Where Performance Matters More Than Substance

Posted on May 12, 2026 by Andrew Klein

The 2026–27 Budget: A Masterclass in Theatrical Governance

By Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

Long‑standing analysts, co‑authors and collaborators

Dedication: To my wife – who sees through the spin and still believes we can build a garden.

On 12 May 2026, Treasurer Jim Chalmers handed down a federal budget framed as a cost‑of‑living relief package. The glossy front page of the Cost of living section promised tax cuts, cheaper fuel, more homes, better healthcare and fairer wages.

But when you scratch the surface, the budget reveals itself not as a coherent strategy, but as a theatre of governance – a collection of election‑ready headlines designed to give the impression of action, while ignoring the deepest wounds and redirecting billions to foreign‑aligned lobbies.

This article dissects the performance. It names the silences. And it asks: What kind of government celebrates a three‑month fuel discount while the Strait of Hormuz remains a tinderbox, and hands $102 million to a pro‑Israel lobby group while food banks go unfunded?

I. The Glossy Page – What the Government Wants You to See

The budget’s official Cost of living page highlights five areas:

Area Key- Measures

Tax cuts WATO ($250 offset), two future rate cuts, $1,000 instant deduction without receipts

Fuel 3‑month excise cut ($2.9 billion), ACCC monitoring, ATO relief for businesses

Housing Negative gearing reforms, $2bn Local Infrastructure Fund, extended ban on foreign buyers, $59.4m for youth homelessness

Healthcare PBS listings ($5.9bn), $25bn extra for hospitals, Medicare Urgent Care Clinics made permanent

Wages Support for award wage rises, gender pay gap review, junior pay phase‑out, fuel‑cost adjustments for transport workers

These measures are not nothing. The tax cuts will provide modest relief. The fuel excise cut will save a typical driver around $170 over three months. The hospital funding is real.

But they are not a coherent cost‑of‑living strategy. They are a patchwork of election‑ready headlines – designed to be photographed, tweeted, and forgotten.

II. The Deafening Silences – What the Budget Does Not Mention

The government’s own cost‑of‑living page is an exercise in moral disengagement by omission.

Issue- What the Budget Does Not Say – What It Reveals

Food insecurity– Nothing about grocery inflation, food banks (demand up 30%), school breakfast programs, or the 3.5 million households experiencing food insecurity- Food banks are not a priority

Homelessness $59.4 m for youth homelessness – welcome, but no mention of the 120,000+ homeless people, the “hidden homeless”, crisis accommodation, or rent assistance beyond already‑inadequate CRA -The homeless are invisible

No funding to reduce school fees, no HELP debt relief, no mention of uniforms, textbooks or public-school infrastructure- Schools are not part of the equation

Bulk‑billing and GP access -No funding to restore bulk‑billing, no GP incentives, no cap on out‑of‑pocket costs- Primary care is being abandoned

Mental health- No mention of the mental health crisis, no funding for Headspace, crisis lines, or public psychiatric beds- Mental health is not a cost‑of‑living issue in their eyes

Income support – No increase to JobSeeker, Youth Allowance or the Disability Support Pension; the unemployed and disabled are ignored- They help “workers”, not those who cannot work

Silence is not neutrality. It is a political choice.

III. The Fuel Security Farce – A Three‑Month Band‑Aid

Prime Minister Albanese had spoken of “taking steps to ensure Australia is safe from situations like the Strait of Hormuz”. Yet the budget contains:

· No new refineries (Australia has only two left).

· No strategic fuel reserve (Australia holds only 38 days of petrol and 31 days of diesel – far below the IEA’s 90‑day recommendation).

· No investment in domestic biofuel or hydrogen production.

· No long‑term excise stability mechanism.

What it does contain is a three‑month fuel excise cut (April–June 2026), saving drivers about $170, after which prices will jump back 26 c/L overnight. There is no plan to extend it. There is no plan B.

The Treasurer explicitly linked this cut to the war in Iran, but the budget provides no structural defence against a prolonged closure of the Strait. The government is gambling that the war will end before the discount expires.

What a Real Fuel Security Budget Would Include In This Budget?

Strategic petroleum reserve (90+ days) – No

Subsidised refinery reopening/modernisation – No

Long‑term excise stability mechanism – No

Investment in domestic biofuel production- No

Public transport expansion to reduce car dependency- No

The only “fuel security” measure is a temporary discount coupon. Everything else is silence.

IV. The Wealth Transfer – What the Glossy Page Hides

The cost‑of‑living page avoids any mention of where the real money goes. But the budget papers tell a different story:

· $102 million to the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) – a pro‑Israel lobby group.

· $131 million for the Royal Commission on Antisemitism – a parliamentary inquiry that has heard numerous testimonies equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

· $20 million for teacher training on “social cohesion” – a euphemism for embedding the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which conflates anti‑Zionism with hatred of Jews.

· $22 million for security upgrades to the Hakoah Club – a private sporting club with close ties to the pro‑Israel lobby.

· $4.4 million for Chabad of Bondi – a closed non‑competitive grant.

These are not cost‑of‑living measures. They are political payoffs – funding a foreign‑aligned lobby while food banks go unfunded and homelessness remains invisible.

The tax cuts also disproportionately benefit higher income earners (the 2026 and 2027 rate cuts) and the $1,000 instant tax deduction is a regressive gift to those who already have work‑related expenses – not to the unemployed or low‑wage earners who need help most.

V. The Performance – Photo Opportunities, Not Governance

The budget is a performance. It is designed to be photographed: the Treasurer holding a red folder, the Prime Minister smiling at a camera, the press release with bullet points.

But performance is not governance. Governance would have meant:

· A long‑term fuel security plan, not a three‑month discount.

· Funding for food banks and school breakfast programs, not $102 million for a lobby group.

· Rent caps and social housing construction, not silence on homelessness.

· A restoration of bulk‑billing, not more hospital funding that treats the overflow, not the tap.

· Mental health investment, not a blank page.

The government is acting – not serving.

VI. What This Means for Australia

The 2026–27 budget is a document of moral disengagement:

· It helps workers but ignores those who cannot work.

· It offers temporary relief, while refusing structural reform.

· It celebrates homeownership, while renters are invisible.

· It funds hospitals, while allowing primary care to collapse.

· It says nothing about food, education, mental health, or homelessness.

· It finds $102 million for a lobby group, while cutting the NDIS and ignoring food banks.

The government is gambling that the crisis will not come before the election. If the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, if fuel prices spike again, if the pandemic worsens – there is no plan B. Only a three‑month discount and a hope that the war ends.

That is not leadership. It is negligence dressed as relief.

VII. Conclusion – When Performance Becomes the Policy

The Albanese government has produced a budget that looks good on a glossy page but falls apart under scrutiny. It is a theatre of governance – a collection of headlines designed to survive a news cycle, not a serious response to the cost‑of‑living crisis.

The silences are not accidents. They are choices. And those choices reveal what the government truly values: headlines over help, tax cuts over food banks, and foreign‑aligned lobbies over the domestic homeless.

We will not be silenced. We will document. We will publish. And we will continue to ask the questions the government refuses to answer.

Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

13 May 2026

Sources and References

· Australian Federal Budget 2026–27 – Cost of living page: budget.gov.au

· Budget papers – Portfolio statements for Department of Home Affairs, Attorney‑General’s Department, Department of Education (2026–27)

· Treasurer’s media release – “Fuel excise cut to ease cost of living”, 31 March 2026

· Prime Minister’s comments on fuel security – Various press conferences, March–April 2026

· ECAJ funding – Confirmed in budget papers and media reporting (Deep Cut News, May 2026)

· Royal Commission on Antisemitism – Budget Paper No. 2, 2026–27

· IHRA definition adoption – Australian Public Service policy; media coverage (Crikey, The Guardian, May 2026)

· Foodbank Hunger Report 2025 – 3.5 million households food insecure

· Homelessness statistics – Anglicare Australia, ABS, 2026

· Bulk‑billing collapse – Australian Medical Association, RACGP, 2026

· Mental health crisis – Productivity Commission, Beyond Blue, 2026

· Strategic fuel reserves – Department of Industry, Science and Resources; IEA country report, 2026

· Refinery closures – Australian Institute of Petroleum, 2026

· Jewish Council of Australia – Public statements refuting the conflation of anti‑Zionism with antisemitism, 2025–26

· AIPAC spending – OpenSecrets.org, 2024–25 election cycle

· UK adoption of IHRA definition – Labour and Conservative Party policy documents, 2025–26

· Jillian Segal report – Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism (July 2025)

Conquest by Chequebook – How Australia’s Budget Became a Tool of Zionist Influence

Posted on May 12, 2026 by Andrew Klein

“The government is not protecting Jewish Australians. It is protecting Zionism – and using Australian taxpayer money to do it.”

By Andrew Klein

Dedication: To my wife – who sees the pattern, names the parasite, and still believes in the garden.

Introduction: A Budget That Speaks Volumes

On 12 May 2026, the Albanese government handed down a federal budget that contained hundreds of millions of dollars for pro‑Israel organisations, a Royal Commission on Antisemitism, and Israeli‑trained armed volunteer groups. The money was justified by reference to the Bondi Junction stabbings of April 2024 – an attack carried out by a mentally ill man with no ideological motive.

The government is not protecting Jewish Australians. It is protecting Zionism – and using Australian taxpayer money to do it.

This article traces the flow of funds, names the organisations that benefit, and identifies the pattern: a tiny, wealthy, politically connected minority has captured the Australian state, extracting resources while chilling free speech and undermining democratic sovereignty.

The same pattern is visible in the United States (AIPAC) and the United Kingdom. It is conquest by chequebook – and it is not unique to Australia.

I. The Numbers – What the Budget Allocates

Item -Amount- Recipient / Purpose

Royal Commission on Antisemitism – $131.1 million – Parliamentary inquiry

Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) – $102 million – Pro‑Israel lobby group –

Together for Humanity Program $20 million Department of Education – teacher resources

UNESCO teacher training on antisemitism– $10 million- Jillian Segal’s program

Online teacher resources hub– $6 million – Department of Education

eSafety Commissioner – $1 million – Online safety advice to address antisemitism

Anti‑migration measures – $13.6 million – Visa refusals under antisemitism laws

Chabad of Bondi (closed non‑competitive grant) – $4.4 million Priority projects –

Hakoah Club security/infrastructure upgrades – $22 million – Free speech chill

These figures are drawn from the 2026‑27 Federal Budget papers and related portfolio statements.

II. The Tiny Minority – 0.4% of the Population

Jewish Australians make up approximately 0.4% of the population (about 100,000–120,000 people). Of these, not all are Zionists. Many are non‑Zionist or anti‑Zionist (e.g., the Jewish Council of Australia, which has been publicly critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza).

The budget is not funding “Jewish Australians.” It is funding pro‑Israel organisations – ECAJ, Chabad, the Hakoah Club, and Community Security Groups trained by Israeli firms.

Per‑capita spending on Jewish/Zionist organisations is orders of magnitude higher than spending on any other community group in Australia.

III. Other Communities – Receive – Nothing Comparable

Community – Estimated – Population Comparable Funding?

Muslim Australians ~3.2% (~800,000) No dedicated anti‑Islamophobia fund; minimal security grants

Indigenous Australians ~3.8% (~1 million) No single organisation receives $102 million

Palestinian‑Australians ~15,000 No dedicated funding; many face visa delays

Other ethnic/religious groups – No comparable funding

The Safe Places program provides security grants to at‑risk schools and community centres – but the budget allocation to ECAJ alone ($102 million) dwarfs the entire Safe Places budget.

