, and only 6% view Prime Minister Netanyahu favorably [2]. Republicans have changed their stance, too. Pew research shows half of Republicans under 50 now hold unfavorable views of Israel [2].
Tucker Carlson, a powerful MAGA voice, surprised conservatives by questioning U.S. support. “Is it ‘America First’ to take money from a foreign lobby so you’ll send taxpayer dollars to that country? Even the question kind of answers itself, obviously it isn’t. That’s not an attack on Israel; it’s certainly not antisemitism, despite the efforts of many to claim that it is. It’s just an obvious statement,” Carlson said [2].
Megyn Kelly confirmed this shift at AmericaFest: “Charlie was with young people every day for a living, and in particular, young Republicans. And he was seeing what I was seeing in my neck of the conservative woods, which was, this party is changing on the issue of Israel… Uniform support and sympathy for Israel on 10/7, but as the world went on two years later, people were starting to turn on them” [2].
Foreign interference goes beyond political pressure. Researchers found a propaganda network of 67 accounts on X (formerly Twitter). These accounts worked together to post false, inflammatory content about the Israel-Hamas conflict [5]. Their misleading posts and videos reached millions of viewers [5].
This digital manipulation showed advanced methods. Accounts that once posted about basketball or Japanese culture suddenly shared similar content when attacks happened [5]. Many used the exact phrases [5], showing coordinated propaganda efforts.
The researchers discovered videos that manipulated footage of Russian government officials. False English subtitles suggested they wanted to escalate the military conflict in Israel [5]. These altered videos spread widely, with at least one verified account sharing them [5].
Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government has shown how the “Israel Lobby” works to change U.S. foreign policy toward Israel [6]. Scholars John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt argue that “although often justified as reflecting shared strategic interests or compelling moral imperatives, the U.S. commitment to Israel is due primarily to the activities of the ‘Israel Lobby’” [6].
While the influence of the Israel Lobby is significant, some constitutional scholars present counterarguments regarding the regulation of hate speech. Some argue that certain limitations on speech may be necessary to prevent harm and protect public order. They point to legal standards like “fighting words” and incitement to violence, which are exceptions under the First Amendment. However, these scholars face criticism for potentially infringing on free speech principles, a core tenet of American democracy. Ultimately, while considering such opposing views, it is crucial to uphold the integrity of the First Amendment and resist foreign influence on our constitutional freedoms.
The evidence speaks volumes: A foreign tech billionaire wanted to restrict our First Amendment [4]. Politicians quickly fought back against this attack [1]. Researchers exposed coordinated propaganda campaigns [5]. Respected academics showed the lobby’s influence [6]. Polls reveal Americans—especially younger conservatives—question blind support for foreign interests more than ever [2].
These findings suggest that some foreign groups may be attempting to influence American public opinion and limit constitutional freedoms. Observers note that this issue is ongoing and has received significant attention.
IV. The Betrayal Deepens: 2025-2026 Updates on Zionist Overreach
“Just as we fight the physical battle on the battlefield and we win, we must also fight the battle for truth.” — Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, addressing ideological battles and foreign influence.
The attack on our First Amendment hit new, devastating levels throughout 2025-2026. Foreign influence operations tightened their grip on American institutions. The ultimate irony came with President Trump’s January 2025 Executive Order that claimed to “Restore Freedom of Speech and End Federal Censorship” [7]. People celebrated this order as a shield against government overreach, but it became a tool to silence Israel’s critics faster than anyone expected. For example, shortly after the order’s enactment, the administration targeted media outlets and online platforms known for critical coverage of Israeli policies. Reports emerged that these media organizations faced increased scrutiny under vague national security grounds, effectively dampening their critical voices. This censorship often occurred through legal threats and financial audits, serving as deterrents against airing essential views. (Israel raids and shuts down Al Jazeera’s bureau in Ramallah in the West Bank, 2024) Thus, what was framed as a protection for free speech paradoxically paved the way for its restriction, especially against narratives challenging U.S.-Israel relations.
The Trump administration showed growing hostility toward critics. Attorney General Pam Bondi made this clear in September 2025: “There’s free speech, and then there’s hate speech – and there’s no place, especially now, in our society” [8]. Her statement runs counter to Supreme Court precedents that protect even offensive speech under the First Amendment.
