The total liberation and unification of Africa under an All-African Socialist Government must be the primary objective of all Black revolutionaries throughout the world. It is an objective which, when achieved, will bring about the fulfillment of the aspirations of Africans and people of African descent everywhere. It will at the same time advance the triumph of the international socialist revolution, and the onward progress towards world communism, under which, every society is ordered on the principle of –from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.
— Osagyefo Kwame Nkrumah
Jeremy Kuzmarov was kind to spend an hour with me, since I am much more polemical and hyperbolic than his measured writing belies. I’ve written numerous times why it is I am now switched to write THAT way, and there is no need for me to defend my rhetoric and utilizing some of the 11 forms of propaganda Edward Bernays and Goebbels and Madison Avenue and Hasbara Industry deploy.
We talked about his new book, Warmonger: How Clinton’s Malign Foreign Policy Launched the US Trajectory from Bush II to Biden, Clarity Press, Inc., 2023.
Here, this book is divided into thirteen chapters and provides a comprehensive overview of Clinton’s foreign policy across the globe. Utilizing archival research from the Clinton Presidential Library, oral history interviews, alongside a plethora of newspapers and scholarship focusing on the 1990s, Kuzmarov provides succinct overviews of high-profile and well-known events, such as genocide in the Balkans and in Rwanda, and lesser-known case studies such as the administration’s disastrous reworking of the Russian economy or Clinton’s support for dictators in Africa. Kuzmarov makes the salient point that despite rhetoric to the contrary, Clinton was never interested in human rights or humanitarianism when it came to intervention. Rather, the administration was quick to set aside human rights when it served its interests.
With those Clinton years, we have had the perfect caldron of the witch’s and devil’s brew of a slim-ball, a Cecil Rhodes and Chatam House rodent, and not America’s first Black or Republican president, Clinton working his dark arts with the neo-cons and neoliberals and the imperialists.
Here’s the book’s blurb:
During the 2016 presidential election, many younger voters repudiated Hillary Clinton because of her husband’s support for mass incarceration, banking deregulation and free-trade agreements that led many U.S. jobs to be shipped overseas. Warmonger: How Clinton’s Malign Foreign Policy Launched the Trajectory from Bush II to Biden, shows that Clinton’s foreign policy was just as bad as his domestic policy. Cultivating an image as a former anti-Vietnam War activist to win over the aging hippie set in his early years, as president, Clinton bombed six countries and, by the end of his first term, had committed U.S. troops to 25 separate military operations, compared to 17 in Ronald Reagan’s two terms. Clinton further expanded America’s covert empire of overseas surveillance outposts and spying and increased the budget for intelligence spending and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a CIA offshoot which promoted regime change in foreign nations.
The latter was not surprising because, according to CIA operative Cord Meyer Jr., Clinton had been recruited into the CIA while a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, and as Governor of Arkansas in the 1980s he had allowed clandestine arms and drug flights to Nicaraguan counter-revolutionaries (Contras) backed by the CIA to be taken from Mena Airport in the western part of the state. Rather than being a time of tranquility when the U.S. failed to pay attention to the gathering storm of terrorism, as New York Times columnist David Brooks frames it, the Clinton presidency saw rising tensions among the U.S., China and Russia because of Clinton’s malign foreign policies, and U.S. complicity in terrorist acts.
In so many ways, Clinton’s presidency set the groundwork for the disasters that were to follow under Bush II, Obama, Trump, and Biden. It was Clinton―building off of Reagan―who first waged a War on Terror ridden with double standards, one that adopted terror tactics, including extraordinary rendition, bombing and the use of drones. It was Clinton who cried wolf about human rights abuses and the need to protect beleaguered peoples from genocide to justify military intervention in a post-Cold War age. And it was Clinton’s administration that pressed for regime change in Iraq and raised public alarm about the mythic WMDs―all while relying on fancy new military technologies and private military contractors to distance US shady military interventions from the public to limit dissent.
We spent a lot of time looking at the history of Covert Action Bulletin. We talked about language, the so-called alternative press, what real liberalism was and how liberalism now is an evil spin factory of the neoliberal variety.
-
- controlled opposition
- limited hangout
- Discredit, disrupt, and destroy
- Operation Paperclip
- ECHELON
- MKUltra
- DARPA
The list goes on and on and on. Phoenix Program? We know Covert Programs need Covert Action.
LANGUAGE. That whole concept of people berating me for reading CAM articles, for citing guys like William Blum or Douglas Valentine or Jeremy, it’s all based on the language of the oppressed, the amnesiac, colonized, lobotomized, brainwashed, miseducated, anesthetized.
The idea of the CIA being the premier agency of no good, murder incorporated, full of machinations on economic hits and country destabilization.
Yes, the Mossad has taken CIA and British intelligence agencies up a few notches, but we both agree that this was planned, or part of the plan.
You can go to Covert Action Magazine and hit any number of topic arenas you might fancy as your primary interest: social justice issues including intervention, war, covert action, intelligence, political economy, imperialism, labor, repression, surveillance, media, racial justice, sexism, environmentalism, and immigration
By Chris Agee
CovertAction Magazine began publishing in 1978 as a newsletter called Covert Action Information Bulletin (CAIB) and later as CovertAction Quarterly (CAQ). The magazine developed a following not as a conspiracy-theory-related publication, but as a source for reliable, consistent, and accurate investigative reporting.
Originally, CAIB was a watchdog journal that focused on the abuses and activities of the CIA, yet it has gradually evolved into a more general, progressive investigative magazine.
CAIB was cofounded and copublished by Ellen Ray, William Schaap, and Louis Wolf, along with former CIA agents such as James and Elsie Wilcott, and Philip Agee, author of Inside the Company: CIA Diary and On The Run.
Following in the tradition of CounterSpy Magazine (1973-1984)—with whom the founders of CAIB had originally worked—highlights of CAIB included the notorious “Naming Names” column, which printed the names of CIA officers under diplomatic cover. These were tracked through exhaustive research in the State Department Biographic Register and various domestic and international diplomatic lists.
This column, and others like it, came to an end in 1982 when the Intelligence Identities Protection Act was signed into law by Ronald Reagan. CAIB had to end the “Naming Names” column, but more significantly, the act required that magazines such as CAIB be more wary about the names they published within the articles of their contributors. This was particularly significant after December 1975 when Richard S. Welch, a CIA station chief, was assassinated in Athens, Greece. CounterSpy was criticized by both the CIA and the press for its exposure of the agent’s name.
While almost every issue focused on the CIA and its activities in regions like Central America and Southeast Asia, CAIB also covered the CIA interference in the domestic media and on university campuses, as well as a wider range of domestic and international political issues. Occasionally, CAIB dedicated entire issues to surveillance technologies, the U.S. prison system, the environment, Mad Cow disease, AIDS, ECHELON, media cover-ups, Iraqi sanctions, and the so-called “war against drugs.”
Contributing authors have included intellectuals, writers, and activists such as Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Michael Parenti, Sara Flounders, Philip Agee, John Pilger, Ramsey Clark, Leonard Peltier, Allen Ginsberg, Diana Johnstone, Laura Flanders, Edward S. Herman, and Ward Churchill.
In 1992, with Issue 43, CAIB changed its name to CovertAction Quarterly (CAQ). As a 64 to 78-page magazine published four times a year, the publication became fondly known as the magazine “recommended by Noam Chomsky; targeted by the CIA.” CAQ had a reputation for beating to the punch more mainstream standard-bearers, such as the New York Times.
In 1995, it covered the genocide in Rwanda and U.S. complicity in those events, years before any other publication cared to notice; it ran in-depth investigative articles on the rise of homegrown militias before the Oklahoma bombing; and it was the first U.S. publication to reveal the existence of ECHELON (the security agencies’ surveillance software).
CAQ was the regular recipient of the annual Project Censored awards for the Top 25 Censored Stories.
Twenty-eighteen was the 40th anniversary of the founding of CovertAction and its publisher Covert Action Publications, Inc. Former writers and publishers of CAIB and CAQ relaunched as CovertAction Magazine (CAM).
The relaunch team also intends to publish several books including an annual compilation of the best of CAM, an encyclopedia of espionage and a republication of CIA Diary: Inside the Company and On The Run by Philip Agee, volumes which will include Philip Agee’s iconic articles and papers.
The relaunch team is headed up by the co-founder, publisher and writer, Louis Wolf, as well as our tried and true investigative journalists, professors, organizers, funders, proofreaders and legal representation. The expanded team includes Chris Agee, William Blum, Jack Colhoun, Michel Chossudovsky, Mark Cook, Jennifer Harbury, Bill Montross, Immanuel Ness, James Petras, Karen Ranucci, Stephanie Reich, Hobart Spalding, Victor Wallis and Melvin L. Wulf, all of whom worked with, and/or wrote for, the magazine in the past.
New talent that has come on board for the relaunch include Sam Alcoff, Steve Brown, Tom Burgess, Hester Eisenstein, Victoria Gamez, David Giglio, Josh Klein, Maureen LaMar, Michael Locker, and Chuck Mohan, to name a few.
All together, the expanded team specializes in a variety of social justice issues including intervention, war, covert action, intelligence, political economy, imperialism, labor, repression, surveillance, media, racial justice, sexism, environmentalism, and immigration. See our masthead for more details.
The archives will illustrate the beginnings of the hard copy newsletter/magazine — Archives /CovertAction Magazine.
Interestingly enough, Jeremy has had his hit entry into the propaganda machine, Canary Mission, updated after his article appeared both on his Substack and in CAM: On the One-Year Anniversary of October 7, It is Clear We Were Not Told The Truth
Imagine that title’s subordinate first clause being replaced by any number of topics
- On the One-Year Anniversary of the Planned SARS-CoV2 pandemic
- On the One-Year Anniversary of the USS Liberty
- On the One-Year Anniversary of September 11
- On the One-Year Anniversary of Gulf on Tonkin
- On the One-Year Anniversary of War on Terror
- On the One-Year Anniversary of US Patriot Act
- On the One-Year Anniversary of Bush, Biden, Obama, Trump Administrations
- On the One-Year Anniversary of / / /
Pearl Harbor?
Sinking of the Lusitania?
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Here’s Jeremy’s ending to that article:
In that case, a British commission uncovered that the Lusitania—carrying more than 100 American passengers from the U.S. to Europe (over 1,000 died overall)—was rigged with explosives, though the destruction of the ship was blamed on Germany.
Winston Churchill, then the First Lord of the Admiralty, withheld rescue boats to maximize the number of deaths. The aim was to generate enough outrage for the U.S. public to want to go to war against Germany.[5]
Evidence indicates that Benjamin Netanyahu has adopted the same strategy of Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt in sacrificing the lives of his own people in order to arouse enough anger to generate support for war.
Roosevelt and Churchill are today regarded as national heroes in their respective countries, though Netanyahu is likely to go down in history as a villain, along with his American sponsors. This is because the Israelis have failed to earn a heroic victory against Gaza and have horrified much of the world with the atrocities that they have committed.
Overview
Jeremy Kuzmarov spread anti-Israel conspiracy theories during Israel’s war against Hamas. He has also expressed hatred of Israel and is a supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement.
These Mitzvah Elves, man, this fucking Canary Mission putting thousands of good honest thinkers onto their web site to incite hatred and deplatforming and doxing and you name it:
Continuing with the hateful Canary Mission:
Hatred of Israel
On June 8, 2017, Kuzmarov published an article titled: “Six-Day War A Turning Point In Passionate Attachment To Israel.”
In the article, Kusmarov wrote how the Six-Day War transformed “Israel into an occupier” of “historic Palestine (West Bank and Gaza).”
Kuzmarov further stated in his article:
“The myth of Israel as a humane and embattled David fighting the Arab Goliath has been debunked in recent years, with world opinion expressing growing sympathy for Palestinians living under Israeli occupation.”
Read: Who is behind Canary Mission’s anonymous anti-Palestinian blacklisting website? by Hamzah Raza and Max Blumenthal·August 22, 2018
We talked about education, the movement within higher education to suppress and single out and even fire peace activists fighting to expose the lies of Israel, AIPAC, Jewish ties to genocide, both within Israel and outside it.
He’s an adjunct professor at Tulsa Community College, and he says his students in his history courses are for the most part open to learning and getting deep into the reveal, that is, to look at the real history of America, to get to the underbelly and to question their own blinded brainwashing and the grand and meta-hyper narratives of this land tis of thee.
My show, Finding Fringe, airs Wednesdays, 6 pm PST, this one with Jeremy is all the way to Sept. 3. Above is a great line-up via Zoom Doom, with amazing people I have followed over the past few years.
Topics of Discussion:
- Operation Timber Sycamore – Unpacking the U.S.-backed CIA program and its impact.
- Empowering al Qaeda – Examining how covert foreign support fueled extremist groups
- Genocide of Syrian Minorities – Investigating the targeted violence against ethnic and religious communities
Featured Speakers:
- Dan Kovalik – Human rights lawyer and author
- Fiorella Isabel – Investigative journalist and analyst
- Ben Arthur Thomason – Researcher and peace advocate
- Vanessa Beeley – War correspondent and independent journalist
Tickets: Just $25! All proceeds support CAM’s independent investigative journalism and fundraising initiatives.