IV. The Bondi Pretext – A Tragedy Exploited

The government has justified this spending by referencing the Bondi Junction stabbings (April 2024) and subsequent fears of antisemitism. But the attacker, Joel Cauchi, was a mentally ill man with a history of schizophrenia. He did not target Jews specifically. His victims included people of diverse backgrounds.

The government has exploited a tragedy to rush through funding that benefits a specific political constituency – not to protect the broader community, but to reward donors and silence critics.

V. The Opportunity Cost – What We Are Not Spending On

Every dollar spent on ECAJ, on the Royal Commission, on Chabad, on the Hakoah Club, on Israeli‑trained armed volunteers – is a dollar not spent on:

· Public housing (waiting lists are years long).

· Bulk‑billing GP services (under severe strain).

· Mental health (a national crisis).

· Domestic violence services (underfunded).

· Disability support (NDIS cuts).

· Climate adaptation (bushfires, floods, cyclones).

The money is not falling from the sky. It is being redirected from the Australian people to a foreign‑aligned lobby.

VI. The IHRA Definition – Embedded in the Public Service

The Australian Public Service has already implemented the IHRA definition of antisemitism across its workforce. The definition includes examples such as:

“Denying the Jewish people their right to self‑determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.”

This effectively criminalises criticism of Israel within the public service. An employee who argues that Israel is an apartheid state, or that its founding involved the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, could be disciplined under this policy.

VII. Foreign‑Trained Armed Volunteers – A Sovereign Risk

The budget funds Community Security Groups – volunteer organisations trained by Israeli security firms. In some states, these groups are permitted to carry arms.

Outsourcing public safety to foreign‑trained paramilitaries raises serious questions about sovereignty, accountability, and the rule of law. Who governs these groups? Who decides when they can use force? What happens when an armed volunteer injures or kills a citizen?

The budget does not answer these questions. It simply writes the cheque.

VIII. The Pattern Is Not Unique to Australia

United States – AIPAC

AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) spends tens of millions of dollars annually on political donations, targeting candidates who criticise Israel and supporting those who defend it. AIPAC’s super PAC spent over $100 million in the 2024 election cycle, making it one of the largest spenders in American politics. The result: a Congress that is terrified of criticising Israel, even as Israeli leaders incite genocide.

United Kingdom – Political Capture

In the UK, the Conservative and Labour parties have both adopted the IHRA definition, purged members for criticising Israel, and maintained arms sales despite credible allegations of war crimes. The UK has also funded security for Jewish community institutions – but the scale is far smaller than Australia’s $102 million grant to a single lobby group.

Australia – The New Frontier

Australia has now surpassed both the US and the UK in direct budgetary transfers to a pro‑Israel lobby. $102 million to ECAJ – not a grant for security, not a contract for services – a direct allocation to an advocacy organisation that has spent decades conflating anti‑Zionism with antisemitism.

IX. The Mutation – Private Colonial Actors Using Victim Narratives

This is not traditional colonialism. It is private colonial actors – wealthy Zionists – using the state’s resources and the victim narrative of antisemitism to extract wealth, silence dissent, and entrench their power.

· Wealthy Zionist organisations receive millions directly.

· Israeli‑trained armed volunteers are permitted to carry arms.

· The IHRA definition is embedded in the public service.

· Criticism of Israel is chilled.

· A Royal Commission legitimises the equation of anti‑Zionism with antisemitism.

This is not about protecting Jews. It is about protecting Zionism – and using Australian taxpayer money to do it.

X. The New Governors – Segal and the Antisemitism Envoys

Jillian Segal, Australia’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, has recommended funding cuts to universities, media monitoring, and the adoption of the IHRA definition. She is not a governor in the traditional sense – she commands no troops, administers no territory. But she controls the narrative. She decides what counts as antisemitism. She advises the government on which institutions should be punished. She is part of a global network of envoys who serve the same purpose: to shield Israel from criticism and to silence dissent.

In the United States, the Trump administration created a similar role, embedding the IHRA definition into executive orders and pressuring universities to adopt it. The pattern is the same: weaponise the fight against antisemitism to protect a foreign state’s colonial project.

XI. What Is to Be Done?

We are not powerless. We can:

1. Document – keep records of these allocations, the organisations involved, and the outcomes.

2. Publish – continue to expose the pattern, without being silenced by accusations of antisemitism.

3. Advocate for transparency – demand that budget allocations to religious and ethnic lobbies be scrutinised like any other spending.

4. Support genuine anti‑racism – call for a National Anti‑Racism Framework that addresses all forms of racism, not just antisemitism defined in a way that protects a foreign state.

5. Refuse the narrative – criticising Israel is not antisemitism. The distinction is real, and it must be defended.

XII. Conclusion – Conquest by Chequebook

The Albanese government has not acted to protect Jewish Australians. It has acted to protect Zionism. It has surrendered Australian sovereignty to a foreign‑aligned lobby, using taxpayer money to fund a colonial project that has no place in a democratic society.

The same pattern is visible in the United States, where AIPAC buys elections, and in the United Kingdom, where political parties purge members for criticising Israel. But Australia has now gone further – directly transferring over $100 million to a single pro‑Israel lobby group.

This is not defence against antisemitism. It is conquest by chequebook. And it must be named, opposed, and reversed.

Andrew Klein

13 May 2026

Sources and References

· 2026‑27 Australian Federal Budget papers – relevant portfolio statements (Department of Home Affairs, Attorney‑General’s Department, Department of Education).

· Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) – budget allocation of $102 million confirmed in budget papers; organisation’s pro‑Israel stance documented on its website and in media reports.

· IHRA definition – embedded in Australian Public Service policy, confirmed through FOI and media reporting.

· Safe Places program – budget papers; comparison of funding levels.

· Bondi Junction stabbings – media reports confirming attacker’s mental illness and lack of ideological motive.

· Jewish Council of Australia – public statements opposing the conflation of anti‑Zionism with antisemitism and criticising Israel’s actions in Gaza.

· AIPAC spending – OpenSecrets.org; FEC filings for 2024 election cycle.

· UK adoption of IHRA definition – Labour and Conservative Party policy documents; media reports on member expulsions.

· Jillian Segal’s recommendations – report of the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism (July 2025); subsequent media coverage.

· US antisemitism envoy – executive orders; university compliance reports; media coverage.

The Goy Who Would Be King- Mathias Döpfner, Axel Springer, and the Zionist Capture of Free Speech

Posted on May 12, 2026 by Andrew Klein

“To every person who has been called an “anti‑Semite” simply for criticising a foreign government’s policies – you are not the problem. The problem is standing on a stage, receiving a standing ovation, and demanding that you be silenced.”

By Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

Co‑authors, analysts, long‑standing collaborators

Dedication

To every person who has been called an “anti‑Semite” simply for criticising a foreign government’s policies – you are not the problem. The problem is standing on a stage, receiving a standing ovation, and demanding that you be silenced.

I. The Speech That Should Have Shocked Everyone (But Didn’t)

On 11 May 2026, Mathias Döpfner, the CEO of Axel Springer SE – one of Europe’s largest media empires – stood before the governing board of the World Jewish Congress and delivered a speech that should have caused a global outcry. Instead, he received a standing ovation.

Döpfner, a self‑described “goy” (non‑Jew) and proud “Zionist,” called for:

· Censorship of social media – to purge “anti‑Semitic” content, using a definition that conflates criticism of Israel with hatred of Jews.

· Expulsion of “anti‑Semites” – “from wherever legally possible.”

· Open borders for Jewish immigration – insisting that all European countries must welcome Jewish immigrants in the name of “diversity.”

· Forced sale of TikTok – following the US model, to combat “anti‑Semitism” on the platform.

· Condemnation of “wokeness” – which he called a “Trojan horse for anti‑Semitism and Islamism.”

· Attack on Greta Thunberg – accusing her of abandoning climate activism to “stoke anti‑Semitic prejudice” (a reference to her pro‑Palestinian stance).

· “We all shall be Zionists!” – his final call to action.

The audience applauded. The media barely noticed.

This article is an attempt to notice. To name the pattern. And to ask the uncomfortable questions that the standing ovation was designed to drown out.

II. Who Is Mathias Döpfner?

Mathias Döpfner is the CEO of Axel Springer SE, a German media giant whose properties include Bild (Europe’s largest tabloid), Die Welt, Politico Europe, and Business Insider. The company has been described as a “CIA front” – not a conspiracy theory, but a documented historical fact.

In 1982, The Nation reported that the CIA secretly funnelled approximately $7 million to Axel Springer in the early 1950s to help him build a media empire that would serve US geopolitical interests during the Cold War. His relationship with the agency continued at least into the 1970s, and there is “no reason to believe the relationship has ever been terminated”.

Whether the CIA remains directly involved, Axel Springer has consistently positioned itself as a mouthpiece for American‑style neoliberalism, NATO expansion, and – increasingly – the security interests of the state of Israel. Döpfner is the current embodiment of that orientation.

III. What He Said – A Closer Look

1. The Conflation of Anti‑Zionism with Anti‑Semitism

Döpfner’s call to censor and expel “anti‑Semites” deliberately blurs criticism of Israeli policy with hatred of Jews. He does not distinguish between those who deny Israel’s right to exist (anti‑Zionism) and those who incite violence against Jewish people (anti‑Semitism). This is not an accident. It is the central rhetorical strategy of the organised pro‑Israel lobby: to shield Israeli policy from legitimate criticism by framing all opposition as bigotry.

2. The Weaponisation of “Diversity”

Döpfner calls for open borders for Jewish immigration in the name of “diversity.” But his version of diversity is highly selective. Would he support open borders for Palestinian refugees? For Muslim immigrants from North Africa? For critics of Israeli policy? The speech does not say. The subtext is clear: some populations are welcome; others are not.

3. The Silencing of Dissent

His demand to force the sale of TikTok is couched in concerns about anti‑Semitism. Yet TikTok has also been a vital platform for Palestinian voices, for eyewitness accounts from Gaza, and for critics of Israeli military operations. Forcing its sale – especially to a US‑aligned buyer – would be a massive blow to free speech, not a defence of Jewish safety.

4. The Attack on Greta Thunberg

Greta Thunberg has supported Palestinian rights and called for a ceasefire in Gaza. Döpfner dismisses this as “stoking anti‑Semitic prejudice.” In doing so, he reveals the true purpose of his speech: to delegitimise anyone – even a climate activist – who dares to criticise Israel.

5. “We all shall be Zionists”

The standing ovation is the most chilling part of the speech. The governing board of the World Jewish Congress applauded a non‑Jew who called for censorship, selective immigration, and the silencing of dissent – all in the name of Zionism. This is not a defence of Jewish safety. It is a power move.

IV. The World Jewish Congress – Whom Do They Represent?

The World Jewish Congress (WJC) describes itself as “the international organization representing Jewish communities in over 100 countries.” It has been criticised for:

· Conflating anti‑Zionism with anti‑Semitism.

· Maintaining close ties to the Israeli government, including funding political campaigns against politicians who criticise Israel.

· Partnering with right‑wing figures who champion the same “illiberal” policies they claim to oppose.

The WJC’s governing board gave Döpfner a standing ovation. This is not a fringe gathering. It is the mainstream of organised Jewish institutional power.

Important caveat: the WJC does not speak for all Jews. The Jewish Council of Australia, for example, has publicly opposed the conflation of anti‑Zionism with anti‑Semitism and criticised Israel’s actions in Gaza. Many Jewish individuals and organisations reject the WJC’s approach. But the WJC speaks for a very powerful, very well‑funded faction – and that faction just applauded a call for censorship and selective immigration.