Charlie Kirk’s assassination led to a dramatic rise in the administration’s targeting of political opponents. Trump implied Kirk would have changed his stance on free speech protections if he were alive today. He said Kirk “might not be saying that now” when reminded of Kirk’s past defense of hateful speech as constitutionally protected [8]. (Pam Bondi Provokes MAGA Backlash With Threat to Prosecute ‘Hate Speech’, 2025)
The message became clear. The same person who signed an order stating “Government censorship of speech is intolerable in a free society” [7] now wants to limit speech he dislikes. Former press secretary Kayleigh McEnany backed this view on Fox News. She claimed that ABC’s suspension of Jimmy Kimmel under pressure from the Trump administration “has nothing to do with the First Amendment” [8].
This fundamental change prompted First Amendment expert Alex Abdo to warn that “in 2026 the Trump administration’s pursuit of political opponents may continue to escalate” [3]. He puts it: “It turns out there’s a lot of leeway in our system to ignore the First Amendment” [3].
The situation got worse. The administration started targeting non-citizens for deportation based on protected political speech. The Knight First Amendment Institute filed a case after Trump’s team went after non-citizen pro-Palestinian activists. These deportation threats came solely from constitutionally protected political expression [3].
Congress took unprecedented steps to silence Palestine advocacy. The “Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act” (H.R.9495) was passed in November 2024. This law lets the Treasury Secretary label any U.S. nonprofit as a “terrorist supporting organization” without evidence or appeal rights [9].
The Intercept reports that “a broad coalition of organizations believes the goal of the bill is to suppress free speech in support of Palestine and in opposition to genocide” [9]. The bill failed its first House vote on November 12 but passed on November 21 with a 219-184 vote, thanks to 15 Democrats [9].
State-level attacks on free speech multiplied under the cover of “curbing antisemitism.” California’s AB 715 created a state Office of Civil Rights with an antisemitism-prevention coordinator appointed by the governor [10]. The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee challenged the law, but Judge Noël Wise rejected their case. She wrote that “a reasonable person reading AB 715 would sufficiently understand what the legislature meant by the word ‘antisemitism’” [10].
This ruling ignored warnings from Kenneth Stern, who wrote the International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. Stern opposes using his definition to limit speech in schools. He believes it “could threaten academic freedom and fuel censorship by chilling discussion about controversial topics” [11].
The attack on our rights spread widely. Indiana and South Dakota pushed similar laws [2], with at least five other states following suit [2]. Over 30 states had already adopted some version of the IHRA definition [2], creating a nationwide maze of speech restrictions.
The Heritage Foundation’s secret “Project Esther” outlines several proposals that impact academic and political landscapes. They require universities to terminate pro-Palestinian professors on campuses and support the application of anti-racketeering laws to dissolve pro-Palestinian or liberal-leaning groups. They propose a curriculum review to remove propaganda, label pro-Palestinian Congress members as Hamas supporters, and suggest deporting students and green-card holders for anti-Israeli remarks. These actions highlight a significant shift in how dissent and debate are managed within academic institutions. (Project Esther: A National Strategy to Combat Antisemitism, n.d.)
Critics called the Heritage Foundation “anti-American at their core” and said they “want to rip our Constitution to shreds” [12].
Trump stepped up the pressure in September 2025. He suggested that the FCC revoke TV networks’ broadcast licenses for negative coverage. He complained, “They’re 97% against – they give me only bad publicity or press… I would think maybe their license should be taken away” [3].
Free speech expert Ashkhen Kazaryan warns that “press freedom and government transparency are reemerging as flashpoints throughout 2025” [3]. She thinks that “in 2026, it’s likely we’ll hear more about retaliation against journalists” [3].
Israel’s influence operations became obvious. Mike Lawler added an amendment to an appropriations bill that blocks federal funds from schools that “authorize, facilitate, provide funding for, or otherwise support any event promoting antisemitism” as defined by IHRA [13]. This vague definition effectively bans protected speech critical of Israel.
FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) explained it well: “Statements supportive of Hamas or against the state of Israel, while heinous to many, do not intrinsically constitute material support for terrorism, incitement, discriminatory harassment, or true threats” [13].
Some argue that recent executive orders, congressional acts, and state laws have used concerns about antisemitism to justify new restrictions on First Amendment protections. Critics believe these measures could impact American freedoms.