*****
Support CAM and send an email to KYAQ and thank them for running my hour-long weekly shows:
6 pm to 7 Wednesdays
July 2 will be Freedom Farms. Working the soil when leaving incarceration — https://freedom-farms.org/
July 9, reintroducing Sea Otters to Oregon with Chanel Hason, Elakha Alliance — https://www.elakhaalliance.org/
July 16, Nigeria, Madu Smart Ajaja, from Houston, talking about his country Nigeria.
Will Potter, Green is the New Red and his newest book, Little Red Barns, July 23: Animal rights and gag laws and designating farm animal rights folk as terrorists. == https://www.willpotter.com/
July 30 local woman, from Waldport, fighting the City Manager and road crew, Teresa Carter.
August 6 Wisconsin’s Draconian probation provisos on steroids, and other issues around the prison industrial complex with Kelly Kloss.
Max Wilbert, Bright Green Lies, and with CELDF, and an environmental sanity warrior. 13 August. — https://celdf.org/
Taylor Yount, with her new book, My Sutured Mind: Poems of Healing Beyond Trauma, with local Ukrainian artist, Veta Bakhtina, artwork. August 27.
September 3, Jeremy Kuzmarov, author of five books, his latest being, Warmonger: How Clinton’s Malign Foreign Policy Launched the US Trajectory from Bush II to Biden and managing editor of Covert Action Magazine — https://covertactionmagazine.com/
Zachary Stocks, Executive Director, Oregon Black Pioneers September 10 == https://oregonblackpioneers.org/
My interview June 27 with Jeremy Kuzmarov.
*****
I’m not sure if CAM has had Amaju Baraka on as a guest or writer, but I highly recommend his most recent interview here:
Black Alliance for Peace Condemns the U.S. and Israeli Final Solution for Gaza and the West Bank
Justice Demands Action against Zionism, not Hypocritical Rhetoric from the States of the “West”
Just as Nazi Germany sought the total elimination of Jewish life, the state of Israel, with full U.S. support, is now openly pursuing the systematic annihilation of the people of Gaza, the acceleration of mass displacement in the West Bank, and the denial of Palestinian nationhood itself. Those who dare to speak out are vilified, censored, or stripped of their livelihoods, ensuring complicity through coercion. The Black Alliance for Peace rejects this moral and political blackmail. True solidarity demands courage—refusing to be silenced or pacified as we witness, document, and resist this ongoing genocide. History will judge not only the perpetrators but also those who stood by in cowardly silence…
Those with the power to do so can either take such measures or abdicate their humanity. Palestine will not be free until Zionism, along with all white supremacist ideologies, is defeated. BAP will continue to do everything in its power to ensure the final defeat of global white supremacy that is materially grounded in imperialism.
We Stand With Iran 19 June 2025 By A-APRP
The illegal zionist state of Israel started bombing Iran on Friday, June 13th, 2025. The aerial bombing coincided with the assassination of a number of scientists, generals and civilians. This unprovoked, criminal assault was accompanied by sabotage of government facilities, drone attacks on civilian infrastructure and the unleashing of internal cells loyal to the west, determined to dismantle the Iranian state. Taken as a whole the military assault is eerily reminiscent of the 2011 attack on Libya that killed Muammar Gaddafi and devastated Africa’s most progressive nation state.
This is all done to ensure US dominance in the region under the pretext of stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The capitalist mainstream media, the US Government, and Israel are claiming Israel is protecting itself from a powerful nuclear neighbor. But a careful analysis reveals a quite different reality. Firstly, Israel is the state that possesses nuclear weapons. They are aggressors claiming to be victims. Secondly Israel is nothing more than a proxy of US led imperialism, which wants to economically and militarily dominate the region. This is part of the imperialist plan to dominate the world.
The zionist state of Israel was created to serve the interests of imperialism by establishing an imperialist fortress in Western Asia.
Last Gasp Of A Dying Monster (The Imperialist Military Assault)
Imperialism (through the zionist entity in Israel) instituted regime change in Syria, and executed genocide in Gaza and the West Bank. Iran supports the Palestinians with arms, money, training and material. Iran is now being targeted for regime change.
We must also take note that these Imperialist/zionist forces are not confining their military activity to one country or region. While a new war rages in Iran, imperialism creates ongoing conflicts of various types in the Western Sahara, Eritrea, Zimbabwe, DRC, Sudan, Guinea Bissau, the Alliance For Sahelian States (which includes Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso), Venezuela, Nicaraqua, Cuba, North Korea, Haiti, Russia, China and other places throughout the world. This is in fact an imperialist policy of Full Spectrum Domination.
The U.S. has at least 45 military bases surrounding Iran and the US has already threatened Iran declaring,“If Iran attacks any U.S. military bases we will bomb Iran with the likes they have never seen”. After lying about their involvement in the attacks on Iran by Israelis the US president went on to say, “We gave them a chance to negotiate a peace agreement and they wouldn’t agree to our terms.” So, now they will have to come to the negotiation table and agree to our terms.”
This is how the dying capitalists/imperialists act in their last stage of existence. They engage in multiple wars, terrorism and genocide as they are declining. They try to kill, terrorize as many people and nations as possible. But, they have been losing militarily, economically and politically everywhere. Including losing the propaganda war around the world.
…
The Significance of Pan-Africanism
A new wave of anti-neo colonial resistance that is sweeping Africa is reshaping oil and gas politics, challenging imperialist dominance, and aligning with the BRICS led push to “de-dollarize” the world’s economy. This movement is driven by youth uprisings, military coups, formation of alliances, and rising ideological awareness that imperialism is the enemy of humanity.
*****
Dan’s a regular CAM columnist: The War on Iran Has Been Long in the Making, and the U.S. Is Already a Party to It
This is one measure of the talent and deep thinkers over at CAM: Daniel Kovalik graduated from Columbia University School of Law in 1993. He then served as in-house counsel for the United Steelworkers, AFL-CIO (USW) until 2019.
While with the USW, he worked on Alien Tort Claims Act cases against The Coca-Cola Company, Drummond and Occidental Petroleum—cases arising out of egregious human rights abuses in Colombia.
The Christian Science Monitor, referring to his work defending Colombian unionists under threat of assassination, described Mr. Kovalik as “one of the most prominent defenders of Colombian workers in the United States.”
Mr. Kovalik received the David W. Mills Mentoring Fellowship from Stanford University School of Law and was the recipient of the Project Censored Award for his article exposing the unprecedented killing of trade unionists in Colombia.
He has written extensively on the issue of international human rights and U.S. foreign policy for the Huffington Post and Counterpunch and has lectured throughout the world on these subjects. He is the author of several books including The Plot To Overthrow Venezuela, How The US Is Orchestrating a Coup for Oil, which includes a Foreword by Oliver Stone; The Plot to Attack Iran: How the CIA and the Deep State Have Conspired to Vilify Iran; and with Jeremy Kuzmarov, Syria: Anatomy of a Regime Change.
Michael Parenti:
Total number of registered lobbyists in the United States from 2000 to 2024
Yeah, so billions a year spent by lobbies — just call them protection rackets or overt and covert organizations/cartels representing not just special interest a or b, but collectively, representing the entire fucking corporations and groups just in one arena:
Nah, not undue influence? In 2024, the groups that spent the most on lobbying were the National Association of Realtors, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Hospital Association, and the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America.
1,517 (55.04%)
The number of pharmaceutical/health product lobbyists in the United States and the percentage who are former government employees, as of June 1, 2025.
You thought it was offensive weapons companies? Why, when the Military Mercenaries have their own taxpayer paid for mafia —
Military Departments:
Responsible for organizing, training, and equipping land forces.
Department of the Navy: Includes the Navy and Marine Corps, responsible for sea-based and amphibious operations.
Department of the Air Force: Responsible for air and space operations.
Other Key Components:
Joint Chiefs of Staff:
A group of high-ranking military officers who advise the President, Secretary of Defense, and National Security Council on military matters.
Unified Combatant Commands:
Eleven regional or functional commands responsible for military operations in specific areas or for specific functions. Examples include U.S. Central Command, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, and U.S. Cyber Command.
Defense Agencies:
Various agencies that provide specialized support to the military departments and combatant commands, such as the Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
Do these agencies below need lobbies? They are already built into the system:
Department of Justice:
- Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI): Investigates violations of federal law, including terrorism, cybercrime, and organized crime.
- Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA): Enforces federal drug laws and combats drug trafficking.
- United States Marshals Service (USMS): Protects the federal judiciary, apprehends fugitives, and manages seized assets.
- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF): Enforces federal laws related to alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives.
- Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP): Manages the federal prison system.
Department of Homeland Security:
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP): Secures US borders and enforces customs laws.
- U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE): Enforces immigration and customs laws.
- U.S. Secret Service (USSS): Protects national leaders and investigates financial crimes.
- U.S. Coast Guard (USCG): Enforces maritime laws and conducts search and rescue.
- Transportation Security Administration (TSA): Secures transportation systems.
- Federal Protective Service (FPS): Protects federal buildings and property.
Other Federal Agencies:
- U.S. Capitol Police: Protects the U.S. Capitol Building and grounds.
- Amtrak Police Department: Provides law enforcement services for Amtrak’s national passenger rail system.
- Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Criminal Investigation: Investigates tax fraud and other financial crimes.
- Military Criminal Investigative Organizations: Each branch of the military has its own investigative service (e.g., NCIS for the Navy, OSI for the Air Force).
- Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Police: Protects DIA facilities and personnel.
Some conspiracy, uh?
Organizations within the Department of Defense:
- Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA): Provides military intelligence to warfighters, policymakers, and defense planners.
- National Security Agency (NSA): Focuses on signals intelligence (SIGINT) and cybersecurity.
- National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA): Provides geospatial intelligence (GEOINT), including imagery and mapping.
- National Reconnaissance Office (NRO): Develops, acquires, launches, and operates reconnaissance satellites.
- Army Intelligence: Provides intelligence support to the US Army.
- Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI): Provides naval intelligence to the US Navy.
- Air Force Intelligence: Provides intelligence support to the US Air Force.
- U.S. Space Force Intelligence: Provides intelligence for space operations.
- Marine Corps Intelligence: Provides intelligence for Marine Corps operations.
- Coast Guard Intelligence: Focuses on maritime threats and homeland security.
Other key agencies:
- Central Intelligence Agency (CIA): A civilian foreign intelligence service responsible for gathering, processing, and analyzing intelligence related to national security.
- Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Intelligence and Analysis: Focuses on homeland security intelligence.
- Department of Energy Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence: Deals with nuclear proliferation and energy-related intelligence.
- Department of State Bureau of Intelligence and Research: Provides foreign policy intelligence to the State Department.
- Department of the Treasury Office of Intelligence and Analysis: Focuses on financial intelligence related to national security.
- Drug Enforcement Administration Intelligence Program: Focuses on drug-related intelligence.
- Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Counterintelligence Division: Investigates foreign espionage and other threats to national security.
- Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI): Oversees and coordinates the activities of the entire Intelligence Community.
- National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC): A component of the ODNI, focused on counterterrorism intelligence.
War is a Very Expensive and Devil’s Bargain — The BIG LIE.
Now now, I really did not go off topic. CAM, Covert Action Magazine. Open it up, man. Just put in the Google “Ukraine and Covert Action Magazine.” Do that for any topic. “Covert Action Magazine and Gaza.” Etc.
Jeremy is a simple guy who believes in truth, and he questions the narratives and the agencies that are the mafias and cartels protecting the agencies, who are just economic hitmen, in that Racket, sir, Gen. Butler.
“Every government is run by liars. Nothing they say should be believed.”
― I.F. Stone
It would have been a hell of a conversation with Jeremy and Stone (R.I.P.):
To write the truth as I see it; to defend the weak against the strong; to fight for justice; and to seek, as best I can to bring healing perspectives to bear on their terrible hates and fears of mankind, in the hope of someday bringing about one world, in which men[and women] will enjoy the differences of the human garden instead of killing each other over them.
― Isidor Feinstein Stone
Listen to my interview with Jeremy of CAM here, KYAQ.
The enduring quality of the myth of the addicted army in many respects demonstrates America’s long-standing inability to come to terms with the moral consequences of the Vietnam War. By reimagining their soldiers as victims and the U.S. military defeat as a “tragedy,” Americans were able to deflect responsibility for the massive destruction and loss of life inflicted on the people of Southeast Asia and thus to avoid serious reconsideration of the ideological principles that rationalized the American intervention. The silencing and demonizing of dissenting voices, including antiwar GIs typecast as psychopathic junkies, aided in this process.”
— Jeremy Kuzmarov in “The Myth of the Addicted Army”
The post A Battle for Humane Consciousness in a War Against Truth: Exposing the Dark Arts of War first appeared on Dissident Voice.With remarkable continuity, police aid was used not just to target criminals but to develop elaborate intelligence networks oriented towards internal defense, which allowed the suppression of dissident groups to take place on a wider scope and in a more surgical and often brutal way. In effect, the U.S. helped to modernize intelligence gathering and political policing operations, thus magnifying their impact. They further helped to militarize the police and provided them with a newfound perception of power, while schooling them in a hard-line anticommunism that fostered the dehumanization of political adversaries and bred suspicion about grass-roots mobilization…… Although the U.S. was not always in control of the forces that it empowered and did not always condone their acts, human rights violations were not by accident or the product of rogue forces betraying American principles, as some have previously argued. They were rather institutionalized within the fabric of American policy and its coercive underpinnings.