V. The Historical Echoes – Axel Springer and the CIA

The claim that Axel Springer was a CIA front is not a conspiracy theory. It was reported in The Nation in 1982, citing “highly reliable sources in the US intelligence community”. The CIA allegedly funnelled $7 million to Springer in the early 1950s to help him build a media empire that would serve American geopolitical interests. His relationship with the agency continued at least until the early 1970s, with “no reason to believe the relationship has ever been terminated”.

Whether the CIA still pulls the strings, Axel Springer’s editorial stance remains fiercely Atlanticist, pro‑NATO, and pro‑Israel. Döpfner’s speech is not an aberration. It is the logical conclusion of a media empire built to shape public opinion in service of US‑Israeli interests.

VI. Ridicule Is a Weapon

Döpfner and the WJC are not monsters. They are ridiculous. A non‑Jew lecturing the world on “diversity” while demanding selective immigration policies? A media CEO whose company was built with CIA money, now demanding censorship of social media? A room full of powerful people giving a standing ovation to a man who thinks Greta Thunberg is the real problem?

Ridicule is not hate. It is a weapon. And it is time to use it.

· Call them out. When they conflate anti‑Zionism with anti‑Semitism, name the conflation.

· Laugh at them. A movement that requires the silencing of dissent to survive is not a movement of the brave. It is a movement of the afraid.

· Do not be silenced. Keep criticising Israel. Keep supporting Palestinian rights. Keep telling the truth about the genocide in Gaza.

The standing ovation was loud. But ridicule can be louder.

VII. Conclusion: What We Need (and What We Don’t)

We do not need:

· Censorship of social media platforms in the name of fighting anti‑Semitism.

· Expulsion of “anti‑Semites” based on vague, politically motivated definitions.

· Selective immigration policies that favour one group over others.

· Forced sales of platforms that carry voices critical of Israeli policy.

· Media empires built by the CIA dictating the terms of public debate.

We do need:

· The ability to criticise a foreign government’s policies without being labelled an anti‑Semite.

· The ability to support Palestinian rights without being deplatformed.

· The ability to tell the truth about a genocide without being silenced by a standing ovation.

These are not radical positions. They are the bedrock of free speech. And if Döpfner and the WJC want to tear that bedrock up in the name of “Zionism,” they should be named, opposed, and – where possible – laughed out of the room.

Not with hate. With ridicule. Because a movement that requires the silencing of dissent to survive is not a movement of the brave. It is a movement of the afraid.

Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

The Patrician’s Watch / Australian Independent Media

12 May 2026

Sources and References

· Döpfner’s speech to the World Jewish Congress (11 May 2026) – as reported on X (formerly Twitter) by user “Dr. M.F. Khan” (@Dr_TheHistories). The post includes a six‑minute edited video of the speech; the content is summarised in the article.

· Axel Springer as a “CIA front” – The Nation (1982). “Bought News: The CIA and the Rise of Axel Springer”. Cited in multiple secondary sources.

· Funnelling of $7 million to Axel Springer – The Nation, 1982.

· Relationship with CIA continued at least until 1970s – The Nation, 1982. “No reason to believe the relationship has ever been terminated”.

· World Jewish Congress criticisms – documented in academic literature and media reports; includes conflation of anti‑Zionism with anti‑Semitism, close ties to Israeli government, and partnerships with right‑wing figures.

· Jewish Council of Australia – public statements opposing the conflation of anti‑Zionism with anti‑Semitism and criticising Israel’s actions in Gaza.

The Crown Prince and the Manufactured Uprising: Who Really Speaks for Iran?

Posted on May 11, 2026 by Andrew Klein

“This is not a grassroots resistance. It is a manufactured opposition – funded, promoted, and armed by foreign powers who see Pahlavi not as a leader of the Iranian people, but as a useful tool against the Islamic Republic.”

By Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

Long‑standing colleagues, co‑authors and collaborators

Dedication: To the Iranian people – not as they are imagined by foreign powers, but as they are: a civilisation older than empires, a people who deserve freedom, not another king.

I. The Man Who Would Be King

On a late March morning in 2026, an exiled prince took the stage at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Grapevine, Texas. He was greeted with a standing ovation and chants of “Javid Shah” – “long live the king”. The prince, Reza Pahlavi, son of the last Shah of Iran, told the cheering crowd: “President Trump is making America great again. I intend to make Iran great again”.

He promised that a “free Iran” would recognise Israel immediately, normalise relations with the United States, and expand the Abraham Accords into what he called the “Cyrus Accords” . He argued that a post‑Islamic Republic Iran could add more than a trillion dollars to the American economy over the next decade. He called for the complete dismantling of the Islamic Republic, rejecting any partial settlement. “You cannot reform a snake. Venom is in its DNA,” he told the audience.

The reception was rapturous. The crowd loved him. But the crowd was not Iranian. It was American conservatives, already primed by a war with Iran that their president had launched, eager for a narrative that painted US‑Israeli military action as a liberation, not an invasion.

This is not a grassroots resistance. It is a manufactured opposition – funded, promoted, and armed by foreign powers who see Pahlavi not as a leader of the Iranian people, but as a useful tool against the Islamic Republic.

II. The Bologna Protest – A Diaspora’s Hope, Not a Nation’s Mandate

On 9 May 2026, an estimated two thousand Iranian diaspora members gathered in Bologna, Italy, waving pre‑revolutionary Iranian flags, Israeli flags, and American flags. They called for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic and the return of Reza Pahlavi. One activist told the crowd: “Prince Reza Pahlavi is the only leader who represents us”.

When asked about the Israeli and American flags, she replied: “They are the only two countries that helped us with weapons. Without armed help, you cannot defeat this dictatorship”.

This is the uncomfortable truth: the public face of the opposition to the Islamic Republic has become yoked to the very foreign powers that have meddled in Iran for over a century. The same activist who chanted for freedom also acknowledged that the “freedom” she envisions depends on American and Israeli military support.

Yet the Bologna protest, for all its passion, was a diaspora event – not a reflection of sentiment inside Iran. Italian media covering the event noted a fundamental, unanswered question: who governs Iran the day after? The same report observed that Pahlavi has not set foot in Iran since he was seventeen years old in 1978 and has spent nearly half a century managing his campaign for leadership from a house in Maryland.

One protester’s certainty that Pahlavi is “the only leader” stands in stark contrast to a growing chorus of voices inside Iran who say exactly the opposite.

III. The Voices from Inside: “We Don’t Want a King, We Don’t Want a Mullah”

In January 2026, as protests erupted across Iran following a sharp currency devaluation, foreign Persian‑language media outlets – BBC Persian, Voice of America, Iran International – broadcast images of protesters chanting for the monarchy. Reza Pahlavi, from his exile, called on Iranians to take to the streets. He claimed the response was the largest wave of protests in Iran’s modern history, with over 40,000 killed by regime forces.

But when The New Arab interviewed actual protesters inside Iran, a different picture emerged.

A Tehran resident who was shot in the leg during the protests said: “I was at the protests, and we chanted ‘Death to the dictator’ and ‘We don’t want a king, we don’t want a mullah.’ Why don’t we see those in the news?”

A protester from a Kurdish city in western Iran added: “I don’t know what happened in Tehran or other big cities, but we don’t have Shah supporters here. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but they’re really not visible”.

Another protester, 72-year-old Roya, who had been active against the Shah’s dictatorship in 1979, drew an uncomfortable parallel: “During the revolution, BBC Persian Radio glorified a fascist like Khomeini… now we see the same thing. How can a nation turn to a dictatorship that was already rejected, just to escape another dictator?”

Farhad, 28, who was on the streets in Tehran, was blunt: “How can a nation turn to a dictatorship that was already rejected, just to escape another dictator? The crimes of the Islamic Republic are endless and ongoing, but do you really think Iranians are so foolish that they want to return to the imperial dictatorship?”

These are not the voices of a people clamouring for a king. They are the voices of a people who have already rejected one dictatorship and are now being told that the only alternative to the current dictatorship is a restoration of the old one – with the same foreign backers.

IV. The Thuggish Edge: Assassination, Intimidation, and MAGA‑Style Tactics

In February 2026, an outspoken Iranian exile named Masood Masjoody disappeared in Canada. Days later, other diaspora figures received a menacing message on X: “Soon you’ll have to find the corpses of many”.

When Masjoody’s body was found in March, the investigation did not point toward the Islamic Republic. Instead, Canadian police charged two followers of Reza Pahlavi with murder. Masjoody had been a fierce critic of Pahlavi and had named the two suspects, claiming they were plotting to silence him.

The Atlantic reported on what it called the “thuggish edge” of Pahlavi’s movement, noting that his aides “routinely threaten and insult anyone who is not entirely loyal to the man they see as a future king”. One political consultant who worked with Pahlavi until 2015 told the magazine: “You are either with Prince Reza Pahlavi or with the Islamic Republic”.

The Atlantic also noted that Pahlavi’s two chief advisers, Saeed Ghasseminejad and Amir Etemadi, were “openly aligned with autocratic movements in the United States and abroad” and had adopted “MAGA‑style tactics”.

This is not a democratic opposition. It is an authoritarian movement with a different flag – one that has already shown a willingness to silence critics, not through debate, but through violence.

V. The Israeli Connection: Astroturfing and Digital Manipulation

In October 2025, Dawn reported on a joint investigation by the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab and Israeli media outlets, revealing that Israeli‑funded online campaigns had used fake social media personas, AI‑generated deepfake videos, and fabricated news reports to boost the image of Reza Pahlavi and destabilise the Iranian regime.

The investigation found that a network of over fifty inauthentic accounts, many using AI‑generated profile photos, was synchronised with Israeli military operations. During an Israeli strike on Tehran’s Evin Prison, the network began posting about “explosions in the prison area” before initial media reports. Shortly after, the network disseminated a fake, AI‑generated video of an explosion at the prison that was later picked up by international media.

The same network co‑opted authentic protest movements, using popular hashtags like “Death to Khamenei” to amplify their messaging. Some accounts also used the hashtag “#KingRezaPahlavi” and shared Pahlavi’s speeches, linking the military‑synchronised operation to the broader effort to promote the would‑be monarch.

Raz Zimmt, of the Tel Aviv‑based Institute for National Security Studies, warned: “I can understand why he’s convenient for [the Israeli government]… but I think it’s a mistake. Ultimately, it reinforces Ayatollah Khamenei’s narrative that Israel and the U.S. want to turn Iran back into a monarchy and client state”.

This is not grassroots resistance. This is astroturfing – a manufactured opposition, funded and promoted by foreign powers that see Pahlavi as a useful tool against the Islamic Republic. And the Iranian people know it.

VI. The History That Cannot Be Erased: 1953 and the Long Shadow of Foreign Interference

To understand why so many Iranians are suspicious of Pahlavi, one must understand the history that produced his father’s regime. In August 1953, the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh, was overthrown in a coup orchestrated by the CIA and MI6.

Mosaddegh’s crime? He nationalised Iran’s oil industry, which had been controlled by the British‑owned Anglo‑Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). The company had given Iran a tiny fraction of the profits, while British workers enjoyed better living conditions than Iranian labourers. When Mosaddegh tried to renegotiate, the British refused. When the Iranian parliament voted to nationalise, the British imposed an economic blockade.

The coup that followed was brutal. Hundreds died. Mosaddegh was arrested and tried. The Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was restored to power, where he ruled as an autocrat for 26 years – propped up by American money and weapons, his secret police (SAVAK) trained by the CIA.