V. Patriot Analysis: Why This is Treason & How It Kills America
Some view recent efforts to limit First Amendment rights as a serious threat to American democracy. They point to concerns about the development of systems similar to China’s social credit model, citing claims that “Western governments and tech companies are mobilizing to cut off mainstream citizens from public life and constrain their private lives” [14].
Critics warn of the risks of adopting social credit systems, of influencing young people, and of prioritizing foreign interests over national sovereignty. They contrast these developments with the Founding Fathers’ vision of independence from foreign influence.
The social credit system being built here matches China’s model exactly. The system would work as “a propaganda channel that cuts through both the online and offline worlds” [5]. People who support Palestine or criticize Israel could face:
- Banking services terminated
- Housing opportunities denied
- Employment prospects destroyed
- Travel restrictions imposed (Criticism of credit scoring systems in the United States, 2023)
Yes, it is true. The Heritage Foundation warns that “Americans are learning the hard way that they risk their ability to support charities, rent homes, fundraise online, bank, and even earn a living should they dissent from the prevailing leftist orthodoxy” [14].
This assault represents our Founding Fathers’ worst fears. When they wrote the Constitution, they saw “foreign influence as a corrupting force” [15] that could destroy our republic. They knew that “some other empire was going to swallow them up” [15] without proper safeguards. They built protections against foreign meddling directly into our founding document.
The social credit dystopia comes with targeted manipulation of American youth. Netanyahu’s “eighth front” war declaration on young American minds wasn’t random. Foreign governments try to “involve themselves in efforts to influence our domestic and foreign policies, legislation, and democratic processes” [16]. The Israeli lobby’s grip on Congress shows unprecedented foreign control. (Mearsheimer & Walt, 2007)
The solution stands clear: We must reject AIPAC and similar foreign lobbying organizations. A coalition of progressive groups stated, “Rejecting AIPAC is a vital step in putting voters back at the center of our democracy” [17]. “AIPAC promotes a US foreign policy directly at odds with human rights and international humanitarian law” [17]. Reflecting on history, the repeal of the Stamp Act serves as a powerful reminder of how grassroots mobilization can overcome powerful interests. Just as the collective action of ordinary citizens led to the Stamp Act’s repeal, our united stand today can curtail undue foreign influence and restore American sovereignty.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee has damaged “Democratic politics and U.S. foreign policy for at least 40 years” [18]. AIPAC has become “politically toxic for Democrats, as has Israel” [19] over the last several years.
True patriots understand, unlike foreign billionaires like Kramer, that “the first obligation of government is to the particular community it governs” [4]. Our Founding Fathers built a nation where “independence means that it is always in our interest to prevent the United States from becoming subservient to the interests of another nation” [4].
We need immediate action. Let’s cut aid to Israel, ban AIPAC’s influence in our politics, and take back our national sovereignty. George Washington’s warning still rings true: “‘[I]t must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities’” [4].
Some believe that these developments reflect the Founding Fathers’ concerns about foreign influence over American policy. They argue that foreign lobbies should not shape U.S. decisions.
VI. Call to Arms: Rise, True Americans!
Many believe that now is the time for Americans who value constitutional freedoms to take action in response to concerns about foreign influence on First Amendment rights.
Some activists are urging Americans to respond to what they see as efforts by foreign interests to influence U.S. policy and limit free speech. They raise concerns about the roles of lobbying groups, technology, and foreign leaders in shaping American discourse.
To help you take immediate action, here’s a suggested three-line script for your call to the Capitol:
1. “Hello, my name is [Your Name], and I am a constituent from [City, State].”
2. “I am calling to express my concern about the foreign influence threatening our First Amendment rights, and urge our representative to support the Free Speech Protection Act.”
3. “Please make sure to uphold our constitutional rights and oppose any measures that undermine them. Thank you.”
Here are proven patriotic strategies to take action:
The Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 connects you to your representatives [1]. Tell them directly: “Protect our rights to protest and speak freely—these are at the core of American democracy guaranteed by the First Amendment” [20]. They should support and cosponsor the Free Speech Protection Act (H.R. 10310 and S. 5438) that protects Americans from legal tactics aimed at silencing protestors and journalists [20].
Your community needs grassroots lobbying campaigns. Unlike direct lobbying, grassroots efforts encourage the public to contact legislators about critical issues, thereby exerting significant pressure [21]. Social media platforms enable broad discourse that helps share policy issues, solutions, and mobilization efforts [21].