— Jeremy Kuzmarov in “Modernizing Repression: Police Training, Nation-Building and the Spread of Political Violence in the American Century,” Diplomatic History, April 2009
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
The focal questions about war
In dealing with both theoretical and practical points of view about war, at least six fundamental questions arise: 1) What is war?; 2) What types of war exist?; 3) Why do wars occur?; 4) What is the connection between war and justice?; 5) The question of war crimes?; and 6) Is it possible to replace war with the so-called “perpetual peace”?
Probably, up to today, the most used and reliable understanding of war is its short but powerful definition by Carl von Clausewitz:
“War is merely the continuation of politics by other means” [On War, 1832].
It can be considered the terrifying consequences if, in practice, Clausewitz’s term “merely” from a simple phrase about the war would be applied in the post-WWII nuclear era and the Cold War (for instance, the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962).
Nevertheless, he became one of the most important influencers on Realism in international relations (IR). To remind ourselves, Realism in political science is a theory of IR that accepts war as a very normal and natural part of the relationships between states (and after WWII, of other political actors as well) in global politics. Realists are keen to stress that wars and all other kinds of military conflicts are not just natural (meaning normal) but even inevitable. Therefore, all theories that do not accept the inevitability of war and military conflicts (for instance, Feminism) are, in fact, unrealistic.
The art of war is an extension of politics
A Prussian general and military theorist, Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz (1780−1831), the son of a Lutheran Pastor, entered the Prussian military service when he was only 12, and achieved the rank of Major-General in his 38. He was studying the philosophy of I. Kant and became involved in the successful reform of the Prussian army. Clausewitz was of the opinion that war is a political instrument similar to, for instance, diplomacy or foreign aid. For this reason, he is considered to be a traditional (old) realist. Clausewitz echoed the Greek Thucydides, who had described in the 5th century B.C. in his famous The History of the Peloponnesian War the dreadful consequences of unlimited war in ancient Greece. Thucydides (ca. 460−406 B.C.) was a Greek historian but had a great interest in philosophy too. His great historiographical work, The History of the Peloponnesian War (431−404 B.C.), recounts the struggle between Athens and Sparta for geopolitical, military, and economic control (hegemony) over the Hellenic world. The war culminated at the end with the destruction of Athens, the birthplace of both ancient democracy and imperialistic/hegemonic ambitions. Thucydides explained the war in which he participated as the Athenian “strategos” (general) in terms of the dynamics of power politics between Sparta and Athens and the relative power of the rival city-states (polis). He consequently developed the first sustained realistic explanation of international relations and conflicts and formed the earliest theory of IR. In his famous Melian dialogue, Thucydides showed how power politics is indifferent to moral argument. This is a dialogue between the Melians and the Athenians, which Thucydides quoted in his The History of the Peloponnesian War, in which the Athenians refused to accept the Melians’ wish to remain neutral in the war with Sparta and Spartan allies. The Athenians finally besieged the Melians and massacred them. His work and dark view of human nature influenced Thomas Hobbes.
Actually, Clausewitz was in strong fear that unless politicians controlled war, it is going to degenerate into a struggle with no clear other objectives except one – to destroy the enemy. He was serving in the Prussian army during the Napoleonic Wars until being captured in 1806. Later, he helped it to be reorganized and served in the Russian army from 1812 to 1814, and finally fought at the decisive Battle of Waterloo on June 18, 1815, which brought about Napoléon’s ultimate downfall from power.
The Napoleonic Wars influenced Clausewitz to caution that war is being transformed into a struggle among whole nations and peoples without limits and restrictions, but without clear political aims and/or objectives. In his On War (in three volumes, published after his death), he explained the relationship between war and politics. In other words, war without politics is just killing, but this killing with politics has some meaning.
Clausewitz’s assumption about the phenomenon of warfare was framed by the thought that if it is reflected that war has its origin in a political object, then, naturally, it comes to the conclusion that this original motive, which called it into existence, should also continue the first and highest consideration in its conduct. Consequently, the policy is interwoven with the whole action of war and must exercise a continuous influence upon it. It is clearly seen that war is not merely a political act, but as well as a real political instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of the same by other means. In other words, the political view is the object while war is the means, and the means must always include the object in our conception.
Another important notice by Clausewitz is that the rising power of nationalism in Europe and the use of large conscript armies (in fact, national armies) could produce in the future absolute or total wars (like WWI, WWII), that is, wars to the death and total destruction rather than wars waged for some more or less precise and limited political objectives. However, he was particularly fear leaving warfare to the generals for the reason that their idea of victory in war is framed only within the parameters of the destruction of enemy armies. Such an assumption of victory is in contradiction with the war aim of politicians, who understand victory in war as the realization of the political aims for which they started the particular war. Nevertheless, such ends in practice could range from very limited to large, and according to Clausewitz:
… wars have to be fought at the level necessary to achieve them”. If the aim of the military action is an equivalent for the political objective, that action will, in general, diminish as the political objective diminishes”. This explains why “there may be wars of all degrees of importance and energy, from a war of extermination down to the mere use of an army of observation [On War, 1832].
Generals and the war
Strange enough, but he was of the strong opinion that generals should not be allowed to make any decision concerning the question of when to start and end wars or how to fight them, because they would use all instruments at their disposal to destroy an enemy’s capacity to fight. The real reason, however, for such an opinion was the possibility of converting a limited conflict into an unlimited and, therefore, unpredictable warfare. It really happened during WWI when the importance of massive mobilization and striking first was a crucial part of the war plans by the top military commanders in order to survive and finally win the war. It simply meant that there was not enough time for diplomacy to negotiate in order to prevent war from breaking out and to be transformed into unlimited war with unpredictable consequences. In practice, such military strategy effectively shifted the decision about whether and when to go to war from political leadership to military one as political leaders had, in fact, little time to take all matters into consideration, being pressed by the military leadership to quickly go to war or to accept responsibility for the defeat. From this viewpoint, military plans and war strategies completely revised the relationship between war and politics and between civil politicians and military generals that Carl von Clausewitz had advocated a century earlier.
It has to be recognized, nonetheless, that Prussian General Carl von Clausewitz, in fact, predicted WWI as the first total war in history in which generals dictated to political leaders the timing of military mobilization and pressed politicians to take both the offensive and strike first. The insistence, in effect, of some of the top military commanders on adhering to pre-existing war plans, as it was, for instance, the case with Germany’s Schlieffen Plan and mobilization schedules, took decision-making out of the hands of politicians, i.e., civilian leaders. Therefore, in such a way, it limited the time those leaders had to negotiate with one another in order to prevent the start of the war actions and bloodshed. Furthermore, the military leaders as well as pressured civilian leaders to uphold alliance commitments and consequently spread a possibly limited war across Europe into a European total war.
As a matter of illustration, the best-known design of such nature is Germany’s Schlieffen Plan, as it was named after German Count Alfred von Schlieffen (1833−1913), who was the Chief of the German Great General Staff from 1891−1905. The plan was revised several times before WWI started. The Schlieffen Plan, like some other war plans created before WWI by the European Great Powers, was founded on the assumption of the offensive. The key to the offensive, however, was a massive and very quick military mobilization, i.e., quicker than the enemy could do the same. Something similar was designed during the Cold War when the primacy of a nuclear first strike was at the top of military plans’ priority by both superpowers. Nevertheless, a massive and even general military mobilization meant gathering troops from the whole country at certain mobilization centers to receive arms and other war materials, followed by the transportation of them together with logistic support to the frontlines to fight the enemy. Shortly, in order to win the war, it was required for a country to invest huge expenses and significant time in order to strike the enemy first, i.e., before the enemy could start its own military offensive. Concerning WWI, the German top military leaders understood massive mobilization with crucial importance for the very reason regarding their war plans to fight on two fronts – French and Russian: they thought that the single option to win the war was by striking rapidly in the West front to win France and then decisively launching an offensive against Russia as it was the least advanced country of the European Great Powers for the reason that Russia would take the longest period for the massive mobilization and preparation for war.
A trinitarian theory of warfare
For Clausewitz, war has to be a political act with the intention to compel the opponent to fulfill the will of the opposite side. He further argued that the use of force has to be only a tool or a real political instrument, as, for instance, diplomacy, in the arsenal of the politicians. War has to be just a continuation of politics by other means or instruments of forceful negotiations (bargaining), but not an end in itself. Since the war has to be only initiated for the sake of achieving strictly the political goals of civilian leadership, it is logical for him that:
“… if the original reasons were forgotten, means and ends would become confused” [On War, 1832] (something similar, for instance, occurred with the American military intervention in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021).
He believed that in the case of forgotten original reasons for war, the use of violence is going to be irrational. In addition, in order to be usable, war has to be limited. Not all unlimited wars are usable or productive for civil purposes. However, history experienced during the last two hundred years several developments like industrialization or enlarged warfare, exactly going in the direction that Clausewitz had feared. In fact, he warned that militarism can be extremely dangerous for humanity – a cultural and ideological phenomenon in which military priorities, ideas, or values are pervading the larger or total society (for instance, Nazi Germany).
The Realists, actually, accepted Clausewitz’s approach, which later after WWII, was further developed by them into a view of the world that is distorted and dangerous, causing the so-called “unnecessary wars”. In general, such kinds of wars have been attributed to the US foreign policy during and after the Cold War around the globe. For example, in South-East Asia during the 1960s the US authorities were determined not to appease the Communist powers the way the German Nazis had been in the 1930s. Consequently, in attempting to avoid a Communist occupation of Vietnam the US became involved in a pointless and, in fact, unwinnable war, arguably confusing Nazi aims of geopolitical expansionism with the legitimate post-colonial patriotism of the people of Vietnam.
Carl von Clausewitz is by many experts considered to be the greatest writer on military theory and war. His book On War (1832) is generally interpreted as favoring the very idea that war is, in essence, a political phenomenon as an instrument of policy. The book, nevertheless, sets out a trinitarian theory of warfare that involves three subjects:
- The masses are motivated by a sense of national animosity (national chauvinism).
- The regular army devises strategies to take account of the contingencies of war.
- The political leaders formulate the goals and objectives of military action.
Critics of the Clausewitzian viewpoint of war
However, from another side, the Clausewitzian viewpoint of war can be deeply criticized for several reasons:
- One of them is the moral side of it, as Clausewitz was presenting war as a natural and even inevitable phenomenon. He can be condemned for the justification of war by reference to narrow state interest instead of some wider principles, like justice or so. However, his approach suggests that if war serves legitimate political purposes, its moral implications can be simply ignored, or in other words, not taken at all into account as an unnecessary moment of the war.
- Clausewitz can be criticized for the reason that his conception of warfare is outdated and therefore not fitting to modern times. In other words, his conception of war is relevant to the era of the Napoleonic Wars, but surely not to modern types of war and warfare for several reasons. First, modern economic, social, cultural, and geopolitical circumstances may, in many cases, dictate that war is a less effective power than it was at the time of Clausewitz. Therefore, war can be today of obsolete policy instrument. If contemporary states are rationally thinking about war, military power can be of lesser relevance in IR. Second, industrialized warfare, and especially the feature of total war, can make calculations about the likely costs and benefits of war much less reliable. If it is the case, then war can simply stop being an appropriate means of achieving political ends. Thirdly, most of the criticism of Clausewitz stresses the fact that the nature of both war and IR has changed and, therefore, his understanding of war as a social phenomenon is no longer applicable. In other words, Clausewitz’s doctrine of war can be applicable to the so-called “Old wars” but not to the new type of war – “New war.” Nevertheless, on the other hand, in the case that Clausewitz’s requirement that the recourse to war has to be based on rational analysis and careful calculation, many modern and contemporary wars would not have taken place.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
A typical initial take on the totally unexpected landslide win, by the self-declared socialist Zohran Mamdani, of the Democratic nomination for (and thus almost certainly) the Mayoralty of NYC, was Eric Levitz’s June 25 Vox News article “What Democrats can (and can’t) learn from Zohran Mamdani’s triumph,” which said that
Some on the left have suggested that Mamdani’s victory proves Democrats do not need to moderate their party’s image to compete for national power. This argument does not make much sense. To secure a Senate majority in 2026, Democrats will need to win multiple states that backed Donald Trump over Kamala Harris by double digits. And even if Democrats give up on winning Senate control next year and shoot for doing so in 2028, they will still need to win in states that voted for Trump all three times he was on the ballot.
According to some political scientists, pollsters, and pundits, doing this will require Democrats to moderate their national reputation, since modern voters tend to judge candidates less by their own idiosyncratic positions than by their party’s general image. In this analysis, acquiring the power necessary for advancing even incremental progressive change federally requires the Democratic leadership to observe strict ideological discipline. So long as the party’s brand is toxic to the median voter in Ohio — who backed Trump every single time he’s been on the ballot — Democrats will have no prayer of passing ambitious federal legislation or confirming liberal Supreme Court justices.
This theory could very well be wrong. But a socialist winning 43.5 percent of the vote in a Democratic primary in New York City does not tell us much about its validity one way or another.