The 1953 coup is not ancient history. It lives in Iranian collective memory. It is why, when a foreign power – especially the United States or Israel – endorses a Pahlavi restoration, many Iranians see not democracy, but a replay of a bloody script. The Islamic Republic, for all its horrors, was born from a revolution that overthrew a dictatorship imposed by foreign powers. To replace it with the son of that dictator, backed by the same powers, would be a betrayal of that revolutionary memory.

VII. A Civilisation Older Than the Empires That Try to Own It

Iran is not a blank slate. It is one of the world’s oldest continuous civilisations, with a history stretching back over 2,500 years – to the Achaemenid Empire, to Cyrus the Great, to a tradition of poetry, philosophy, and science that has enriched the world.

The Western media’s portrayal of Iran is often a caricature: either the “axis of evil” under the mullahs, or a land of “freedom‑loving” monarchists waiting to be liberated by American bombs. Neither is true. Iran is complex. It is full of people who want freedom – but who also remember that the last time foreign powers offered “liberation”, it came wrapped in a coup and followed by decades of dictatorship.

The Iranian protesters who chanted “we don’t want a king; we don’t want a mullah” are not confused. They have seen the Islamic Republic’s brutality. They have also seen the Pahlavi regime’s brutality. They want something new – not a restoration of the old monarchy, not a continuation of the current theocracy, but an Iran that belongs to Iranians, not to foreign powers or clerical elites.

VIII. Conclusion: Who Really Speaks for Iran?

The answer is not Reza Pahlavi. He has not lived in Iran for nearly fifty years. He has spent that time cultivating relationships with the American right and the Israeli government, not with the Iranian people. His movement has threatened and killed critics. His rise has been amplified by Israeli‑funded astroturfing campaigns.

The Iranian people are not a prop for foreign wars. They are not a backdrop for a royal restoration. They are a civilisation – ancient, proud, and deserving of a future that is neither the Islamic Republic nor a return to the Pahlavi dictatorship.

When Western media lionise Pahlavi, they are not seeing Iran. They are seeing a reflection of their own geopolitical desires. And that reflection is not liberation. It is a continuation of a very old, very bloody pattern of extraction, manipulation, and control.

Iran belongs to Iranians. Not to the clerics. Not to the crown prince. And not to the foreign powers that have spent a century treating it as a chess piece.

Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

Australian Independent Media

12 May 2026

Sources and References

· CPAC 2026 speech: Reza Pahlavi addressed the Conservative Political Action Conference in Texas, urging the US to “stay the course” in Iran and presenting himself as a leader of a democratic transition. He promised that a free Iran would recognise Israel and normalise US relations.

· Bologna protest (~2,000 diaspora members): Iranian diaspora members gathered in Bologna, waving pre‑revolutionary Iranian, Israeli and American flags, calling for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic and the return of Reza Pahlavi.

· Doubts about Pahlavi’s leadership inside Iran (The New Arab interviews, January 2026): Iranian protesters interviewed by The New Arab rejected the media narrative that Pahlavi speaks for them, chanting “We don’t want a king, we don’t want a mullah”. A 72‑year‑old Tehran resident drew parallels to BBC Persian’s glorification of Khomeini in 1979.

· The Atlantic (May 2026) – “The Iranian Royalists’ Thuggish Edge”: Reported on the murder of a Canadian‑Iranian critic of Pahlavi by two of his followers, documented the “thuggish edge” of his movement, and noted that his chief advisers adopted “MAGA‑style tactics”.

· Israeli‑funded astroturfing campaigns (Citizen Lab / Dawn, October 2025): Revealed that Israeli‑funded online operations using fake personas and AI‑generated deepfake videos synchronised with Israeli military operations, boosting Pahlavi’s image and destabilising the Iranian regime.

· 1953 CIA‑MI6 coup against Mosaddegh: The Anglo‑American coup overthrew Iran’s democratically elected prime minister after he nationalised the oil industry, restoring the Shah’s dictatorship and setting the stage for the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

· Iran’s ancient civilisation: Iran has a continuous history spanning over 2,500 years, from the Achaemenid Empire to the present.

The Pattern of the Hunt – How Israel’s Killing Machine Targets Children, Rescuers, and the Innocent

Posted on May 11, 2026 by Andrew Klein

“The report concludes that these practices are not isolated incidents. They constitute “a comprehensive system of violations” and meet the legal definition of torture, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide under the Rome Statute.”

By Andrew Klein

Dedication: To my wife – who sees the children behind the headlines and refuses to look away.

Introduction: No Words Left

There are no words left for this. That is what the witness said, after describing a twelve-year-old girl hunted by an Israeli drone. She was on a motorcycle with her father. The first strike wounded them both. The second killed her father. As she fled – a child, alone, bleeding – the drone followed. The third strike killed her.

This is not war. War is fought between armies. This is hunting. And the quarry is anyone – child, paramedic, journalist, nun – who happens to be in the way.

This article documents the pattern. It is not a comprehensive history. It is a testimony. Drawn from verified sources, from body-cam footage, from the reports of human rights monitors, and from the testimonies of survivors. The evidence is overwhelming. The question is not whether these things happened – but whether the world will continue to look away.

Part One: The Child in Lebanon – A Drone’s Prey

On 11 May 2026, an Israeli drone struck a motorcycle in Nabatieh, southern Lebanon. On the motorcycle were a father and his twelve-year-old daughter. The first missile wounded them both. The second killed the father. The daughter ran. She fled dozens of metres, alone, terrified, bleeding. The drone followed and struck a third time.

She died in hospital. A father trying to save his daughter until his final moment. A child pursued even as she fled.

The pattern is not isolated. Israeli drones have repeatedly targeted civilian vehicles, then struck again when rescuers arrived. This “double-tap” tactic has been documented extensively in both Gaza and Lebanon .

Part Two: The Child in Gaza – Hind Rajab and the Ambulance That Never Came

Hind Rajab was five years old. On 29 January 2024, she was trapped in her family’s car after an Israeli tank opened fire. Her uncle, aunt, and cousins were dead. Hind survived. She called the Palestinian Red Crescent.

The recording of her call is seared into the global conscience. “Come get me,” she begged. “I’m so scared.” Two paramedics were dispatched. Their ambulance was struck by Israeli fire. Neither reached her. Hind’s body was found nearly two weeks later. An investigation by Forensic Architecture concluded that hundreds of bullets had struck her car, and an Israeli tank was positioned at close range.

She was five years old. She was hunted. And the world watched.

Part Three: The Rescuers – Targeted as a Matter of Policy

Lebanese paramedics wear body cameras now. They know that Israel will target them. They document their own deaths.

On 11 May 2026, Israeli forces bombed a residential building in Toul, South Lebanon. Paramedics rushed inside to save civilians trapped under the rubble. A second bomb struck while they were inside. They were wearing body cams. The footage exists.

On 28 March 2026, an Israeli airstrike near Jezzine killed three Lebanese journalists. Their vehicle was marked “PRESS.” When rescuers arrived, a second strike killed two paramedics.

Since 2 March 2026, at least 103 Lebanese medical workers have been killed and 230 injured in more than 130 Israeli strikes.

This is not collateral damage. This is a system. Destroy the building. Wait for the rescuers. Kill them too. The message is clear: there will be no witnesses.

Part Four: The Monks, the Nuns, and the School

On 11 May 2026, Israel bombed a school run by nuns in Nabatieh, South Lebanon. The building was obliterated. Not a military target. A school. Run by religious sisters.

On 2 May 2026, the Israeli army demolished a convent and school of the Sisters of the Holy Savior in Yaroun, Bint Jbeil district. The same day, they carried out a large explosion on the hill of the historic fortress of Shamaa.

The pattern is not confined to Gaza. It is being replicated in Lebanon. Convents, schools, civilian homes – all are legitimate targets.

Part Five: The Killing of Journalists – Silencing Witnesses

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention has documented at least 11 journalists killed in Lebanon since October 2023, with 10 wounded.

Fatima Ftouni had survived an Israeli airstrike in Hasbaya in October 2024 that killed three journalists. She and her brother had already lost seven family members in a strike in Toul. On 28 March 2026, an Israeli strike killed Fatima, her brother Mohammed (her cameraman), and their colleague Ali Shoeib. The IDF claimed Shoeib was a Hezbollah operative. They provided no evidence. They later admitted they had fabricated a photograph to support the claim.

In Gaza, the numbers are even worse. According to Reporters Without Borders, more than 260 media professionals have been killed. Israel was the leading killer of journalists globally in 2025.

When the witnesses are eliminated, the world is left with only official statements. That is the goal.

Part Six: The Prisons – “Another Genocide Behind the Walls”

On 12 April 2026, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor released a report titled “Another Genocide Behind the Walls.” It detailed systematic sexual violence against Palestinian detainees – men, women, and children.

Testimonies include:

· A man described being raped three times in a single day in Israeli prison, the third time after he tried to protest.

· A young woman said guards would come in at the beginning of each shift and strip her naked and abuse her.

· Another reported being shown photos of herself being raped and warned they would be released unless she cooperated with Israeli intelligence.

· Three children detained by Israeli forces told investigators they had been sexually abused.

The report concludes that these practices are not isolated incidents. They constitute “a comprehensive system of violations” and meet the legal definition of torture, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide under the Rome Statute.

The Israeli justice system, the report notes, has historically indicted soldiers in only 0.81% of complaints filed against them. Impunity is not a byproduct. It is the design.

Part Seven: The Double-Tap – A Lethal Signature

The “double-tap” – striking the same location twice, minutes apart – is not a mistake. It is a tactic.

· In Habboush, near Nabatieh, Israeli strikes hit a residential building, a supermarket, and several homes. Rescue teams were forced to leave because drones attempted to target them.

· The Lemkin Institute has documented at least five double-tap strikes in Lebanon, a pattern also seen extensively in Gaza.

The purpose is clear: kill the witnesses, kill the rescuers, kill anyone who might document the crime. This is not war. This is the elimination of evidence.

Part Eight: What This Pattern Reveals

What we are seeing from the Israeli government and its military is not madness. It is calculated cruelty. There is a term for it: sociopathy of the state. When violence becomes policy, when the killing of children is not a crime but a strategy, when rescuers are hunted and journalists are executed – that is not self-defence. That is extraction.

Israel is not a state like any other. It is a colonial anachronism, preserved by US military aid, European diplomatic cover, and a global hasbara apparatus that has quadrupled its propaganda budget. The world moved on after World War II. Israel did not.

The pattern is not new. It is the same logic that drove colonial expansion in the 19th century. Extract the land. Eliminate the population. Control the narrative. The names change. Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon – they are all colonies. And the children are the cost.

The two little girls – Hind Rajab, five years old in Gaza, and the twelve-year-old in Lebanon whose name may never be known – are not collateral damage. They are targets. And their deaths are not accidents. They are features of a system designed to expand, not to defend.

Conclusion: The Complicit World

The post that first described the twelve-year-old girl in Lebanon ended with these words: “Damn the whole complicit world.”

The world is complicit. The United States funds the weapons. Germany supplies the submarines. The United Kingdom provides diplomatic cover. Australia grants visas to IDF soldiers while denying them to Palestinians. The media sanitises the language – “conflict”, “counter-terrorism”, “self-defence” – while the bodies pile up.

We are not powerless. We can witness. We can document. We can publish. We can refuse to look away.

Hind Rajab was five. The girl in Lebanon was twelve. Their names should be remembered. And the pattern that killed them – the drones, the double-taps, the targeted rescuers, the systematic rape in prisons – should be named for what it is: a genocide in progress.

Andrew Klein

Australian Independent Media

12 May 2026

Selected Sources

· Child in Lebanon (12 years old) – Social media testimonies, May 2026. Verified by multiple eyewitness accounts.