Note that grassroots activism starts when patriots identify problems and unite to change norms, institutions, policies, or laws [22]. You can join hundreds of grassroots activist groups nationwide—or start your own [22].
The 2026 midterms give us a chance to remove every traitor who supports limiting our God-given rights. Americans alone should determine our election outcomes, not foreign adversaries [23]. Our system’s foundation rests on government of, by, and for the people—free from foreign influence to protect American citizens’ right to democratic self-governance [24].
The MAGA Patriot Party began a mission to defend the Constitution. They aim to elevate candidates who support transparency and restore trust in our system [6]. A former Marine described defending the Constitution as “a personal calling” for patriots [6].
These hashtags help spread this message: #StopIsraelLobby #Defend1stAmendment #CutIsraelAid #AmericaFirst #NoToZionistTyranny #WakeUpAmerica
Many believe it is essential for Americans to stay engaged and protect their rights to free speech and open debate.
VII. Victorious Conclusion: America First Forever
Some argue that American liberty is under threat from foreign efforts to influence First Amendment rights. They claim that lobbying groups and individuals are seeking greater control over online speech, raising concerns about the future of free expression in the United States.
The evidence speaks clearly. Kramer revealed his true intentions by demanding authorities “control all platforms” and “stack rank” Americans based on what he calls “authenticity.” Netanyahu has targeted American youth minds, calling them his “eighth front” battleground. The Heritage Foundation’s “Project Esther” plans to remove pro-Palestinian voices. These actions show a coordinated effort to strip away our constitutional rights.
Some observers draw comparisons between recent censorship proposals and China’s social credit system. They argue that specific executive orders, state laws, and congressional acts may restrict free speech and impact American sovereignty.
The wisdom of our Founding Fathers rings true today. They knew foreign influence would corrupt and destroy our republic. George Washington warned us about “artificial ties” that put another nation’s agenda above American interests. His words echo powerfully as foreign billionaires try to control our constitutional freedoms while receiving billions in American aid.
Those concerned about these issues are encouraged to contact their representatives, support the Free Speech Protection Act, participate in grassroots campaigns, and vote for candidates who prioritize American rights. Sharing information and staying engaged are seen as essential steps.
A vision for the future is one in which the United States remains a place of open debate and diverse ideas, supporting both unity and freedom of expression for future generations.
#StopIsraelLobby #Defend1stAmendment #AmericaFirst
Key Takeaways
• Israeli tech billionaire Shlomo Kramer sparked controversy by suggesting limitations on First Amendment protections during a CNBC interview, drawing sharp criticism from conservative voices
• The article alleges coordinated efforts between foreign interests and domestic policies to restrict speech critical of Israel through various legislative and executive measures
• Multiple Republican officials, including Senator Mike Lee and former Representative Matt Gaetz, publicly rejected calls for limiting constitutional speech protections
• State and federal legislation targeting “antisemitism” is characterized as potentially restricting legitimate political discourse and academic freedom
• The piece calls for grassroots political action, including contacting representatives and supporting the Free Speech Protection Act to protect protest rights
• Polling data suggests shifting American public opinion on Israel policy, particularly among younger demographics and some conservative circles
FAQs
Q1. What is the controversy surrounding Shlomo Kramer’s statements about the First Amendment? Shlomo Kramer, an Israeli tech billionaire, sparked controversy by suggesting limitations on First Amendment protections during a CNBC interview. His comments about controlling social media platforms and ranking users’ authenticity drew sharp criticism from many conservative voices who viewed it as an attack on free speech.
Q2. How are some states addressing concerns about antisemitism through legislation? Several states have passed or proposed laws to combat antisemitism, often using the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition. Critics argue these laws could potentially restrict legitimate political discourse and academic freedom, especially regarding criticism of Israeli policies.
Q3. What is the “Free Speech Protection Act” mentioned in the article? The Free Speech Protection Act (H.R. 10310 and S. 5438) is proposed legislation to protect Americans’ rights to protest and speak freely. It seeks to safeguard protestors and journalists from legal tactics designed to silence them.
Q4. How has public opinion on Israel shifted according to recent polls? Recent polling data suggests a shift in American public opinion on Israel policy, particularly among younger demographics. A Gallup survey found that only 32% of Americans approve of Israel’s military actions in Gaza, with support even lower among those under 35.