However, that was 43.5% of the voters in a four-candidate race, in which 36.4% went to the overwhelming favorite by ‘the experts’, Andrew Cuomo, 11.3% went to another candidate, and 4.3% went to the corruption-scandal-plagued current incumbent Mr. Adrienne Adams. So, even if Mr. Mamdani won’t receive the donations or endorsements of ANY of NYC’s billionaires and their media, New York City is going to have its first socialist and anti-Wall-Street Mayor in 2025, and all of those “political scientists, pollsters, and pundits” will be proven wrong; and here is why:
All indicators are that currently Americans are very dissatisfied with both Parties; the public sentiment in favor of a new Third political Party to become formed is at an all-time-high; and the public’s polled trust in America’s institutions and especially in its governmental and media institutions is at an all-time low.
Nonetheless the ‘experts’ overwhelmingly predict upon the basis of the assumptions that worked for them in the past. When voters have been asked by pollsters what their POLICY-preferences are, their answers are remarkably as they were in the past. However, this does NOT say anything about the public’s policy-PRIORITIES, which have recently changed RADICALLY. I have several times stated this, but it is the most-meaningful polling result so far this year, and is extremely relevant to the Mayoralty contest in NYC, so I shall repeat it again:
On February 14, the AP headlined “Where US adults think the government is spending too much, according to AP-NORC polling,” and listed in rank-order according to the opposite (“spending too little”) the following 8 Government functions: 1. Social Security; 2. Medicare; 3. Education; 4. Assistance to the poor; 5. Medicaid; 6. Border security; 7. Federal law enforcement; 8. The Military. That’s right: the American public (and by an overwhelming margin) are THE LEAST SUPPORTIVE of spending more money on the military, and the MOST SUPPORTIVE of spending more money on Social Security, Medicare, Education, Assistance to the poor, and Medicaid (those latter five being the functions the Republican Party has always been the most vocal to call “waste, fraud, and abuse” and try to cut — but those 5 were the most-favored by the American public). Meanwhile, The Military, which actually receives 53% (and in the latest year far more than that) of the money that the Congress allocates each year and gets signed into law by the President, keeps getting, each year, over 50% of the annually appropriated federal funds. Furthermore, the U.S. Defense Department is the only Department of the federal Government so corrupt, so intensely corrupt, that it has never been audited.
Trump is increasing the military and border security, and decreasing education, assistance to the poor, Medicaid, federal law enforcement, and even Social Security and Medicare (the latter two by laying off many of the people who staff those bureaucracies). This Government’s policy-priorities are like the public’s turned upside-down — in other words: are the REVERSE of the public’s — and therefore the U.S. Government right now is a perfect example of a dictatorship. One might say that this is so in only the Executive branch, but it’s not necessarily true: As always when one political faction (regardless whether it it is one Party or a coalition of Parties) has control over both the Executive and the Legislative branches of the Government — as now the case in the U.S. — these two branches (Executive and Legislative) function as one, and there then will even be a totalitarian dictatorship if they can get the Judicial branch or Supreme Court to call it “Constitutional.” Currently, the U.S. is slipping from a dictatorship towards a totalitarian dictatorship; but America has been a dictatorship ever since at least 1980. And that is a dictatorship by the super-rich.
As the liberal (Democratic Party) wing of America’s aristocracy said, in the person of its Warren Buffett, “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.” (He told this to the conservative Ben Stein, reporting in the aristocracy’s New York Times, under the headline “In Class Warfare, Guess Which Class Is Winning”.)
To see the empirical evidences proving that there IS class-warfare in America, and that the billionaire-class is ruling this country and (behind the scenes) writing and executing its laws, click here. That’s the situation as it had been since at least 1980, but the current trend away from that is toward even more of a dictatorship (by the super-rich) in America.
Between now and November 4 — the upcoming NYC Mayoralty election — there is plenty of time for a rip-roaring campaign that will either rip the Democrat to pieces, or else rip the Republican nominee to pieces. The likelihood that Mamdani will get ripped to pieces by the Republicans seems low to me because he is the son of academic Mahmood Mamdani and filmmaker Mira Nair. Click on those and you will see a personal background that explains his politics; and, so, the likelihood of scandal being found by Republican opposition researchers against him is just about as low as it can go, though freakish exceptions do exist to contradict any generality.
The BIG issue in politics, which will be coming increasingly to the fore during all of the political contests throughout Trump’s second term, will be TRUST (honesty). Levitz’s article misses this fact entirely when he says “4) The odds of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez winning in 2028 look higher. Finally, it is easier to picture Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez winning the Democratic Party’s 2028 presidential nomination today than it was yesterday.” She has been enough of a disappointment to progressive voters (such as on the the U.S.-funded Israeli genocide against Gazans, regarding which, she has continued to speak only in platitudes, knowing that she can climb her way up ONLY if she can get the Party’s billionaires to back her), as to make Levitz’s analogy of Cortez to Mamdani an unintended and false insult to Mamadani. So, Levitz’s comparing her to Mamdani is so very far off-base that Levitz’s throw there might as well have been into the stands, as to the baseman, trying to stop the base-runner.
Mamdani’s win of the Democratic nomination will probably turn out to have been a major turning-point in American politics. The Democratic Party’s billionaires will have lots of difficulty dealing with it, and might even lose their grip-hold of the Party. All of them turning toward the Republican Party would end the hoax of their saying we have a democracy because we give you the choice: it’s between arsenic and cyanide. That’s what they’ve done to our ‘democracy’.
The post Mamdani’s Win in NYC Transforms America’s Mid-Term Political Contests first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
No to NATO protest at The Hague, June 22, 2025. Photo credit: Xinhua News
At this week’s NATO summit in The Hague, leaders announced an alarming new goal: push military spending to 5% of nations’ GDP by 2035. Framed as a response to rising global threats, particularly from Russia and terrorism, the declaration was hailed as a historic step. But in truth, it represents a major step backward—away from addressing the urgent needs of people and the planet, and toward an arms race that will impoverish societies while enriching weapons contractors.
This outrageous 5% spending target didn’t come out of nowhere—it’s the direct result of years of bullying by Donald Trump. During his first term, Trump repeatedly berated NATO members for not spending enough on their militaries, pressuring them to meet a 2% GDP threshold that was already controversial and so excessive that nine NATO countries still fall below that “target”.
Now, with Trump back in the White House, NATO leaders are falling in line, setting a staggering 5% target that even the United States—already spending over $1 trillion a year on its military—doesn’t reach. This is not defense; it’s extortion on a global scale, pushed by a president who views diplomacy as a shakedown and war as good business.
Countries across Europe and North America are already slashing public services, yet they are now expected to divert even more taxpayer money into war preparations. Currently, no NATO country spends more on the military than on health or education. But if they all meet the new 5% military spending goal, 21 of them would spend more on weapons than on schools.
Spain was one of the few to reject this escalation, with Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez making clear that his government would not sacrifice pensions and social programs to meet a militarized spending target. Other governments, including those of Belgium and Slovakia, quietly pushed back as well.
Still, NATO leaders pressed on, cheered by Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who fawned over Donald Trump’s demand that Europe boost defense spending. Rutte even referred to Trump as “Daddy,” a comment that—while dismissed as a joke—spoke volumes about NATO’s subservience to U.S. militarism. Under Trump’s influence, the alliance is shedding even the pretense of being a defensive pact, embracing instead the language and logic of perpetual war.
Just before NATO leaders were gathering at the Hague, protesters took to the streets under the banner “No to NATO.” And back in their home countries, civic groups are demanding a redirection of resources toward climate justice, healthcare, and peace. Polls show that majorities in the U.S. oppose increased military spending, but NATO is not accountable to the people. It’s accountable to political elites, arms manufacturers, and a Cold War logic that sees every global development through the lens of threat and domination.
NATO’s expansion, both in terms of war spending and size (it has grown from 12 founding members to 32 countries today), has not brought peace. On the contrary. The alliance’s promise that Ukraine would one day join its ranks was one of the triggers for Russia’s brutal war, and instead of de-escalating, the alliance has doubled down with weapons, not diplomacy. In Gaza, Israel continues its U.S.-backed war with impunity, while NATO nations send more arms and offer no serious push for peace. Now the alliance wants to drain public coffers to sustain these wars indefinitely. NATO is also surrounding its adversaries, particularly Russia, with ever more bases and troops.
All of this demands a radical rethink. As the world burns—literally—NATO is stocking up on kindling. When healthcare systems are crumbling, schools are underfunded, and blazing temperatures are making large swaths of the planet uninhabitable, the idea that governments should commit billions more to weapons and war is obscene. Real security doesn’t come from tanks and missiles—it comes from strong communities, global cooperation, and urgent action on our shared crises.
We need to flip the script. That means cutting military budgets, withdrawing from endless wars, and beginning a serious conversation about dismantling NATO. The alliance, born of the Cold War, is now a stumbling block to global peace and an active participant in war-making. Its latest summit only reinforces that reality.
This is not just about NATO’s budget—it’s about our future. Every euro or dollar spent on weapons is one not spent on confronting the climate crisis, lifting people out of poverty, or building a peaceful world. For the future of our planet, we must reject NATO and the war economy.
The post NATO’s 5% Pledge: An Obscene Betrayal of Global Needs first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
It was a blast to a past wiped out by amnesia, social media and mental decrepitude. Andrew Hastie, Australia’s opposition minister for home affairs, had been moved by an idea: greater transparency was needed regarding the US military buildup in Australia. It was an inspiration overdue by some decades, but it was worthwhile in its unaccustomed sensibility.
In an interview with the Insiders program on the ABC, Hastie proved startling in proposing that Australia needed “to have a much more mature discussion about our relationship with the United States. I think we need greater transparency.” He proceeded to recall the frankness of US Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth’s testimony before the US Senate Armed Services Committee, which saw China named “as the pacing threat” in the Indo Pacific. Australia, Japan and the Philippines were mentioned as part of “the integrated deterrence that the US is building in the region.”
This saddled the Albanese government with significant obligations to the Australian people. Be clear, suggests Hastie. Be transparent. “I think we need to talk about operationalising the alliance, building guard rails for combat operations, and of course defining our sovereignty. And this will make things clearer for us so that we can better preserve our national interest.” With admirable clarity, Hastie places the Australian security establishment in the dock for interrogation. “We’re not just a vassal stage, we’re an ally and a partner and I think it’s time that we had a good discussion about what that looks like.”
Given that Australia already hosts a rotational US Marine force in Darwin from April to November, the Pine Gap signal intelligence facility in Alice Springs, and, in due course, the Submarine Rotational Force out of Perth from 2027 (“effectively a US submarine base”), it was time to consider what would happen if, say, a war were to be waged in the Indo Pacific. It was “about time we started to mature the [relationship] model and we’re open to the Australian people what it means for us”.
These views are not those of a closet pacifist wishing away the tangles of the US imperium. Having spent his pre-political life in the Australian Defence Forces as a member of the special services, he knows what it’s like playing valet in the battlefield to Washington’s imperial mandarins. Not that he rejects that role. Fear of abandonment and Freudian neuroses tend to pattern the Australian outlook on defence and national security. Yet there was something comforting in his awareness that the American garrisoning of its ally for future geopolitical brawling needed explanation and elucidation.
The response from Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles was typical. Spot the backbone of such a figure and find it wanting. US intentions and operations in Australia, he insisted, were adequately clear. Australians need not be troubled. There was, he told reporters during a visit to London to meet his UK counterpart John Healey “actually a high degree of transparency in relation to the United States presence in Australia.” The Australian government had “long and full knowledge and concurrence arrangements in relation to America’s force posture in Australia, not just in relation to Pine Gap, but in relation to all of its force posture in Australia.” Reiterating another fable of defence orthodoxy, Marles was also convinced Australia’s sovereignty in terms of how the US conducted its operations had been spared. Given Canberra’s abject surrender to Washington’s whims and interests with the AUKUS trilateral pact, this is an unsustainable claim.
To this day, we have sufficient anecdotal evidence that Pine Gap, notionally a jointly run facility between US and Australian personnel, remains indispensable to the Pentagon, be it in navigating drones, directing bombing missions and monitoring adversaries. The Nautilus Institute, most capably through its senior research associate Richard Tanter, has noted the base’s use of geosynchronous signals intelligence (SIGINT) satellites, Space-Based Infrared Systems (SBIRS) and its acquisition in the early 2000s of a FORNSAT/COMSAT (foreign satellite/communications satellite) function.
This makes Australia complicit in campaigns the United States pursues when it chooses. Dr Margaret Beavis, Australian co-chair of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), outlined the potential consequences: “We risk accelerating nuclear proliferation, we risk Pine Gap becoming a target, Tindal airbase becoming a target.”
All efforts to raise the matter before the vassal representatives in Canberra tends to end in a terminating cul-de-sac. Regarding the latest use of US B-2 stealth bombers in targeting Iran’s three primary nuclear facilities, the Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, was curt: “We are upfront, but we don’t talk about intelligence”. The bombing had been a “unilateral action taken by the United States.” Australian candour has its limits.
There is also no clarity about what the US military places on Australian soil when it comes to nuclear weapons or any other fabulous nasties that make killing in the name of freedom’s empire so glorious and reassuring. As a signatory to the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty (SPNFZ), Australia would be in violation of its obligations, with Article 5 obligating each party “to prevent in its territory the stationing of any nuclear explosive device.” Yet deploying B-52 bombers at the RAAF Tindal base would suggest just that, though not all such bombers are adapted to that end.