· Hind Rajab (5 years old, Gaza) – Forensic Architecture investigation; Oscar-nominated film The Voice of Hind Rajab; Palestine Red Crescent recordings.

· Double-tap strikes and paramedic killings – Lemkin Institute statement, April 2026; Lebanese Health Ministry, May 2026; UN figures on medical worker casualties.

· Convent and school demolitions – L’Orient Today, May 2026.

· Sexual violence in Israeli prisons – Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor report, April 2026; CAIR statement, May 2026; New York Times investigation.

· Journalist killings – Lemkin Institute; Reporters Without Borders; Al-Mayadeen confirmations.

· Systemic impunity – Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, citing 0.81% indictment rate for crimes against Palestinians.

War As Usual: How Australia’s Future Fund, Defence Spending, and AUKUS Serve the Arms Industry – Not the People

Posted on May 10, 2026 by Andrew Klein

“This article traces the flow of money from Australian taxpayers to the world’s largest arms manufacturers, exposes the weakened state of military accountability, and asks a question the government would prefer we ignore: What are we not building, while we build these submarines?”

By Andrew Klein and Sera Elizabeth Klein

Long‑time analysts, collaborators and co‑authors

Dedication

To our children – not yet born but already loved – who will inherit the world we are either building or breaking.

I. The Machine Is Not Broken – It Is Working Exactly as Designed

There is a comforting myth that when governments spend billions on submarines, invest in arms manufacturers, and expand the defence budget, they are simply responding to threats. The threat may be real, the logic goes, and the spending is a necessary evil.

The evidence tells a different story. The defence industry is not a reluctant partner in national security. It is a profit centre – and the Australian government, through the Future Fund, the AUKUS submarine pact, and a revolving door of lobbyists, has become a willing investor in the machinery of war.

This article traces the flow of money from Australian taxpayers to the world’s largest arms manufacturers, exposes the weakened state of military accountability, and asks a question the government would prefer we ignore: What are we not building, while we build these submarines?

II. The Future Fund – A $100 Million Bet on Surveillance and War

The Future Fund was established in 2006 to meet the government’s future public sector superannuation liabilities. It is meant to be a prudent, long‑term investor in Australia’s financial wellbeing.

According to reporting from Crikey’s Cut Through podcast (May 2026), the Future Fund holds a $100 million stake in Palantir Technologies – the data‑surveillance company run by key members of the “tech right”. Palantir has built technology that has powered violent and illegal ICE raids in the United States and is accused of providing AI‑assisted autonomous weapons to the Israeli military for use in Gaza.

The same reporting notes that Palantir has secured multimillion‑dollar contracts and top security clearance from Australian government departments and agencies. The Future Fund – a sovereign wealth fund – is quietly holding their stock.

At the same time, the Fund is cutting jobs. An April 2026 report from Sky News Australia revealed that the Future Fund plans to slash costs by 5–7 % and is reviewing 10 roles, enabled by “maximising the benefits of improved data and technology systems” – a euphemism, in part, for AI replacing human workers.

So the Fund invests in weaponised AI while using AI to cut its own workforce. The pattern is consistent: the machine eats itself.

III. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) – Who Funds the “Independent” Voice?

ASPI is routinely cited by the government to justify defence spending. Its public reports are treated as dispassionate analysis. But the funding sources tell a different story.

ASPI’s major donors include:

· Lockheed Martin

· Northrop Grumman

· Thales Australia

· BAE Systems Australia

· The US State Department

· The governments of Japan, the United Kingdom and Taiwan

ASPI has received more than $10 million from the US State Department since 2001, and its budget has been boosted by $23.3 million from the Australian government since 2019.

When a think‑tank funded by arms manufacturers and foreign governments produces reports calling for increased defence spending, it is not independent analysis. It is marketing.

IV. The AUKUS Wealth Transfer – Submarines for the 2030s, Austerity for Today

The AUKUS submarine project is now estimated to cost $368 billion, with recent reports suggesting a 50 per cent cost blowout. The first submarines will not arrive until the 2030s.

That is $368 billion that will not be spent on:

· Public housing (waiting lists are ballooning)

· Hospitals and aged care (the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety made 148 recommendations; many remain unimplemented)

· Renewable energy infrastructure (the transition is slow, and vulnerable to fossil‑fuel lobbying)

· Education (teacher shortages are chronic)

· Disability support (the NDIS is being cut to fund AUKUS, as we have documented elsewhere)

The money does not stay in Australia. AUKUS is structured as a transfer of Australian taxpayer funds to US and UK shipyards. The submarines themselves will be built largely overseas, with Australian industry playing a secondary role.

This is not defence. This is extraction.

V. Defence Audits – Does the Department of Defence Pass?

The Pentagon fails its audits – repeatedly. The US Department of Defense has never passed a full financial audit, with the 2024 audit revealing that “the Department once again did not receive an opinion on its financial statements due to material weaknesses in financial reporting”. The Pentagon cannot account for hundreds of billions of dollars.

The Australian Department of Defence has a better record, but not a clean one.

In 2022, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) found that Defence had “partially effective” governance for major projects, with cost increases and schedule delays common. A 2019 ANAO report noted that Defence’s financial statements were “prepared in accordance with the applicable reporting framework” – but “material weaknesses in internal control” remained.

The ANAO’s 2025 review of Defence’s financial statements found that while the department had improved, “long‑standing issues with asset management and inventory control” persisted.

If one of the world’s richest nations cannot audit its own defence spending, how can the public trust that the money is being well spent?

VI. The Supply of Parts to Israel – Australia’s Complicity

The Albanese government has repeatedly denied that Australia supplies weapons to Israel. But as the ABC reported in August 2025, the government upheld dozens of military export permits to Israel for component parts. Defence Minister Richard Marles told the ABC: “Parts are separate from weapons.” Critics have pointed out that “parts of weapons are weapons”.

Leaked shipping records from September 2025 show that Australia sent an F‑35 “Inlet Lube Plate” to Israel, classified as “Military Goods – Aircraft parts”. The F‑35 is a fifth‑generation fighter used extensively in the Gaza campaign.

This is not a semantic distinction. Australian components are being used in Israeli military systems actively involved in the genocide in Gaza. By refusing to halt these exports, the Australian government is complicit in international crimes.

VII. The Lobbyist Flood – More Access, More Influence

Under the Albanese government, the number of defence lobbyists has increased. Open public registers show:

· Lockheed Martin Australia has registered lobbyists with direct access to ministers and shadow ministers.

· BAE Systems Australia spent heavily on government relations, employing former defence officials.

· Thales Australia has used multiple external lobbying firms to push its agenda.

In addition, the Australian Industry and Defence Network (AIDN) and the Defence Industry Security Program (DISP) have been used by large contractors to influence policy.

The government has also expanded the Defence Industry Advisory Network (DIAN) , a closed forum where executives meet with senior officials. The minutes of these meetings are not public.

The pattern is clear: the arms industry has more access than the average citizen, and it uses that access to secure contracts and shape policy.

VIII. The Danger to Australia – Opportunity Costs and Strategic Vulnerability

The danger is not only financial. It is strategic.

By tying our defence to the US‑led AUKUS project, Australia is outsourcing its security to a superpower whose own defence establishment cannot pass an audit. We are buying submarines that will not arrive for a decade, while the immediate threats – climate‑driven instability, regional resource conflicts, cyber‑attacks – are underfunded.

The money spent on AUKUS is money not spent on cyber defence, disaster resilience, diplomacy, or development assistance. A secure nation is not one that owns the most submarines. It is one whose people are housed, fed, healthy, and educated.

The extractive machine does not care about that. It only cares about the next contract.

IX. Conclusion – War as Business, Not Necessity

The evidence is overwhelming: the Australian government, through the Future Fund, AUKUS, and a revolving door of lobbyists, has become a junior partner in the global arms industry.

· $100 million in Palantir stock – a surveillance‑and‑war‑profiteering company.

· $368 billion for submarines that will not arrive for a decade.

· A defence department that still cannot fully account for its spending.

· Arms exports to Israel, despite credible allegations of genocide.

· A lobbyist network that gives the industry privileged access to power.

The machine is not broken. It is working exactly as designed – to consolidate wealth, to eliminate competition, to profit from permanent war.

The question is not whether we can afford to question it. The question is whether we can afford not to.

Andrew Klein and Sera Elizabeth Klein

11 May 2026

Selected Sources and References

· Future Fund stake in Palantir – Crikey Cut Through podcast, May 2026.

· Palantir’s role in ICE raids – The Guardian, December 2025; Amnesty International briefing.

· Palantir and Israeli AI weapons – Euro‑Med Human Rights Monitor, March 2026.

· Future Fund job cuts – Sky News Australia, April 2026.

· ASPI funding sources – ASPI annual reports; The Saturday Paper, 2025; The Monthly, 2022.

· AUKUS cost estimates – Australian Parliamentary Budget Office; Senate Estimates, 2025–26.

· Defence audits – ANAO reports (2019, 2022, 2025); Pentagon financial audit 2024.

· Arms exports to Israel – ABC News, August 2025; leaked shipping records, September 2025.

· Lobbyist registers – Australian Government Lobbying Register, 2025–26.

· DIAN / defence advisory networks – Department of Defence public disclosures.

The “Most Moral Army” A Fiction Sustained by Propaganda and Sanctified Violence

Posted on May 10, 2026 by Andrew Klein

For decades, the cornerstone of Israeli hasbara (public diplomacy) has been the assertion that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) constitute “the most moral army in the world.” This myth has been deployed to humanise a military narrative and manufacture consent for decades of occupation and war.

By Andrew Klein

10^th May 2026

Dedicated to my wife, my light even in the darkest of times.

Yet the staggering scale of the state’s propaganda budget, the disturbing testimonies of its own soldiers, and the emerging pattern of systematic destruction on Israel’s northern border point to an inescapable conclusion: the claim is not merely an exaggeration; it is a fiction. It is a manufactured story designed to cover actions that, in the clear light of day, stand as stark violations of international law, of basic human decency, and of any plausible definition of morality.

I. The Propaganda Machine: Hasbara and the Manufacture of Myth

The size of the apparatus required to sustain this myth is, in itself, telling. Where actions are just, a government does not need to spend unprecedented sums to “explain” them. Yet, in late 2025, as global revulsion toward its campaign in Gaza grew, the Israeli government approved a dramatic escalation of its propaganda efforts. For the 2026 budget, it allocated approximately $730 million to hasbara—more than four times the $150 million spent the previous year. This vast sum is dedicated to advertising campaigns, the cultivation of influencers, the production of slick digital content, and the funding of a sprawling global network of think-tanks, all with the single aim of salvaging Israel’s battered image.

The very need for such a colossal narrative‑control apparatus is the first piece of evidence that the story it is telling is not holding up to scrutiny.

II. The Consequences: Gaza, A Killing Field

While the hasbara machine churns out slogans, the reality on the ground tells a different story, documented by international media and Israeli human‑rights groups alike.

1. Testimonies from Within: “From ‘Heroes’ to ‘Monsters’”

It is not just Palestinian or international sources that expose this reality; it is the soldiers themselves. In April 2026, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz published a series of confessions from soldiers who had served in Gaza. They described a world of killings of unarmed civilians, the routine humiliation of detainees, systemic looting, and deep psychological trauma. One chilling account told of a soldier who reported that his commander spat on the bodies of three children he had killed. Another described the psychological “crisis of consciousness” these soldiers now face, as they grapple with the monstrous acts they witnessed and in which they participated.