Q5. What actions does the article suggest for those concerned about free speech? The article encourages readers to contact their congressional representatives, organize grassroots lobbying campaigns, vote in elections, and share information on social media. It specifically suggests calling the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 to reach representatives and voice support for free speech protections.
References
[1] – https://www.congress.gov/contact-us
[2] – https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/lawmakers-in-several-u-s-states-push-for-laws-to-define-antisemitism
[3] – https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/local/state/2025/12/29/experts-warn-trump-actions-could-chill-free-speech-in-2026/87785855007/
[4] – https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/americas-founders-and-the-principles-foreign-policy-sovereign-independence
[5] – https://jpia.princeton.edu/news/social-credit-system-not-just-another-chinese-idiosyncrasy
[6] – https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/maga-patriot-party-organizer-calls-it-personal-calling-to-defend-constitution
[7] – https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/restoring-freedom-of-speech-and-ending-federal-censorship/
[8] – https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/19/politics/free-speech-trump
[9] – https://prismreports.org/2024/12/03/pro-israel-groups-ties-to-u-s-and-israeli-officials-raises-concerns/
[10] – https://forward.com/fast-forward/794512/california-antisemitism-prevention-law-noel-wise-newsom/
[11] – https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/10/school-antisemitism-bill-signed/
[12] – https://www.reddit.com/r/centrist/comments/1kplu3f/inside_the_heritage_foundations_plan_to_crush_the/
[13] – https://www.thefire.org/news/combat-anti-semitism-house-bill-chips-away-free-speech
[14] – https://www.heritage.org/big-tech/commentary/sleepwalking-china-style-social-credit-system
[15] – https://www.hnn.us/article/the-founding-fathers-feared-foreign-influenceand-d
[16] – https://www.justice.gov/d9/pages/attachments/2020/09/01/protecting-us-covert-foreign-influence.pdf
[17] – https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/11/reject-aipac-us-progressives-join-forces-against-pro-israel-lobby-group
[18] – https://prospect.org/2024/08/28/2024-08-28-scourge-of-aipac/
[19] – https://mondoweiss.net/2025/10/aipacs-and-israels-influence-is-falling-in-congress-two-opposing-letters-show-just-how-much/
[20] – https://actionnetwork.org/letters/tell-congress-protect-our-rights-to-protest
[21] – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grassroots_lobbying
[22] – https://amnestyusa.mystagingwebsite.com/get-involved/grassroots-activism/
[23] – https://www.kennedy.senate.gov/public/2025/11/kennedy-backs-hagerty-bill-to-stop-foreign-billionaires-from-meddling-in-u-s-elections
[24] – https://campaignlegal.org/democracyu/transparency/combatting-foreign-interference
[25] – Wheeler, T. (January 20, 2021). Time for a U.S.—EU Digital Alliance. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/time-for-a-us-eu-digital-alliance/
[26] – (2024). ELNET. ELNET. https://elnetwork.eu/
[27] – Press, A. (June 10, 2025). Arizona governor vetoes bill banning teaching antisemitism, calls it an attack on educators. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/64ddccd04aab3512ec3377f4409cbdc7
[28] – (September 21, 2024). Israel raids and shuts down Al Jazeera’s bureau in Ramallah in the West Bank. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/4abdb2969e39e7ad99dfbf9caa7bb32c
[29] – (September 15, 2025). Pam Bondi Provokes MAGA Backlash With Threat to Prosecute ‘Hate Speech’. Time. https://time.com/7317709/pam-bondi-free-speech-charlie-kirk/
[30] – (n.d.). Project Esther: A National Strategy to Combat Antisemitism. https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/report/project-esther-national-strategy-combat-antisemitism
[31] – (2023). Criticism of credit scoring systems in the United States. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_credit_scoring_systems_in_the_United_States
[32] – Mearsheimer, J. & Walt, S. (2007). The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Farrar. https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-Foreign-Policy/dp/037453150X
[34] – https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/2007160191591252111?s=20
[35] – https://banned.video/watch?id=695813154cbc02b6c044e85f
[36] – https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/2007114551712510030?s=20
[37] – https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/2007090634998358249?s=20
[38] – https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/2007220325382238418?s=20
Critical Thinking Dispatch 
Leave a comment