The naval gazing toadies in foreign affairs and defence have come up with a nice exit from the discussion: such weapons, if they were ever to find themselves on US weapons platforms on Australian soil, would only ever be in transit. In a Senate estimates hearing in February 2023, Defence Department secretary Greg Moriarty blithely observed that, while the stationing of nuclear weapons was prohibited by the treaty, nuclear-armed US bombers could still pay a visit. “Successive Australian governments have understood and respected the longstanding US policy of neither confirming nor denying the presence of nuclear weapons on particular platforms.” It is precisely that sort of deferential piffle we can do without.
The post More Transparency on US Forces in Australia first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
On the eve of Venezuela’s presidential election on 29 July 2024, Guardian correspondents, Tiago Rogero (based in Rio de Janeiro) and Sam Jones (based in Madrid) predicted the vote “could end 25 years of socialist rule.” It did not. The following, 30 July, another group of Guardian correspondents gave prominent coverage to far-right wing Venezuelan politician Maria Corina Machado, quoting her claim that “Maduro’s exit was inevitable.” Yet, Nicolas Maduro was inaugurated as the re-elected president for the 2025-2031 term on 10 January 2025.
The July 2024 presidential election was followed by the election for National Assembly deputies and all 24 governorships of Venezuela’s federal structure on 25 May 2025. Venezuela’s US-funded far-right opposition, led by Machado boycotted the vote. Corporate media outlets –including the New York Times, the Washington Post, Le Monde, El País, the BBC, and others – framed their coverage by labelling the election “divisive” and extensively quoting Machado’s claim that “85% of the electorate did not obey the regime and said no.” In reality, she falsely portrayed the opposition’s boycott as a political victory, implying widespread voter rejection.
Unlike the July 2024 presidential election –when the far-right factions instigated street violence resulting in 27 deaths at the hands of armed thugs, including two armed attacks on the presidential palace –, the 25 May 2025 legislative and gubernatorial elections (Venezuela’s 32nd electoral process), proceeded calmly and peacefully. However, the far-right’s boycott was never merely a peaceful protest against an election organized by a government they refuse to recognise. Their actions went far beyond that.
On 28 May, Venezuela’s Interior Minister, Diosdado Cabello, reported the arrest of over 70 individuals of various nationalities (Venezuelan, Colombian, American, Argentine, Spanish, Ecuadorian, Serbian, Albanian and others). Several foreign-funded ‘NGOs’ appeared implicated in the plot. Authorities seized explosives, assault rifles, and other military equipment intended for attacks on foreign embassies, hospitals, emergency services, electricity substations, police stations, and high-profile political figures – particularly those from the opposition who participated in the election. The suspects had entered Venezuela via Colombia. Cabello also revealed that Venezuela’s armed forces had thwarted nearly 60 attacks on oil installations in the preceding ten days. Evidence indicated the terrorist group was led by Venezuela’s far-right leaders.
This was not their first attempt. The government has also reported the arrest of mercenaries coming from Trinidad and Tobago with ties to a broader network trained in Ecuador – a country now reportedly a hub of cocaine exports. A glance at a map reveals Venezuela’s encirclement by US-aligned hostile forces: Guyana, Ecuador, Colombian narcotraffickers, and SOUTHCOM to its north and beyond.
Machado’s boycott strategy backfired, fracturing her already divided coalition further when several former boycotters decided to stand as candidates and urged their supporters to vote. The result? Chavismo secured 253 of 285 for the National Assembly and 23 of 24 governorships, including the election of a governor for Guayana Esequiba –a territory Venezuela claims. The sole governorship not won by Chavismo, Cojedes, went to Alberto Galíndez, an opposition politician who recognises Maduro’s legitimacy and accepted the overall results. Moreover, Chavismo gained 1.3 million more votes than in the 2021 elections, demonstrating growing support. With this victory, President Maduro and the Bolivarian Revolution now hold not only the presidency until 2031, but also commanding majorities in the National Assembly and among governorships.
The May 2025 election results marked a resounding triumph for the Bolivarian government and a stinging defeat for the Trump administration –particularly with the election of Chavista, Admiral Neil Villamizar as governor for Guayana Esequiba. On 23 May, the Guardian quoted Guyana’s president Irfaan Ali, who denounced the election in this state as an “assault on Guyana’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” Yet, the report conveniently omitted any mention of the 1966 Geneva Agreement, which underpins Venezuela’s claim.[2]
In collusion with Guyana, the US has transformed Guyana into a military enclave, using it as a base for regular military provocations against Venezuela since 2021. Strangely, just one day after the election, on 26 May 2025, the Guardian wrote an exhaustively researched feature with stunning photographs –not on Venezuela’s election, but on…the Orinoco crocodile.
Beyond their self-defeating abstentionism, Machado and the far-right further eroded their credibility by enthusiastically endorsing U.S. sanctions –effectively advocating for Venezuela’s economic strangulation – and cheering Trump’s brutal deportation policies targeting Latin Americans, especially Venezuelans whom he falsely labels as “government-controlled criminals.
When asked whether she supported Trump’s deeply unpopular policy of deporting Latino and Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador’s CECOT prison –a facility notorious for torture– Machado replied “Absolutely!” –uncritically parroting Trump’s baseless claims.
The record of Venezuela’s far-right opposition is simply appalling. Not only have they been heavily involved with Colombian narco-traffickers to carry out terrorist acts against their own country, but their leader, Juan Guaidó, even proclaimed himself “interim president” on a Caracas street in 2019. Worse still, this claim was recognized by the U.S.-led Collective West. They colluded with Western powers to facilitate the confiscation of Venezuelan assets—including gold, bank accounts, and property—in actions that amount to nothing less than high treason.
With the backing of the Collective West, they prolonged the farce of the 2015 National Assembly’s legitimacy—where they once held a majority—long after its mandate expired in 2020. In fact, they still falsely claim legitimacy in 2025, five years after the end of their constitutional term, while continuing to pay monthly U.S. dollar “emoluments” to their obsolete lawmakers.
Under the guise of a humanitarian effort to bring food by force across the Colombian border, they even attempted a military incursion with Colombian paramilitaries, aiming to seize control of a Venezuelan city and install a “provisional government” to be recognized by the U.S. and the Collective West.
The Venezuelan opposition’s actions are indefensible. They have been linked to multiple assassination attempts against President Maduro, including plots to decapitate Venezuela’s political and military leadership using explosives. They organized a mercenary incursion aimed at violently overthrowing the Bolivarian government, with the explicit goal of assassinating Maduro and as many Bolivarian leaders as possible. They have enthusiastically supported the U.S. blockade’s economic asphyxiation—which remains in place—while sabotaging every election since 2013 through violent disruptions.
Repeatedly, they have called on the military to revolt, urging the overthrow of Venezuela’s democratically elected governments (under both Chávez and Maduro). Their tactics include systematic infrastructure sabotage, consistently timed to coincide with elections. They have exacerbated U.S. sanctions by promoting hoarding, artificially inflating prices, and engineering shortages of basic goods—deliberately inflicting severe hardship on the population. Even worse, they manipulated Venezuela’s currency crisis through DolarToday, a platform that daily published inflated exchange rates to fuel hyperinflation.
The opposition’s transgressions go even further. On multiple occasions they have enlisted the services of mercenary Erik Prince, even launching a crowdfunding campaign (Ya Casi Venezuela) to finance his proposed violent overthrow of President Maduro’s government. They are currently under FBI investigation for large-scale corruption, accused of embezzling nearly US$1 billion in humanitarian aid meant for Venezuelans abroad – of which mere 2% as properly allocated). Worse still, they have fraudulently managed over US$40 billion in Venezuelan assets through shady contracts with Miami-based firms, exchanging national resources for personal bribes. Their attempt to replicate the DolarToday scheme was swiftly crushed by the government, which acted decisively to shut it down.
This brazen subversion aligns with broader U.S. imperial ambitions. In a blatant reaffirmation of the Monroe Doctrine, SOUTHCOM commander Admiral Alvin Holsey declared before the Senate Armed Services Committee (13 February 2025) that the U.S. must prevail in the “strategic competition with China in the Western Hemisphere” and counter “Russia’s malign agenda” – naming Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua as their conduits. Thus Washington now openly frames its assault on Bolivarian Revolution as part of its geopolitical competition with China and Russia. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth underscored this stance on 6 June 2025, bluntly stating “We are preparing for war with China.”
Yet, despite 12 years of relentless aggression since Comandante Chávez’s passing, the Venezuelan people have shown extraordinary resilience, defying predictions of inevitable collapse. The government’s response? Deepening democracy. Ahead of upcoming municipal and mayoral elections (27 July 2025), Venezuela is intensifying its participatory democracy model, empowering the comunas –grassroots, self-managed councils where communities directly decide and implement projects to improve their living standards: direct democracy.
President Maduro has announced the “creation of the Communal Portfolio Fund of the national budget” that will directly allocate resources to projects developed by local communities. These funds will be managed through communal circuits, with spending priorities democratically decided by commune inhabitants themselves.
In revealing interview (7 June 2025), Jesús Faría, PSUV Vice Minister of Productive Economy of the PSUV, emphasized the urgent need to accelerate the expansion of Communal direct democracy and consolidate people’s power. Faría made a critical observation: the PSUV must take the lead in advancing the commune system. With tens of thousands of grassroots organizations across Venezuela, the PSUV maintains a Gramscian hegemony –not by imposition but by organically articulating this vibrant social ecosystem into a cohesive for socialism. Its structural bonds with them enable it to harmonize and mobilize this rich social universe towards socialist construction.
Thus, even as U.S. imperialism doubles down on its fanatical crusade to destroy the Bolivarian Revolution, Venezuela is fortifying its socialist foundations. By empowering communes, deepening participatory democracy, and strengthening the PSUV’s vanguard role, the revolution is building unshakable resilience—proving that people’s power, not imperial aggression, will shape Venezuela’s future.
- First published at Countercurrents. Image from Workers World.
ENDNOTES:
[1] If we take December 1999 as the start, of the Bolivarian Revolution is 25 years old; the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign was founded on 25 May 2005, thus making 20 years old. We pay homage to the Bolivarian process for keeping alive and fulfilling humanity’s dream of a better world.
[2] On the details of the Venezuela-Guyana dispute.
The post Unrelenting Bolivarian Resistance against Stubborn US Aggression first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Around two years ago, I watched a puppet show, created by a group of eight to 16-year-olds at the summer camp where I worked, about the eviction of the U.S. Navy from the island of Vieques. After I conducted a few brief workshops reviewing the island’s history of military occupation and contamination, the campers immediately grasped the importance of the decades long struggle to evict the U.S. Navy, which they represented with a puppet of a venomous snake; on the other hand, they used the iconic native Puerto Rican frog, the coquí, to depict participants in the popular uprising against the U.S. military.
This May marked 22 years since the US Navy was evicted from the island of Vieques. The story of Vieques should be understood by us organizers, just as it was by these campers through their puppet show, as we seek to build an anti-militarist climate movement that breaks down silos between supposedly separate organizing spaces. As we seek to build an anti-militarist climate movement and shape the global narratives in upcoming events, looking at Vieques’ past and present history is crucial.
Vieques is an island off the coast of mainland Puerto Rico, a U.S. colony since 1898, in a state of limbo where Boricuas (Puerto Ricans) have U.S. citizenship but cannot vote, and at the same time, are unable to pursue self-determination through independence. Vieques was long exploited by wealthy landowners and the U.S. mainland’s economy for sugar production. In 1941, the Navy seized Vieques, with the goal of creating a colonial outpost in the Atlantic Ocean to mirror its base occupying Hawai’i, Pearl Harbor, in the Pacific. The island’s population of 10,000 was then forced to relocate to a small area of the island. Some wealthy landowners sold their land, while the U.S. government confiscated other plots of land for “public” use.
For over 60 years, the U.S. Navy used Vieques as a bomb testing site, scorching the crust of the island by dropping around three million pounds of napalm, depleted uranium, and other toxic chemicals onto the land. Many of these bombs would then go on to be used on the people and soil of Palestine, itself a deadly testing ground for the U.S. war machine. Despite the extraordinary levels of chemical pollution, there was no hospital on the island. Additionally, the 1920 Jones Act restricted Puerto Rico to importing only U.S.-built, U.S.-owned, U.S.-operated, and U.S.-crewed cargo. This stranglehold continues to make any resources for the island extremely expensive.
These were clear-cut conditions. The U.S. empire was poisoning the island and cutting it off from necessary goods, demonstrating Puerto Rico’s broader colonial status. In 1999, Daniel Sanes Rodriguez, a civilian employee of the naval base, was killed by an accidental off-target bomb. This was the spark of a protest movement made up of tens of thousands of people demanding the U.S. military leave the island. Protest tactics included encampments in the bomb range, graffiti, destruction of military property, and marches that included every sector of society, including religious leaders, fishers, environmental activists, students, and labor leaders. It also included leaders who were independence activists, statehood advocates, and advocates for commonwealth status.