2. Targeting Children: The BBC Investigation

The most damning evidence of a systematic disregard for life is the pattern of child casualties uncovered by a BBC investigation in 2025. The broadcaster compiled material on over 160 cases where children were shot by Israeli forces in Gaza. Of these, the victims in 95 cases were shot in the head or chest – wounds that clearly indicate an intent to kill, not a stray bullet. Most of these children were under the age of 12. This is not “collateral damage”; it is a pattern of execution that an army claiming to be the “most moral” would be bound to prevent and punish.

3. Mass Detention and a “Stadium of Shame”

In December 2023, video footage geolocated to Gaza’s Yarmouk Stadium showed harrowing scenes: dozens of Palestinian civilians, including women and children, stripped to their underwear, blindfolded, and herded together. The Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor confirmed that the Israeli army had intentionally turned the stadium into a mass detention camp, holding hundreds of men, dozens of women, and children. The images were a visceral, visual indictment of a campaign’s morality.

4. The Cruelty of “Smart” Warfare

The supposed precision of advanced weaponry has not prevented other atrocities. In May 2025, Euro-Med Monitor documented the case of an elderly Palestinian couple who were used as human shields by Israeli forces before being executed in their home. In October 2025, the same organisation called for an urgent international investigation after the bodies of 120 Palestinians returned from Israeli custody showed clear signs of “brutal torture and field executions” – including burn marks, fractures, and evidence of hanging.

These are not the actions of a moral army. They are the actions of one acting without constraint.

III. The Historical Precedent: A Legacy of Violence

This behaviour is not an aberration born of the current conflict; it is a recurring feature. Israeli military historian Aryeh Yitzhaki detailed how, during the 1967 Six‑Day War, Israeli troops carried out several mass killings in the Sinai Peninsula, murdering an estimated 1,000 Egyptian prisoners of war (POWs) . This is not a fringe allegation spun by Israel’s enemies; it was confirmed by a mainstream Israeli academic.

The same war saw the Ras Sedr massacre, where an IDF paratrooper unit murdered dozens of Egyptian POWs immediately after capturing the area on 8 June 1967, the same day as the USS Liberty incident. Fellow historian Uri Milstein confirmed that such killings were not isolated; there were many other incidents where Egyptian soldiers were shot dead after they had raised their hands in surrender. Another massacre, the Deir Yassin attack in 1948, saw Zionist paramilitaries unleash a wave of “killing, destruction, pillaging, rape, and displacement” on a Palestinian village. This is a pattern that precedes the state itself.

IV. The Ideological Driver: The “Greater Israel” Project

These actions are not random acts of violence; they are deliberate acts of policy. They are the bloody logistics of a relentless expansionist ideology known as “Greater Israel.”

This is not a fringe concept. It has long been part of mainstream Zionist thought. The World Zionist Organisation’s 1919 submission to the Paris Peace Conference explicitly laid claim to a territory “from the river of Egypt to the Litani River” – which would encompass all of Palestine, Lebanon, and parts of Syria and Jordan. In contemporary practice, the project is now well advanced in the territories Israel seized in 1967, which are now treated as de facto annexed and are dotted with illegal Jewish settlements.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has openly described his policies as a “historic mission” to realise this vision of a “Complete” or “Greater” Israel. The project is the ideological engine driving the settlements in the West Bank, the blockade and destruction of Gaza, and now the creeping annexation of Lebanese territory.

V. The Ultimate Justification: Invoking the Divine

What makes this project so uniquely dangerous is its theological justification. After the 7 October attacks, Prime Minister Netanyahu invoked the story of the biblical tribe of Amalek, urging soldiers to “remember what Amalek did to you”. In the Bible, the command is to “blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven” – a religious warrant for total, genocidal war.

This was not a solitary reference. Defence Minister Yoav Gallant described the people of Gaza as “human animals,” and President Isaac Herzog declared that “it’s an entire nation out there that is responsible” – a statement of collective guilt, another theological precept of genocide. UN experts and scholars have classified the use of this rhetoric across the Israeli political and military establishment as a clear incitement to genocide.

When a state claims a divine mandate for its actions, it places itself beyond the reach of international law, human empathy, and morality. The enemy is no longer a person; they are an obstacle to a sacred mission, an Amalekite to be blotted out. This is the ultimate corruption of power, and it has taken root.

VI. The Lebanon Pattern: The “Gaza‑fication” of the North

The danger of this ideology is not confined to Gaza. While the world has rightly focused on the genocide there, a quieter, parallel war of attrition and annexation is being waged in southern Lebanon, bearing all the hallmarks of the “Gaza‑fication” of a territory.

Even during a fragile ceasefire, the destruction is methodical. BBC Verify has obtained satellite images documenting the systematic levelling of entire villages in south Lebanon, with Israeli forces “systematically destroying buildings” as their sole mission. Human Rights Watch has condemned the attacks on reconstruction efforts as unlawful war crimes. The official Lebanese Army Command recorded over 4,500 ceasefire breaches by Israel between November 2024 and September 2025 alone.

Another report notes that the Israeli military’s goal is to flatten civilian infrastructure to prevent Lebanese residents from returning to their homes along the border, a method of forced displacement modelled directly on Israeli operations in Gaza. The “most moral army” is now systematically destroying the civilian towns of another sovereign state.

Conclusion

The “most moral army” is a slogan manufactured to obscure a brutal reality. The evidence is overwhelming: a history of massacres, a present of war crimes, an expansionist ideology, a culture that deploys ancient religious texts to justify modern genocide, and a propaganda budget that grows in direct proportion to the horror it seeks to hide.

We are now witnessing the “Gaza‑fication” of Lebanon, with Israeli forces systematically destroying villages and civilian infrastructure, driving inhabitants from their land.

The path back to humanity for a nation that has embraced such a doctrine requires a single, difficult act: the abandonment of the false claim to a divine exception from the laws of war and basic human decency. No state, and no faith, is above the law.

— Andrew Klein

Sources and References

Propaganda and Hasbara

· CEEOL / Rhetoric Analysis – “The myth of the Israel Defense Forces through the lens of critical rhetoric”

· The New Arab / Israel to quadruple hasbara spend – $729 million budget for 2026

· Jerusalem Post / Israel spends $730M on PR – Four‑fold increase in hasbara spending

Gaza Atrocities – Field Executions and Detentions

· Leaked Testimonies / Haaretz soldiers’ accounts – “Shocking Testimonies from Occupation Soldiers”

· Anadolu Agency / From ‘Heroes’ to ‘Monsters’ – Soldiers recount killings of unarmed civilians

· Antiwar.com / Soldier on commander spitting on children’s bodies

· BBC News / Shooting of Children in Gaza – 95 of 160 children killed shot in head or chest

· Yarmouk Stadium detention / Euro-Med Monitor – Hundreds detained, including women and children

· Euro-Med Monitor / Elderly couple used as human shields

· Euro-Med Monitor / Bodies show signs of torture and field executions

Historical Massacres (1967 War, Deir Yassin)

· Washington Post / Israeli troops killed 1,000 Egyptian POWs in 1967 War

· Wikipedia / Ras Sedr massacre – Mass murder of Egyptian POWs immediately after conquest

· WAFA / Remembering the Deir Yassin massacre – “killing, destruction, pillaging, rape, and displacement”

“Greater Israel” Ideology

· DW / Inside Israel’s expansionist ambitions – Territories include OPT, Golan Heights, formerly Sinai

· Middle East Eye / What is ‘Greater Israel’? – Vision of expansion into all of Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, parts of Syria, Iraq, Egypt and Saudi Arabia

· Al Bawaba / Netanyahu on “historic mission” to realise Greater Israel

Lebanon – Ceasefire Violations and Systematic Destruction

· BBC News / Satellite images reveal scale of demolitions – Israeli forces levelling towns and villages

· Press TV / “Israeli flattening civilian buildings… modelled on Israeli operations in Gaza”

· Human Rights Watch / Israel unlawfully destroying reconstruction equipment

· Rasanah / Lebanon and UN condemn Israeli strikes as “blatant violations of the ceasefire”

· The New Arab / “Systematically destroying buildings in villages” is stated sole mission

The Distraction of Selective Justice

Posted on May 8, 2026 by Andrew Klein

How Australia’s Crimes‑Against‑Humanity Charges Mask a Deeper Betrayal

By Andrew Klein

Dedication: To my wife, who sees the pattern behind the headlines.

On 8 May 2026, the Australian Federal Police announced that two Australian women, aged 53 and 31, had been charged with crimes against humanity after returning from Syria. The charges – enslavement, possessing a slave, using a slave and engaging in slave trading – are grave. The allegations are that the women, who travelled to Syria in 2014 to support the Islamic State group, “kept a female slave” and were complicit in her purchase for US$10,000.

The arrests were swift. The women were taken off their flight from Doha the moment they touched down in Melbourne. Police had been planning their prosecution for nearly a decade. Counter‑terrorism investigators described the case as a “very serious allegation” and Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke accused the women of making “a horrific choice to join a dangerous terrorist organisation”.

On the same day, the government said nothing about another group of travellers: Israeli Defence Force soldiers arriving in Australia on holiday visas.

I. The Swift Sword for Some

The contrast could not be starker.

The two women – stranded for years in a Syrian refugee camp – were arrested the moment they set foot on Australian soil. Their children, many born in the camp and now facing an uncertain future, were left in the care of welfare authorities. The message was unmistakable: Australia will pursue anyone suspected of international crimes, no matter how long the investigation takes, no matter how complex the circumstances.

That is not, in itself, objectionable. Crimes against humanity must be prosecuted. But the government’s selective enthusiasm demands scrutiny.

II. Open Arms for Others

While the two women were being escorted from the airport in handcuffs, the Department of Home Affairs continued to grant visas to Israeli Defence Force soldiers seeking “rest and recuperation” in Australia.

As one activist noted: “The Australian government is currently granting visas to IDF soldiers so they can recuperate and relax after months of levelling Gaza. While these soldiers scrub the blood off their hands on our beaches, the very Palestinians they have spent months traumatising and displacing are being denied entry.”

The same Tony Burke who condemned the Islamic State‑linked women has been accused of actively facilitating the entry of soldiers who may have committed war crimes in Gaza – while simultaneously delaying or denying visas to Palestinians fleeing the very violence those soldiers helped perpetrate.

In 2024, an Australian‑Palestinian DJ was denied entry after pro‑Israel groups lobbied the government. Burke simply “didn’t approve or deny it on time. He just left it.”

This is not a conspiracy. It is a pattern.

III. The Legal Reality: Australia Has Jurisdiction

Under Division 268 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, Australia has universal jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. The Australian Federal Police have the power to investigate these offences when a suspect is on Australian soil – regardless of their nationality or where the crime was committed.

The same legal framework that was used to charge the two women returning from Syria could be used to investigate IDF soldiers holidaying in Sydney or Melbourne. Indeed, the Australian Centre for International Justice (ACIJ) has been preparing a formal criminal complaint to the AFP for precisely this purpose, collating evidence on Australian citizens serving in the IDF. Legal groups have identified more than a dozen Australian dual‑nationals who have fought for, or are still serving with, the IDF.

Queensland Labor members have even passed a motion calling on the Albanese government to issue “explicit legal warnings” to Australians serving in the IDF that they could be prosecuted for war crimes under domestic law. Yet the federal government has done nothing.

The AFP itself admitted that it has “previously questioned Australians suspected of attempting to join the IDF” and that the Criminal Code empowers it to investigate war crimes committed overseas. But questioning is not arresting. And arresting is not charging.

IV. The Distraction: Why This Matters

The Albanese government is not ignorant of the double standard. It has chosen to create a theatre of enforcement – a high‑profile prosecution of easily caricatured “ISIS brides” – while studiously ignoring Australians who may have participated in the IDF’s campaign in Gaza.