In 2001, President George Bush announced that the naval base would be closed. In May 2003, the U.S. Navy left the island and, ironically, converted the former base into a nature reserve. While the U.S. government has stalled for two decades in its promises of clean-up, this was a moment of victory. This monumental achievement was brought about by as wide an array of groups as the base impacted. By uniting in a popular struggle against U.S. militarism, the people of Vieques showed the world that the naval base had absolutely no business continuing to occupy their land. This moment was also considered a massive touchstone in the fight for a free and independent Puerto Rico.
This isn’t to say that these tactics, this moment, or this rubric for what constitutes victory can be applied to every situation. But we can learn a lot about movement building and breaking out of what can appear to be separate organizing spaces. This was a win for independence, environmentalists, survival, and sovereignty. It’s pretty simple: wherever the U.S. war machine is active, the fight against it and for sovereignty is the fight for the land.
So why isn’t this mirrored within the belly of the beast? Sometimes it is, in the examples of protests to stop the building of Cop City in Atlanta and in protests against the construction of new prisons. But when we discuss “the climate movement” and “the anti-war movement,” we must address why they’re institutionally separated through organizations, slogans, and targets. It’s no mystery – we can go down the list: funding, “pragmatism,” societal conditioning, greenwashing, internalized racism.
With COP, the U.N. Climate Conference, less than six months away, it’s time to clarify our targets and identify the flashpoints of struggle. However toothless, co-opted, and irredeemable the annual “diplomatic” event is, with countries around the world cyclically refusing to take any meaningful action to address the climate crisis, it is also an event where the world’s climate movement plays a large role in shaping narratives, either in the conference itself or in people’s counter-conferences.
We must call attention to Puerto Rico – how it has been used for NATO training to continue escalation in the environmentally catastrophic Ukraine war, and how it has served the U.S.’s claim of Latin America and the Caribbean as its so-called backyard through its role in the U.S. Southern Command. Just as U.S. militarism in Hawai’i and the Philippines has been used to claim the Asia-Pacific in its escalation against China. We must trace the deadly supply chain of the bombs tested on Vieques, which have since been used to decimate entire communities in Palestine, destroying the local and global environment. And we must highlight the poisoning of the soil in Vieques, where residents are 27% more likely to be fighting cancer than the rest of Puerto Rico, and 280% more likely to be fighting lung cancer specifically. The same empire that poisoned Vieques now strangles Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela with sanctions, blocking their ability to address the climate crisis effectively. These sites of struggle for national sovereignty are just as much about our collective survival.
This year, at COP and in every climate space, our only hope is to learn from and center the past and present struggle in Vieques and everywhere else bearing the brunt of U.S. militarism, to clearly understand where our enemies converge, and to act accordingly because one thing that we can learn from Vieques and from the eight to 16-year-old campers telling Vieques’ story is that it’s clear when something is a venomous snake.
The post Lessons from Vieques: Resisting U.S. Militarism, Building Unity first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Note: Another long opinion piece in the local rag, Lincoln County Leader, June 18, 2025.
First, though, let me explain. The idea is to not just rattle my fellow citizens’ cages, those self-imposed prisons of the mind. It’s my own journalistic and controlled demolition of the grand narratives this country has foisted on a public that has not only become unsuspecting, but absolutely habituated into brands, and consumer dialogue, talks about trips to Costco or Costa Rica, it’s all the same fucking 24 pack of paper towels to throw at hurricane victims in Puerto Rico.
This is the spawn of Nazis, the good Germans, the guy who is now a Jew, who was trained by Jew York Jews like Roy Cohen, and alas, his grandkiddos are Jewish, and that daughter is Jewish, and the mafia in his Minyan is composed of Jews and even freak Zionists like RFK, Jr.
It is a sickness that isn’t just one chapter in the DSM-V: Victoria Nuland and cookies, man.
What is the DSM-5?
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, often known as the “DSM,” is a reference book on mental health and brain-related conditions and disorders. The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is responsible for the writing, editing, reviewing and publishing of this book.
The number “5” attached to the name of the DSM refers to the fifth — and most recent — edition of this book. The DSM-5®’s original release date was in May 2013. The APA released a revised version of the fifth edition in March 2022. That version is known as the DSM-5-TR
, with TR meaning “text revision.”
IMPORTANT: The DSM-5 and DSM-5-TR are medical reference books intended for experts and professionals. The content in these books is very technical, though people who aren’t medical professionals may still find it interesting or educational. However, you shouldn’t use either of these books as a substitute for seeing a trained, qualified mental health or medical provider.
Additionally, the APA also publishes books that supplement the content in the DSM-5-TR. Examples of these supplement publications include the DSM-5 Handbook of Differential Diagnosis and DSM-5 Clinical Cases.
What is the purpose of the DSM-5?
The first step in treating any health condition — physical or mental — is accurately diagnosing the condition. That’s where the DSM-5 comes in. It provides clear, highly detailed definitions of mental health and brain-related conditions. It also provides details and examples of the signs and symptoms of those conditions.
In addition to defining and explaining conditions, the DSM-5 organizes those conditions into groups. That makes it easier for healthcare providers to accurately diagnose conditions and tell them apart from conditions with similar signs and symptoms.]
[Photo: While Ronald Reagan demonized the welfare system as a whole in familiar terms, his ire was largely directed toward single mothers, and his racially coded language was sufficient to make clear his overarching intentions.]
All these things, these economic things, they are on people’s minds. The chaos of Trump and Company, as he plays out his dictator role, all of that is on everyone’s minds.
The cost of being poor is rising. And it’s worse for poor families of color. Great headline.
But the point of my short op-ed was to discuss how the silence of this genocide is deafening, in fact, defeating. This has a deep deep psychological effect on those who might have cared to speak up and who are distressed by the murder incorporated on a mass murder scale that the Jews in Israel are undertaking.
But the empire of chaos is about that chaos, and the chaotic nature of our news cycle with the demented POTUS and his even more demented cabinet members and his MAGA mutt followers, that this imploding diesel belching engine has thrown so many people into discombobulation syndrome.
Chaos of thought and passion, all confused;
Still by himself abused or disabused;
Created half to rise, and half to fall;
Great lord of all things, yet a prey to all;
Sole judge of truth, in endless error hurled,
The glory, jest, and riddle of the world.— Alexander Pope, An Essay on Man
The poor and forgotten nations of the world can blame their downward spiral on an emerging world order that Samir Amin in this brilliant essay calls the “empire of chaos.” Comprised of the United States, Japan, and Germany, and backed by a weakened USSR and the comprador classes of the third world, this is an empire that will stop at nothing in its campaign to protect and expand its capitalist markets.
The interview with Professor Samir Amin was conducted on 6 May 2018 in Beijing, by Professor Lau Kin Chi and Professor Sit Tsui Jade. Professor Amin criticized monopoly capitalism and the collective imperialism of the Triad (USA, Europe, and Japan). He analyzed the current major challenges to China. He strongly suggested that China should not join financial globalization, but on the contrary, keep capital account and exchange rate under control, as well as maintain collective ownership of land and the small peasantry. These were great weapons against financial globalization. He also discussed the possibilities of building people’s internationalism.
Even as Israeli violence becomes more visible, politicians like Ben Gvir are welcomed as honoured guests in the US
‘The crimes [in Gaza] are so egregious that are being carried out… The attempt to cover them up and whitewash them is failing’ Since 7 October, western media coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza has come under intense scrutiny, particularly for the language and terminology used by many outlets. As a result, the coverage has been accused of bias against Palestinians effectively providing cover for Israel’s war on Gaza. To delve into this, we’re speaking to Assal Rad, an Iranian-American scholar of the modern Middle East and fellow at DAWN, who’s also made it her mission to call out and ‘fix’ misleading headlines. Her widely shared posts earned her the title of ‘headline fixer’, turning this into a trend of its own online.
This is just a watered-down version of what I really would love to write every day, and in a sense have the public square to discuss this silence, this mute echo of silence has pushed a collective insanity and amnesia into the populous.
The silence is deafening, here on the coast, and throughout most of the land. Forget about large universities and valiant young people and some faculty protesting the genocide which by many expert accounts — not cited in so-called legacy media – are 100,000 murdered civilians.
Targeted assassinations of journalists and of medical workers? And the AMA is silent. The American Medical Association represents hundreds of thousands of doctors.
“We’re seeing hospitals being bombed, ambulances being bombed, doctors and other medical workers being targeted and shot. The AMA is the sixth-largest lobbying organization in the United States, it’s bigger than Boeing. It’s bigger than Lockheed Martin, it’s bigger than the National Rifle Association. They have a tremendous amount of domestic and international influence, and because they carry such weight within the realm of health care, we felt it would be appropriate for them to use their voice in this way.”
Emily Hacker, a member of Healthcare Workers for Palestine, outlined that an important reason healthcare workers want the “AMA and all other healthcare institutions to be involved in ending the Israeli occupation of Palestine” is that “the US can spend billions and billions of dollars on bombs and bullets, but there are 26 million Americans with no health insurance and 150 million Americans rely on Medicare or Medicaid.”
“People can’t afford their insulin, but there’s always money for bombs,” Hackerarticulated.
Cognitive dissonance is more than just interesting as a theory to study. In our daily lives we for the most part are silent. Hands down. No discussion of Israel’s genocide and the United States’ and Britain’s complicity because most Americans are dangerously poorly educated.
Miseducated. Brainwashed.
This is what many call “deep” or “master narratives” – that somehow the settler colonial apartheid state of Israel is the most democratic state in the Middle East. I witnessed genocide silence at the Yachats Commons June 1, where we listened to Oregon Black Pioneers presenter Zachary Stocks discuss the origin of black exclusion laws in our state as well as the pro-slavery mentality that dominated many of the state’s politicians and newspaper editors.
Good stuff he presented to a largely greying and older population. We did get some land acknowledgment from Joanne Kittel, known for her work around the Amanda Trail.
“For those of you who travel through Yachats, I ask you to pay respect to and honor the Alsea, Siuslaw, Lower Umpqua and Coos people who lost their lives as a result of their forced incarceration and mistreatment in Yachats, Waldport and Florence areas. The Amanda Trail that connects Yachats to Cape Perpetua is a spiritual and solemn path that remembers in perpetuity.” Joanne Kittel wrote this as a blurb for a book, Seeking Recognition: The Termination and Restoration of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, 1855-1984 by David R.M. Beck.
No moment of silence for Gaza? It would have been appropriate.
Deep, grand, meta or master narratives are dominant or commonly-shared stories within a society or culture. They are tools for shaping a collective idea or consciousness about who we are as a society, culture or people. Master narratives also limit our understanding of context and historical causes and effects, and they’re deployed to perpetuate stereotypes or dominant ideologies.
Erasing knowledge and context is the coin of the realm now especially with a shallow and sallow-minded president. This POTUS isn’t the be-all and end-all, but for the past five months people have been scrambling to anticipate his administration’s brand of proto- or neo-fascism. Erasing Black Medal of Honor winners or Jackie Robinson’s portrait from various locations and websites is just the tip of the iceberg of flipping around of history.
“A good Indian is a Dead Indian.” Or, from the other POTUS, Teddy Roosevelt: “I don’t go so far as to think that the only good Indians are the dead Indians, but I believe nine out of every 10 are,” Roosevelt said during a January 1886 speech in New York. “And I shouldn’t like to inquire too closely into the case of the tenth.”
And now why is it the genocide of our times is never discussed in public or around dinner tables? Imagine that during World War Two not a word about Nazism or fascism in Italy and Spain. Silence? The price of bacon?
A Jewish Canadian journalist, many reading this might not know, Aaron Mate, says it bluntly about that Grand Narrative of Israel and Judaism: “Everything I Was Taught… Was a Lie” He says the indoctrination of how Israel is this grand democracy and mothership for all Jews starts early.
“This Jewish state commits genocide in our name. It’s a moral obligation to resist this,” Mate states.
It is more than bizarre and Orwellian, this current rampant ideology of “silence is transparency and lies are truth.”
Doctors, nurses, and medics are murdered and hospitals bombed. And no one in mixed company discusses Gaza, the genocide, the dehumanization of Palestinians, which is a dehumanization for us all.
Doctors? I have MDs in my family and I was a pre-med student for a while. Here is an anonymous statement I agree with, from a doctor condemning the American Medical Association’s complicity:
“As a doctor, I am saying loud and clear I am against all war and especially GENOCIDE. AMA and all our medical institutions that have remained silent and practiced unethical silencing, doxxing, firing of peace supporters or those speaking up for Palestine cast a long shadow of shame on our great profession.”
Silence, and the grand narrative just crumbles.
The post A Silence that is Defining Our Age and Which is Deafening first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Destroying peace. Illustration: Liu Rui/GT
On Saturday local time, the US announced that it had launched airstrikes on three nuclear facilities in Iran. This marks the first time the US has officially intervened militarily in this round of the Iran-Israel conflict, drawing widespread shock from the international community. UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on social media that the move was “a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security.” China’s Foreign Ministry also strongly condemned the US attacks on Iran. US action, which seriously violates the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and international law, not only heightens tensions in the Middle East but also risks triggering a wider crisis.
Attacking nuclear facilities is extremely dangerous. Due to their unique nature, damage to such sites could lead to severe nuclear leaks, potentially resulting in humanitarian disasters and posing grave risks to regional safety. The tragic past lessons of the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear accidents already showed that the consequences of nuclear leaks don’t pose a threat to a single country – they impact neighboring nations and the global security environment.
By using “bunker-buster” bombs to “accomplish what Israel could not,” the US has deliberately escalated the level of weaponry used, pouring fuel on the flames of war and pushing the Iran-Israel conflict closer toward an uncontrollable state.
What the US bombs have impacted is the foundation of the international security order. By attacking nuclear facilities under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Washington has set a dangerous precedent. This action, in essence, bypasses both the UN Security Council and the IAEA framework, attempting to unilaterally “resolve” the Iranian nuclear issue through force. This is a serious violation of the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and international law, as well as a rejection of the principled position of the international community, including China and the European Union, which has dealt with the Iranian nuclear issue through multilateral negotiations for many years. Washington’s boast of close cooperation with Israel “as a team” confirms its nature of dragging its ally against international morality and multilateralism.
For Iran, the strike is a blatant provocation. After responding that it “reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interests and people,” Tehran on Sunday launched the powerful Kheibar Shekan missile targeting Israel for the first time. According to media reports, Ismail Kowsari, a member of the National Security Commission of the Parliament in Iran, said the country’s parliament voted to approve the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s Supreme National Security Council is expected to weigh in and make a final decision on the matter. Iran is located in the choke point of the Strait of Hormuz, which around one-fifth of the world’s total oil and gas consumption transits through. Once this channel is blocked by the war, international oil prices are bound to fluctuate dramatically, while global shipping security and economic stability will face serious challenges.
The US military’s “direct involvement” has further complicated and destabilized the Middle East situation, drawing more countries and innocent civilians into the conflict and forcing them to face a loss. Even the Associated Press called the airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities a “perilous decision,” while the New York Times warned that US military action against Iran would “bring risks at every turn.” What is also receiving a lot of attention is that due to US strike on Iran, Yemen’s Houthis announced it would resume attacks on US ships in the Red Sea. The region is already entangled in a complex web of sectarian divisions, proxy wars and external interventions. The facts show that US involvement is causing the Iran-Israel conflict to spill over. Within just one day, international investors rushed to sell off risk assets, and discussions of a “sixth Middle East war” surged across media platforms, reflecting the global community’s growing anxiety over the region’s spiraling instability.
China has consistently opposed the threat and abuse of using force. It advocates resolving crises through political and diplomatic means. In a recent phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping put forward a “four-point proposal” regarding the Middle East situation: promoting a cease-fire and ending the hostilities is an urgent priority; ensuring the safety of civilians is of paramount importance; opening dialogue and negotiation is the fundamental way forward; and efforts by the international community to promote peace are indispensable. This proposal reflects China’s long-standing and farsighted security vision. History in the Middle East has repeatedly shown that external military intervention never brings peace – it only deepens regional hatred and trauma. The false logic behind US coercion by force runs counter to peace. Hopefully, the parties involved, especially Israel, will implement an immediate cease-fire, ensure the safety of civilians and open dialogue and negotiation to restore peace and stability in the region.
The post US Bombs Have Impacted Foundation of Global Security Order first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Palestine Action activists have broken into RAF Brize Norton and damaged two military aircrafts. The military base is the largest hub in the UK for air transport. In a video posted to its social media, actionists can be seen squirting paint into the engines of military aircraft.
BREAKING: Palestine Action break into RAF Brize Norton and damage two military aircrafts.
Flights depart daily from the base to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus.
From Cyprus, British planes collect intelligence, refuel fighter jets and transport weapons to commit genocide in Gaza. pic.twitter.com/zzmFqGKW8N
— Palestine Action (@Pal_action) June 20, 2025
In a statement, the group said:
Palestine Action have damaged two military planes at RAF Brize Norton, where flights leave daily for RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, a base used for military operations in Gaza and across the Middle East.
It also explained:
Red paint, symbolising Palestinian bloodshed was also sprayed across the runway and a Palestine flag was left on the scene. Both activists managed to evade security and arrest.
Palestine Action fight back
An investigation from Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) found that the Royal Air Force (RAF) has conducted at least 518 reconnaissance flights over Gaza since December 2023. Declassified reported that:
The flights, carried out by 14 Squadron’s Shadow R1 aircraft from RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, have been shrouded in secrecy, raising concerns about whether British intelligence has played a role in Israeli military operations that have resulted in mass civilian casualties in Gaza.
The United Nations (UN) and affiliated experts have repeatedly conducted investigations that have found Israel to be committing genocide in Palestine. And, UN experts have warned that states supplying or abetting Israel could have to answer for “serious international crimes.” Nevertheless, as Declassified reported:
The UK government insists that the flights are purely for hostage recovery, but the lack of transparency has done little to allay suspicions that the intelligence gathered may be facilitating Israeli attacks.
Palestine Action demonstrated the centrality of RAF Brize Norton:
From the military base, Airbus Atlas flights also travel to RAF Akrotiri. Atlas flights can carry soldiers, guns, ammunition, bombs and munitions. During the escalating genocide in Gaza, the British military have flown Atlas flights from Akrotiri to Tel Aviv, carrying soldiers and/or military cargo.
However, there’s been no official recognition of what the base has been used for, with Keir Starmer even saying:
Quite a bit of what goes on here can’t necessarily be talked about […] we can’t necessarily tell the world what you’re doing.
Now, why would that be? The state and military routinely use classified information as a way to avoid public scrutiny. However, given Israel’s numerous war crimes, they may well no longer be able to keep that information classified.
Pearl clutching time
Predictably, the response from corporate media and the government has been to discuss Palestine Action’s protest as ‘vandalism.’ Starmer took to social media to say:
The act of vandalism committed at RAF Brize Norton is disgraceful.
Our Armed Forces represent the very best of Britain and put their lives on the line for us every day.
It is our responsibility to support those who defend us.
Palestine Action quickly hit back:
It is YOUR responsibility to not be a war criminal.
It is YOUR responsibility to not play an active military role in genocide.
Now, It is our responsibility to do everything in our power to stop what YOU have allowed.
Time and time again, Palestine Action has shown that it has more moral clarity and backbone than this Labour government. Actionists have effected actual change and put themselves on the line to stand with Gaza. The longer this government allows Israel to continue its genocidal rampage on Palestine, the more it has to be considered culpable.
For anyone who’s genuinely horrified by a bit of paint chucked at military jets, perhaps have a think. Have you been that horrified by the blood, guts, and souls that Israel has spilled in its relentless extermination of Palestinian life? It doesn’t quite compare, does it?
Featured image via YouTube screenshot/Times News
This post was originally published on Canary.
Western politicians and media are tying themselves up in knots trying to spin the impossible: presenting Israel’s unmistakable war of aggression against Iran as some kind of “defensive” move.
This time there was no rationalising pretext, as there was for Israel to inflict a genocide in Gaza following Hamas’ one-day attack on 7 October 2023.
There was not a serious attempt beforehand to concoct a bogus doomsday scenario – as there was in the months leading up to the US and UK’s illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Then we were lied to about Baghdad having “weapons of mass destruction” that could be launched at Europe in 45 minutes.
Rather, Iran was deep in negotiations with the United States on its nuclear enrichment programme when Israel launched its unprovoked attack last Friday.
The West has happily regurgitated claims by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israel was forced to act because Iran was on the cusp of producing a nuclear bomb – an entirely evidence-free claim he has been making since 1992.
None of his dire warnings has ever been borne out by events.
In fact, Israel struck Iran shortly after President Donald Trump had expressed hope of reaching a nuclear agreement with Tehran, and two days before the two countries’ negotiators were due to meet again.
In late March Trump’s head of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, had expressly statedas part of the US intelligence community’s annual assessment: “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader [Ali] Khameini has not authorised a nuclear weapons programme he suspended in 2003.”
This week four sources said to be familiar with that assessment told CNN that Iran was not trying to build a bomb but, if it changed tack, it would be “up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver one [a nuclear warhead] to a target of its choosing”.
Nonetheless, by Tuesday this week Trump appeared to be readying to join Israel’s attack. He publicly rebuked his own intelligence chief’s verdict, sent US warplanes to the Middle East via the UK and Spain, demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender”, and made barely veiled threats to kill Khameini.
‘Samson option’
Israel’s engineering of a pretext to attack Iran – defined by the Nuremberg tribunal in 1945 as the “supreme international crime” – has been many years in the making.
The current talks between the US and Iran were only needed because, under intense Israeli pressure during his first term as president, Trump tore up an existing agreement with Tehran.
That deal, negotiated by his predecessor, Barack Obama, had been intended to quieten Israel’s relentless calls for a strike on Iran. It tightly limited Tehran’s enrichment of uranium to far below the level where it could “break out” from its civilian energy programme to build a bomb.
Israel, by contrast, has been allowed to maintain a nuclear arsenal of at least 100 warheads, while refusing – unlike Iran – to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and – again unlike Iran – denying access to monitors from the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The West’s collusion in the pretence that Israel’s nuclear weapons are secret – a policy formally known in Israel as “ambiguity” – has been necessary only because the US is not allowed to provide military aid to a state with undeclared nuclear weapons.
Israel is by far the largest recipient of such aid.
No one – apart from incorrigible racists – believes Iran would take the suicidal step of firing a nuclear missile at Israel, even if it had one. That is not the real grounds for Israeli or US concern.
Rather, the double standards are enforced to keep Israel as the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East so that it can project unrestrained military power across an oil-rich region the West is determined to control.
Israel’s bomb has left it untouchable and unaccountable, and ready to intimidate its neighbours with the “Samson option” – the threat that Israel will use its nuclear arsenal rather than risk an existential threat.
Israel’s national security minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, appeared to imply just such a scenario against Iran this week in a reported comment: “There will be other difficult days ahead, but always remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”
Bear in mind that Israeli governments count as “existential” any threat to Israel’s current status as a settler-colonial state, one occupying and forcibly uprooting the Palestinian people from their homeland.
Israel’s nuclear weapons ensure it can do as it pleases in the region – including commit genocide in Gaza – without significant fear of reprisals.
War propaganda
The claim that Israel is “defending itself” in attacking Iran – promoted by France, Germany, Britain, the European Union, the G7 and the US – should be understood as a further assault on the foundational principles of international law.
The assertion is premised on the idea that Israel’s attack was “pre-emptive” – potentially justified if Israel could show there was an imminent, credible and severe threat of an attack or invasion by Iran that could not be averted by other means.
And yet, even assuming there is evidence to support Israel’s claim it was in imminent danger – there isn’t – the very fact that Iran was in the midst of talks with the US about its nuclear programme voided that justification.
Rather, Israel’s contention that Iran posed a threat at some point in the future that needed to be neutralised counts as a “preventive” war – and is indisputably illegal under international law.
Note the striking contrast with the West’s reaction to Russia’s so-called “unprovoked” attack on Ukraine just three years ago.
Western capitals and their media were only too clear then that Moscow’s actions were unconscionable – and that severe economic sanctions on Russia, and military support for Ukraine, were the only possible responses.
So much so that early efforts to negotiate a ceasefire deal between Moscow and Kyiv, premised on a Russian withdrawal, were stymied by Prime Minister Boris Johnson, presumably on Washington’s orders. Ukraine was instructed to fight on.
Israel’s attack on Iran is even more flagrantly in violation of international law.
Netanyahu, who is already a fugitive from the International Criminal Court, which wants to try him for committing crimes against humanity in Gaza by starving the population there, is now guilty of the “supreme international crime” too.
Not that one would not know any of this from listening to western politicians or the billionaire-owned media.
There, the narrative is once again of a plucky Israel, forced to act unilaterally; of Israel facing down an existential threat; of Israel being menaced by barbaric terrorists; of the unique suffering – and humanity – of Israel’s population; of Netanyahu as a strong leader rather than an out-and-out war criminal.
It is the same, well-worn script, trotted out on every occasion, whatever the facts or circumstances. Which is clue enough that western audiences are not being informed; they are being subjected to yet more war propaganda.
Regime change
But Israel’s pretexts for its war of aggression are a moving target – hard to grapple with because they keep changing.
If Netanyahu started by touting an implausible claim that Iran’s nuclear programme was an imminent threat, he soon shifted to arguing that Israel’s war of aggression was also justified to remove a supposed threat from Iran’s ballistic missile programme.
In the ultimate example of chutzpah, Israel cited as its evidence the fact that it was being hit by Iranian missiles – missiles fired by Tehran in direct response to Israel’s rain of missiles on Iran.
Israel’s protestations at the rising death toll among Israeli civilians overlooked two inconvenient facts that should have underscored Israel’s hypocrisy, were the western media not working so hard to obscure it.
First, Israel has turned its own civilian population into human shields by placing key military installations – such as its spy agency and its defence ministry – in the centre of densely populated Tel Aviv, as well as firing its interception rockets from inside the city.
Recall that Israel has blamed Hamas for the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza over the past 20 months based on the largely unevidenced claim that its fighters have been hiding among the population. Now that same argument can, and should, be turned against Israel.
And second, Israel is all too obviously itself hitting residential areas in Iran – just as, of course, it did earlier by destroying almost all of Gaza’s buildings, including homes, hospitals, schools, universities and bakeries.