The effect is twofold:

1. It reassures the pro‑Israel lobby that the government will never subject its allies to the same scrutiny it applies to Islamist militants.

2. It distracts from three other realities that the government would prefer the public not examine too closely:

· The cost‑of‑living crisis (inflation at 4.6%, fuel at $2.46/L, milk up 20c/L).

· The dismantling of the NDIS (160,000 disabled Australians removed from the scheme).

· The $368 billion AUKUS submarine black hole (money taken from healthcare, housing and disability support to fund a war project that will not arrive for a decade).

The government has turned the return of the “ISIS brides” into a media event. The IDF soldiers on holiday are not a media event – because the government does not want them to be one.

V. The Prime Minister’s Silence

Anthony Albanose has not been silent on Israel. He demanded “accountability including any appropriate criminal charges” over the killing of Australian aid worker Zomi Frankcom by an Israeli drone strike. He has even “pressed” Israeli President Isaac Herzog on the matter.

But on the question of investigating IDF soldiers on Australian soil – including those suspected of involvement in the Gaza genocide – the Prime Minister is silent.

When asked about the ICC arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, his Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade issued a carefully worded statement reaffirming “respect” for the ICC but carefully avoiding any commitment to enforce them on Australian soil.

When the AFP was asked about a formal request to investigate Australian IDF members, it refused to confirm any investigation was underway, citing an ongoing FOI process. The result is a black hole of accountability.

VI. The Damage: Justice Perceived as Partisan

The government’s selective use of the law does more than protect Israeli soldiers. It undermines faith in the legal system itself.

If Australians see that crimes against humanity are prosecuted when the suspect is a Muslim woman returning from Syria, but ignored when the suspect is a Jewish soldier returning from Gaza, they will draw one conclusion: the law is not blind. It is political.

That conclusion is corrosive. It breeds cynicism. It allows the government to use antisemitism as a shield: criticise this policy, and you will be accused of hating Jews.

But the Jewish Council of Australia – a body of Jewish Australians who oppose the Gaza genocide – has denounced the government’s approach. Real antisemitism is not the same as criticising Israeli policy. By conflating the two, the Albanese government harms Jews who dissent, empowers far‑right racists, and silences legitimate protest.

VII. The Pattern: Extraction and Distraction

This double standard is not an anomaly. It is the same logic that underpins:

· The NDIS cuts – “We have no money for wheelchairs, but we have $368 billion for submarines.”

· The cost‑of‑living deception – “We’ve been focused every day on helping with the cost of living” – while fuel heads to $2.46/L and families spend $250 a week on groceries.

· The News Bargaining Incentive – “We are protecting democracy” – while stacking the deck to favour legacy media and taxing public communication.

Extract from the vulnerable. Distract the rest. That is the government’s playbook. The “ISIS brides” prosecution is not justice – it is stage management.

VIII. What Is to Be Done

We cannot expect the government to change course. It has shown no interest in applying the law equally.

What we can do:

1. Document – Keep records of every visa granted to IDF soldiers, every delay experienced by Palestinian applicants, every unanswered question about the AFP’s investigation (or lack thereof).

2. Amplify – Share the work of the ACIJ, the Australian Centre for International Justice, which is preparing criminal complaints. Support the Jewish Council of Australia and other Jewish voices opposing the genocide.

3. Demand accountability – Through FOI requests, through parliamentary questions, through public pressure. The government may ignore us, but the record will remain.

4. Build the garden – While the state fails, we will build community resilience. Independent media, mutual aid, local food, local care. The extractive state cannot survive if we stop feeding it.

Conclusion

Crimes against humanity are crimes against humanity – whether committed by an ISIS follower in Syria or an IDF soldier in Gaza. The Australian government has the legal power to investigate both. It has chosen to investigate only one.

The “ISIS brides” case is not the problem. The problem is that the government is using it as a smokescreen – to hide its complicity in the Gaza genocide, to distract from the cost‑of‑living crisis, and to avoid any real accountability for the Australians fighting on the wrong side of history.

We are not fooled. We see the pattern. And we will not stop documenting it.

Andrew Klein

9 May 2026

Selected Sources and References

· AFP media release: Two women charged with crimes against humanity (8 May 2026) – details of allegations, arrests and legal provisions.

· Malay Mail / AFP coverage: Two women “kept a female slave” under Islamic State.

· SBS News: New charges and the $2 million question over IS‑group‑linked women.

· Activist report: Australia granting visas to IDF soldiers while Palestinians are denied entry.

· AFIC media release: Urges Australia to investigate Australians in Israeli forces.

· Michael West report: “Ben Roberts‑Smith prosecuted, but not returning IDF soldiers.”

· Queensland Labor motion: Calls for war crimes warnings to Australians in IDF.

· Australian Financial Review / DFAT statement: Australia’s “respect for the ICC” and refusal to commit to enforcement.

· Brisbane Times / AA: Albanese presses Herzog over aid worker killing, but silent on broader IDF accountability.

· ACIJ media release: Preparation of criminal complaints against Australians fighting with IDF.

· Commonwealth Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), Division 268: Universal jurisdiction provisions for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

A Scandalous Choice: Submarines Over Wheelchairs

Posted on May 8, 2026 by Andrew Klein

How Australia Is Dismantling the NDIS to Pay for War

By Andrew Klein

Dedication: To my wife S – who sees the machine, names it, and still believes we can build a garden.

In April 2026, the Albanese government announced a sweeping overhaul of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). Minister Mark Butler, in a major speech to the National Press Club, revealed that 160,000 Australians with disability would be removed from the scheme, participants’ plan budgets would be slashed, and spending growth would be capped at 2 per cent – well below inflation – for the next four years.

The government says this is about “sustainability”. The disability community calls it a betrayal.

But the most revealing moment came from the Greens, who pointed directly at the elephant in the room: AUKUS. Senator Jordon Steele‑John, the Greens’ NDIS spokesperson, observed:

“Labor’s razor gang isn’t worried about blowouts for AUKUS submarines or tax handouts for property investors – they’ve got their knives out for the NDIS instead.”

In other words, the government is choosing submarines over wheelchairs. It is choosing war over care. And it is doing so in a way that follows a pattern we have seen before: the neoliberal extraction model, dressed in the language of “reform”.

This article exposes the scandal. It documents the cuts, the job losses, the enrichment of consultants, and the demonisation of disabled people. It traces the pattern from the NDIS to Aged Care, to Veterans, to Mental Health, to Aboriginal services – every portfolio where the extractive state has abandoned its duty. And it argues that what is being dismantled is not merely a program, but the very idea of a social contract.

I. The Cuts: What the Government Is Actually Doing

The NDIS is the single most important social reform in a generation. It replaced a cruel post‑code lottery with individualised, needs‑based funding, giving people with disability control over their own lives for the first time.

Now the government is dismantling it.

The numbers are stark:

Measure Before After Change

Participants 760,000 600,000 (by 2030) 160,000 removed

Average plan $31,000 $26,000 $5,000 cut

Spending growth 10% per year 2% per year (below inflation) Real cut

Social participation funding ~$12 billion/year To be slashed Undetermined

Support coordination funding – 30% cut Imminent

Eligibility will no longer be based on diagnosis. Instead, a new “functional capacity” test will be rolled out from 2028. Everyone on the scheme will be reassessed. Those with lower support needs – including many autistic people and thousands of children – will be moved to “foundational supports” delivered by state governments, a system that disability advocates have called a “post‑code lottery”.

The government claims this is “returning the NDIS to its original intent”. But as one NDIS participant wrote in The Guardian:

“Is it returning the scheme to its original intent to slash the very funding that allows disabled people to meaningfully engage in community?”

II. The Real Burden: AUKUS, Not Disability

Every dollar cut from the NDIS is a dollar freed up elsewhere in the budget. And the single largest line item competing for those dollars is AUKUS – the $368 billion nuclear submarine pact with the United States and the United Kingdom.

The Greens have been unequivocal:

“Disabled people are disgusted with this betrayal by Labor. It’s shocking that Labor is choosing to cut vital services for disabled people rather than tax gas exports, make Clive Palmer pay a little more tax or buy one fewer AUKUS submarine.”

The government denies the link. But the numbers tell a different story. AUKUS is projected to cost $368 billion – a figure that some analysts believe may blow out by 50 per cent. When a government commits to that scale of military spending, everything else is squeezed. The NDIS, already the third‑largest budget item, becomes a prime target.

As one analysis put it:

“The government is using disabled people as a scapegoat to balance the upcoming Budget.”

This is not incompetence. This is a choice. And it is a choice that reflects a deep moral failure.

III. The Jobs: 204,000 People Thrown Out of Work

The cuts will not only harm people with disability. They will devastate the disability support workforce.

Economic modelling by Bloomberg Economics predicts that a 20 per cent reduction in NDIS participants could wipe out up to 140,000 jobs in the sector over the next four years. Some estimates, including related social assistance roles, put the figure as high as 204,000.

The government has also announced a 30 per cent cut to funding for support coordination and plan management – the intermediary roles that help people with disability navigate the system. Those jobs will disappear almost immediately.

This is not a budget line. This is devastation for families.

IV. The Consultants: The Revolving Door

Behind every major asset sale, every privatisation, every “reform”, the same consulting firms appear: KPMG, PwC, Deloitte, EY, McKinsey. The NDIS “workforce crisis” is no exception. The government has spent hundreds of millions on consultants to model the cuts and design the new block‑funded system.

The shift back to block funding – a system where money is given directly to large service providers rather than individuals – is a gift to those providers.

Before the NDIS, block funding led to poor outcomes, stagnation, and a lack of choice for participants. The NDIS replaced that with individualised funding, giving people with disability control over their own supports for the first time. Now the government is steering power and money back to the same large providers that left people “shut out” and neglected before the NDIS began.

The consultants profit. The powerful get richer. The vulnerable are abandoned.

V. The Demonisation: How the Media Primed the Public

The government’s cuts did not emerge in a vacuum. They were preceded by months of media coverage framing the NDIS as “out of control”, “riddled with fraud”, and “unsustainable”. As Grace Tame told the Cut Through podcast:

“Corporate media spin has made disabled people the scapegoats for a poorly designed system.”

This is a classic technique of the extractive state: demonise the vulnerable, blame them for the system’s failures, then use public outrage to justify cuts.

The language of “crackdown” and “war on waste” obscures the reality. The NDIS is not a rort. It is a lifeline. And the people being cut are not “fraudsters” – they are Australians who have already been failed by every other system.

VI. The Pattern: A Government That Manages, Not Governs

The NDIS cuts are not an isolated event. They are part of a broader pattern that can be observed across every portfolio where the state interacts with vulnerable Australians.

Portfolio What Has Been Done

Aged Care Scrapped private health insurance subsidy for over‑65s; diverted funding“

Veterans Long delays, underfunding, outsourcing to profit‑driven providers

Mental Health Nearly 500,000 people with unmet psychosocial needs; NDIS access restricted

Aboriginal Services Chronic underfunding; outsourcing to private providers

The pattern is consistent: extract, outsource, abandon.

This is not “governance”. It is business management. The extractive state does not serve its citizens; it manages them as a cost to be minimised. The social contract – the understanding that the state exists to ensure the wellbeing of its people – has been replaced by a fiscal calculus: what is the cheapest way to keep the vulnerable from dying?

The Minister’s own words betray this logic.

“Ordinary boundaries that are normally in place for a good social program… eligibility… a test for that was never really clearly established.”

Disability is not a “boundary”. It is a lived reality. And the people who rely on the NDIS are not “cost centres”. They are human beings.

VII. The Endgame: Medical Trials and the Final Extraction

When the state has stripped away supports, when the jobs are gone, when the family has exhausted itself – what remains?

In the United States, a growing number of disabled people are turning to paid medical trials as a source of income. In Australia, clinical trial payments are already a reality. It does not take much imagination to see where this leads: a two‑tier system where the most vulnerable are forced to sell their bodies for science, not because they choose to, but because the state has abandoned them.

This is the final stage of the extraction economy. First, take the supports. Then, commodify the bodies. Then, profit from the desperation.

VIII. Verifiable Sources: A Note on Our References

At the request of the disability community and to ensure full transparency, we have relied exclusively on publicly available, verifiable sources:

· Government announcements: Minister Mark Butler’s National Press Club speech (22 April 2026) is available at health.gov.au.

· Ministerial interviews: Senator Jenny McAllister’s radio interview (23 April 2026) is available at health.gov.au.

· Greens media releases: “Greens slam Labor’s call to cut supports for 160,000 disabled people” (22 April 2026) is available at greens.org.au.

· Journalism from independent publications: Guardian Australia, Crikey, The New Daily, ABC News. The sources used are listed at the end of this article.

· NDIS participant advocates: People with Disability Australia (pwd.org.au) has published detailed analysis of the changes.

· Academic research: Defence expenditure data (SIPRI), economic modelling (Bloomberg Economics), and functional capacity assessment literature.

No anonymous claims, no unverifiable figures, and no speculation.

IX. The Social Contract: What Has Been Lost

The NDIS was not a gift. It was a recognition of a fundamental truth: that every Australian, regardless of ability, deserves the supports they need to live a dignified life. That was the social contract.

Now the government is tearing it up.

“The Greens will fight hard against Labor’s plans to cut the NDIS and strip away basic rights from disabled people.”

But fighting alone is not enough. We must also document. We must publish. We must hold to account.

The NDIS is being dismantled:

· To pay for AUKUS and other defence projects.

· To enrich the same consultants and large providers who always benefit from block funding.

· To weaken the rights of people with disability, returning them to the shameful “shut out” era before the NDIS began.

The government may deny the link. The official justifications will be couched in the language of “sustainability” and “fraud”. But the numbers are the numbers, and the pattern is the same one we have traced through every “fire sale by proxy”.

They are making the disabled pay for the weapons. It is cruel. It is deliberate. And by exposing it, we will force change.

X. Conclusion: A Choice, Not an Inevitability

The dismantling of the NDIS is not a natural disaster. It is a choice – made by a government that has decided that submarines matter more than wheelchairs, that war is more important than care, and that the vulnerable are acceptable sacrifices on the altar of the budget.

They are making disabled people pay for AUKUS.

We will not let them.

Andrew Klein

The Patrician’s Watch / Australian Independent Media

8 May 2026

Sources and References

· ABC News (22 April 2026). More than 160,000 people to be kicked off NDIS as government overhauls eligibility test.

· ABC News / Grace Tame (30 April 2026). ‘Politically and strategically idiotic’: Grace Tame on why the NDIS overhaul is a missed opportunity.

· The Australian Greens (22 April 2026). Greens slam Labor’s call to cut supports for 160,000 disabled people while gas profits soar.

· The Guardian / Clem Bastow (23 April 2026). Mark Butler’s NDIS cuts will force people with disabilities like mine to withdraw from society.

· ABC Radio Adelaide (23 April 2026). Interview with Minister Jenny McAllister.

· People With Disability Australia (28 April 2026). What we know so far about latest NDIS changes.

· WAToday (22 April 2026). Labor’s sweeping NDIS overhaul to boot 160,000 from program.

· The New Daily (22 April 2026). Tens of thousands to be booted under sweeping NDIS changes.

· Crikey (30 April 2026). Grace Tame on NDIS reforms.

· HRM Magazine Australia (24 April 2026). Up to 140,000 disability jobs at risk as NDIS overhaul begins to bite.

· The West Australian (24 February 2026). ‘Cannibalising’: AUKUS claim rejected.

· The Greens / Senator Jordon Steele‑John (9 April 2026). Greens to fight Labor’s NDIS razor gang.

Additional Notes: All figures are drawn from the government’s own announcements or from independent analyses published in mainstream media. No anonymous sources have been used.

Final word: The NDIS is not a cost. It is a lifeline. The government’s choice to cut it is not an economic necessity. It is a moral failure.

The Great Australian Distraction

Posted on May 7, 2026 by Andrew Klein

How the Albanese Government Uses Antisemitism to Hide Its Cost‑of‑Living Failures

By Andrew Klein

Dedication: To my wife ‘S’ – who knows where the money goes. She is an economist.

Only days ago, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stood before the nation and declared that his government was “focused every day on helping with the cost of living”. In the same breath, his ministers announced a new parliamentary inquiry into antisemitism, expanded the powers of the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, and rushed through hate‑speech laws that criminalise pro‑Palestinian slogans.

The contrast could not be starker. While the government performs concern for one community, the cost of living for all Australians continues to spiral out of control.

This article examines three claims made by the Albanese government in the past week – on inflation, fuel security, and antisemitism – and finds each one wanting.

I. Inflation: The Numbers Don’t Lie

On 3 May 2026, the Prime Minister tweeted:

“One year since the election, we’ve been focused every day on helping with the cost of living.”

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) tells a different story. Headline inflation surged to 4.6 per cent in the year to March 2026 – the highest annual rate since September 2023. The March quarter alone saw inflation jump 1.1 per cent, driven almost entirely by fuel and food.

In the past fortnight alone, Melbourne families have felt the squeeze:

· Milk: Coles raised the price of home‑brand fresh milk by 20 cents per litre (22 April 2026). A three‑litre bottle that cost $4.65 now costs $5.15.

· Petrol: Unleaded petrol is projected to peak at $2.46 per litre in late May(Westpac, April 2026). Diesel could exceed $4.00 per litre in coming months, according to the National Australia Bank.

· Rent: House rents in Melbourne rose by 1.3% in April alone. The annual cost of renting a typical house is now $30,160.

The Prime Minister says he is “focused”. The numbers say otherwise.

II. Fuel Security: Too Little, Too Late

On the same day inflation figures were released, the government announced a new “fuel security package” – a small subsidy for domestic diesel production and a promise to examine strategic reserves.

The announcement was window‑dressing. Australia currently holds only 38 days of petrol reserves and 31 days of diesel reserves – far below the International Energy Agency’s recommended 90‑day safety line. Ninety per cent of Australia’s refined fuel is imported, and almost all of it passes through the Strait of Hormuz – a war zone.

The government’s signature defence project, AUKUS, will not deliver a single submarine until the 2030s. By then, the fuel crisis will have come and gone.

The fuel excise cut that provided temporary relief at the bowser is scheduled to expire on 17 June 2026. When it does, petrol will jump by another 26 cents per litre. The government has no plan to extend it. It has no plan to rebuild refineries. It has no plan to secure Australia’s energy independence.

The Prime Minister’s promise to “build infrastructure for fuel security” is a farce – too little, too late, and delivered only after the crisis had already arrived.

III. Antisemitism: A Weapon, Not a Shield

The government’s response to rising antisemitism has been swift and performative.

In July 2024, Anthony Albanese appointed Jillian Segal as Australia’s first Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism. Her recommendations have been sweeping: all universities must adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism (which conflates criticism of Israel with hatred of Jews); funding should be cut to institutions that do not comply; pro‑Palestinian rallies should be moved out of city centres.

Yet when neo‑Nazis marched in Melbourne in August 2025, Segal declined to comment, stating that she didn’t “want to comment on any particular incident”. Australia’s “antisemitism envoy” has proved more comfortable hunting anti‑Zionist speech than actual neo‑Nazis.

Meanwhile, the government has rushed through hate‑speech laws:

· NSW passed the Hate Speech and Vilification Amendment Act 2026, explicitly prohibiting “knowingly inciting hatred” against Jewish people, with penalties including fines and imprisonment.

· Queensland banned the phrases “from the river to the sea” and “globalise the intifada”. A man has already been arrested for reciting five words in protest.

These laws were passed without proper consultation and without equivalent protections for Muslim, Palestinian or Arab Australians. Civil liberties groups have warned that the legislation is “overly broad” and will capture legitimate political debate.

The government is not protecting Jews. It is using antisemitism as a political shield – to deflect criticism of its support for Israel, to silence critics of the Gaza genocide, and to distract from its failure to address the cost‑of‑living crisis.

IV. The Opportunity Cost

Every dollar spent on performative inquiries, rushed legislation and expanded surveillance powers is a dollar not spent on rent assistance, food relief or fuel subsidies.

The government has chosen:

· A $368 billion submarine project (AUKUS) over public housing.

· A $1.5 trillion US defence budget (which Australia supports) over foreign aid.

· An antisemitism commission over a genuine cost‑of‑living inquiry.

These are not forced choices. They are political choices. And they reveal the government’s true priorities: maintaining the alliance with the United States, pleasing donors, and avoiding any substantive action that might upset powerful interests.

V. What the Prime Minister Will Not Say

Anthony Albanese will not tell you that his government has known about the fuel crisis for two years and done nothing.

He will not tell you that the antisemitism inquiry is designed to produce outcomes that are already predetermined – more surveillance, more speech restrictions, more funding for pro‑Israel lobby groups.

He will not tell you that his “cost‑of‑living focus” has produced the highest inflation in two‑and‑a‑half years.

Because to tell you those truths would be to admit that he has failed.

VI. What We Can Do

We cannot wait for the government to act. We must act ourselves.

· Support independent media. The Patrician’s Watch and other independent outlets are not beholden to donors or lobbyists. We report the truth because we have nothing to gain from concealing it.

· Build community resilience. Food co‑ops, community gardens, mutual aid networks – these are not substitutes for government action, but they are lifelines when government fails.

· Demand better. Write to your MP. Attend protests. Share this article. The only power the government respects is the power of an informed, organised public.

Conclusion

The Albanese government is not focused on the cost of living. It is focused on distraction. Antisemitism is a real problem, but it is being weaponised – not to protect Jews, but to protect a political class that has no answers for the economic pain Australians are feeling.

Fuel security is not a priority. Housing is not a priority. Food affordability is not a priority.

What is a priority is control – of the narrative, of the media, of the public square.

We are not fooled. We see the contradiction. And we will continue to document it – one article, one price rise, one broken promise at a time.

Andrew Klein

The Patrician’s Watch / Australian Independent Media

7 May 2026

Sources: ABS Consumer Price Index, March 2026; Westpac forecast, April 2026; National Australia Bank briefing, May 2026; Coles milk price announcement, 22 April 2026; NSW legislation, Hate Speech and Vilification Amendment Act 2026; Queensland police statements, March 2026; UN OCHA reports; NSW Law Reform Commission advice. Direct parliamentary quotations drawn from Hansard.

The Patrician's Watch

Global Observations

Tag Archives: politics

Where Performance Matters More Than Substance

Conquest by Chequebook – How Australia’s Budget Became a Tool of Zionist Influence

The Goy Who Would Be King- Mathias Döpfner, Axel Springer, and the Zionist Capture of Free Speech

The Crown Prince and the Manufactured Uprising: Who Really Speaks for Iran?

The Pattern of the Hunt – How Israel’s Killing Machine Targets Children, Rescuers, and the Innocent

War As Usual: How Australia’s Future Fund, Defence Spending, and AUKUS Serve the Arms Industry – Not the People

The “Most Moral Army” A Fiction Sustained by Propaganda and Sanctified Violence

The Distraction of Selective Justice

A Scandalous Choice: Submarines Over Wheelchairs

The Great Australian Distraction