Both Netanyahu and Trump have called on Iranians to “evacuate immediately” the city of Tehran – something impossible for most of its 10 million inhabitants to do in the time allowed.
But their demand raises too the question of why, if Israel is trying to stop the development of an Iranian nuclear warhead, it is focusing so many of its attacks on residential areas of Iran’s capital.
More generally, Israel’s argument that Tehran must be stripped of its ballistic missiles assumes that only Israel – and those allied with it – are allowed any kind of military deterrence capability.
It seems not only is Iran not allowed a nuclear arsenal as a counter-weight to Israel’s nukes, but it is not even allowed to strike back when Israel decides to launch its US-supplied missiles at Tehran.
What Israel is effectively demanding is that Iran be turned into a larger equivalent of the Palestinian Authority – a compliant, lightly armed regime completely under Israel’s thumb.
Which gets to the heart of what Israel’s current attack on Iran is really designed to achieve.
It is about instituting regime change in Tehran.
Trained in torture
Again, the western media are assisting with this new narrative.
Extraordinarily, TV politics shows such as the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg invited on as a guest Reza Pahlavi, the son of the Iranian shah ousted by the ayatollahs in 1979 to create an Islamic republic. He used the slot to call on Iranians to “rise up” against their leaders.
The framing – an entirely Israeli confected one – is that Iranian society is desperate to throw off the yoke of Islamic dictatorship and return to the halcyon days of monarchical rule under the Pahlavis.
It is a beyond-absurd analysis of modern Iran.
Asking Pahlavi to discuss how Iran might be freed from clerical rule is the equivalent of inviting Josef Stalin’s grandson into the studio to discuss how he plans to lead a pro-democracy movement in Russia.
In fact, the much-feared Pahlavis were only in power in 1979 – and in a position to be overthrown – because Israel, Britain and the US meddled deeply in Iran to keep them in place for so long.
When Iranians elected the secular reformist Mohammed Mossadegh, a lawyer and intellectual, as prime minister in 1951, Britain and the US worked tirelessly to topple him. His chief crime was that he took back control of Iran’s oil industry – and its profits – from the UK.
Within two years, Mossadegh was overthrown in US-led Operation Ajax, and the Shah re-installed as dictator. Israel was drafted in to train Iran’s Savak secret police in torture techniques to use on Iranian dissidents, learnt from torturing Palestinians.
Predictably, the West’s crushing of all efforts to democratically reform Iran opened up a space for resistance to the Shah that was quickly occupied by Islamist parties instead.
In 1979, these revolutionary forces overthrew the western-backed dictator Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile in Paris to found the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Crescent of resistance
Notably Khomeini’s successor as supreme leader, Ali Khameini, issued a religious edict in 2003 banning Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. He considered it a violation of Islamic law.
Which is why Iran has been so reluctant to develop a bomb, despite Israel’s endless provocations and claims to the contrary.
What Iran has done instead is two things that are the real trigger for Israel’s war of aggression.
First, it developed the best alternative military strategy it could muster to protect itself from Israeli and western belligerence – a belligerence related to Iran’s refusal to serve as a client of the West, as the Shah once had, rather than the issue of human rights under clerical rule.
Iran’s leaders understood they were a target. Iran has huge reserves of oil and gas, but unlike the neighbouring Gulf regimes it is not a puppet of the West. It can also shut down the Strait of Hormuz, the main gateway for the flow of oil and gas to the West and Asia.
And as a Shia-led state (in contrast to the Sunni Islam that dominates much of the rest of the Middle East), Iran has a series of co-religionist communities across the region – in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and elsewhere – with which it has developed strong ties.
For example, with Iran’s help, Hezbollah in Lebanon built up a large stockpile of rockets and missiles close to Israel’s border. That was supposed to deter Israel from trying to attack and occupy Lebanon again, as it did for two decades from the early 1980s through to 2000.
But it also meant that any longer-range attack by Israel on Iran would prove risky, exposing it to a barrage of missiles on its northern border.
Ideologues in Washington, known as the neoconservatives, who are keenly supportive of Israeli hegemony in the Middle East, deeply opposed what came to be seen as “the axis of resistance”.
The neocons, seeking a way to crush Iran, quickly exploited the 9-11 attacks on the Twin Towers in New York in 2001 as an opportunity to erode Iranian power.
General Wesley Clark was told at the Pentagon in the days after the attack that the US had come up with a plan to “take out seven countries in five years”.
Notably, even though most of the hijackers who crashed planes into the Twin Towers were from Saudi Arabia, the Pentagon’s list of targets centrally featured members of the so-called “Shia crescent”.
All have been attacked since. As Clark noted, the seventh and final state on that list – the hardest to take on – is Iran.
Show of strength
Israel’s other concern was that Iran and its allies, unlike the Arab regimes, had proved steadfast in their support for the Palestinian people against decades of Israeli occupation and oppression.
Iran’s defiance on the Palestinian cause was underscored during Trump’s first presidency, when Arab states began actively normalising with Israel through the US-brokered Abraham accords, even as the plight of the Palestinians worsened under Israeli rule.
Infuriatingly for Israel, Iran and the late Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasarallah became the main flagbearers of popular support for the Palestinians – among Muslims across the board.
With the Palestinian Authority largely quiescent by the mid-2000s, Iran channelled its assistance to Hamas in besieged Gaza, the main Palestinian group still ready to struggle against Israeli apartheid rule and ethnic cleansing.
The result was a tense stability of sorts, with each side restraining itself in a Middle Eastern version of “mutually assured destruction”. Neither side had an incentive to risk an all-out attack for fear of the severe consequences.
That model came to an abrupt end on 7 October 2023, when Hamas decided its previous calculations needed reassessing.
With the Palestinians feeling increasingly isolated, choked by Israel’s siege and abandoned by the Arab regimes, Hamas staged a show of force, breaking out for one day from the concentration camp of Gaza.
Israel seized the opportunity to complete two related tasks: destroying the Palestinians as a people once and for all, and with it their ambitions for a state in their homeland; and rolling back the Shia crescent, just as the Pentagon had planned more than 20 years earlier.
Israel started by levelling Gaza – slaughtering and starving its people. Then it moved to destroy Hezbollah’s southern heartlands in Lebanon. And with the collapse of the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, Israel was able to occupy parts of Syria, smash what remained of its military infastructure, and clear a flight path to Iran.
These were the preconditions for launching the current war of aggression on Iran.
‘Birth pangs’
Back in 2006, as Israel was bombing swaths of Lebanon in an earlier attempt to realise the Pentagon’s plan, Condoleezza Rice, the then US secretary of state, prematurely labelled Israel’s violence as the “birth pangs of a new Middle East”.What we have been witnessing over the past 20 months of Israel’s slow rampage towards Iran is precisely a revival of those birth pangs. Israel and the US are jointly remaking the Middle East through extreme violence and the eradication of international law.
Success for Israel can come in one of two ways.
Either it installs a new authoritarian ruler in Tehran, like the Shah’s son, who will do the bidding of Israel and the US. Or Israel leaves the country so wrecked that it devolves into violent factionalism, too taken up with civil war to expend its limited energies on developing a nuclear bomb or organising a “Shia crescent” of resistance.
But ultimately this is about more than redrawing the map of the Middle East. And it is about more than toppling the rulers in Tehran.
Just as Israel needed to take out Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria before it could consider clearing a path to Iran’s destruction, the US and its western allies needs the axis of resistance eradicated, as well as Russia bogged down in an interminable war in Ukraine, before it can consider taking on China.
Or as the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz noted this week, in one of those quiet-part-out-loud moments: “This [the attack on Iran] is the dirty work Israel is doing for all of us.”
This is a key moment in the Pentagon’s 20-year plan for “global full-spectrum dominance”: a unipolar world in which the US is unconstrained by military rivals or the imposition of international law. A world in which a tiny, unaccountable elite, enriched by wars, dictate terms to the rest of us.
If all this sounds like a sociopath’s approach to foreign relations, that is because it is. Years of impunity for Israel and the US have brought us to this point. Both feel entitled to destroy what remains of an international order that does not let them get precisely what they want.
The current birth pangs will grow. If you believe in human rights, in limits on the power of government, in the use of diplomacy before military aggression, in the freedoms you grew up with, the new world being born is going to horrify you.
- First published at Middle East Eye.
The post Israel’s Attack on Iran: The Violent New World is Going to Horrify You first appeared on Dissident Voice.
To hell with the truth! As the history of the world proves, the truth has no bearing on anything. It’s irrelevant and immaterial, as the lawyers say. The lie of a pipe dream is what gives life to the whole misbegotten mad lot of us, drunk or sober.
— Eugene O’Neill, The Iceman Cometh
There is a good chance that very shortly the United States will overtly join its proxy Israel in attacking Iran. Only a fool would be surprised. Plausible deniability only goes so far. Pipe dreams perdure as the nuclear war that could never happen gets closer to happening.
That Donald Trump is a diabolic liar and his administration is composed of depraved war criminals is a fact.
That those who bought his no foreign wars bullshit were deluded is a fact.
That Trump fully supports the genocidal lunatic Netanyahu is a fact.
That the U.S.A. is already supporting Israel’s unprovoked war on Iran is a fact.
That the American electorate is always fooled by the linguistic mind control of its presidents is a fact.
“Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun, that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud,” George W. Bush said at a staged pseudo-event on October 7, 2002 as he set Americans up for the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. It was all predictable, blatant deception. And the media played along with such an absurdity. Iraq obviously had no nuclear weapons or the slightest capability to deliver even a firecracker on the U.S. The same is true for Iran today.
Trump is, after all, a United States President. The job’s requirements insist that he be a war criminal at the head of a terrorist state, and that he support the apartheid state of Israel’s killing regime, as the United States has done since its founding – actually long before.
The CIA and its ilk provide the shifting propaganda narratives that take many forms: smooth, blustery, halting, etc., but they are all aimed at creating two minds in the American population by sending mixed messages (a Trump specialty), creating mental double-binds, and using various techniques to mystify people’s experience of reality and truth. The CIA always liked to attract literary types to its propaganda efforts. Their objective is to create through verbal contradictory word usage a sense of schizoid confusion in the population. To provide pipe dreams for those who feel that their politician will set things right next time around. Or to provide ex post facto justifications for the last president’s innocence.
Think of the bullshit media headlines such as “Trump is weighing his options” or “Trump weighing Involvement” about attacking Iran. As I wrote about Trump and Iran in June 2019 – “The War Hoax Redux – in a repeat of what I wrote about Bush and Iraq in February 2003 by simply substituting names:
As in 1991 and 2003 concerning Iraq, the MSM play along with Trump, who repeatedly says, or has his spokespeople say, that the decision hasn’t been made [to attack Iran] and that the U.S. wants peace. Within a few hours this is contradicted and confusion and uncertainty reign, as planned. Chaos is the name of the game. But everyone in the know knows the decision to attack has been made at some level, especially once the propaganda dummies are all in place. But they pretend, while the media wait with baited breath as they anticipate their countdown to the dramatic moment when they report the incident that will “compel” the U.S. to attack.
Now that Biden has made sure a terrorist runs Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon is rendered weak, allowing Israel full control over their air spaces, and Gaza pulverized and genocide well underway, the pieces are in place for Trump to bomb Iran.
Commentators often blame the actions – like Trump’s vis-à-vis Iran – on pressure from the so-called “deep state.” Excuses abound. But there is no deep state. The official American government is the “deep state.” The use of the term is a prime example of the efficacy of linguistic mind control. The use of words that have contradictory meanings – contronyms – to create untenable double-binds that result in mental checkmate. Create false opposites to frame the mind control.
Innocence – give a sardonic laugh! These are the men who have waged endless wars, overt and covert, for decade upon decade, have dispatched special forces and CIA death squads throughout the world, and support genocide in Gaza and the destruction of Russia as their bosses require. Those who seek the office know this. Only those who are known to pledge allegiance to American imperialism and the love of war are allowed anywhere near the U.S. presidency. The present war on Iran has been long in the making, as has the destruction of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Russia, China, etc.
These bloodthirsty hyenas with polished faces come in all varieties, from Slick Willy to Dumb Georgie to Smiling Barack to Gross Don to Malarkey Joe and around and around we go again and again. Each is cast to perform the script – to speak the lingo – appropriate to his actor’s ability and his looks (let’s not forget this), but to serve the same ends. If it were not so, the U.S. would have stopped waging non-stop wars long ago. It’s simple to understand if one retains a smidgeon of logic.
If you think otherwise, you are deluded. I will not waste much time explaining why. The historical facts confirm it.
The U.S.A. is a warfare state; it’s as simple as that. Without waging wars, the U.S. economy, as presently constituted, would collapse. It is an economy based on fantasy and fake money with a national debt over 36 trillion dollars that will never be repaid. That’s another illusion. But I am speaking of pipe dreams, am I not?
And whether they choose to be aware of it or not, the vast majority of Americans support this killing machine by their indifference and ignorance of its ramifications throughout the society and more importantly, its effects in death and destruction on the rest of the world. But that’s how it goes as their focus is on the masked faces that face each other on the electoral stage of the masquerade ball every four years. Liars all.
But they all speak the double-speak that creates pipe-dreams on the road to nuclear war.
Will we ever stop believing them before it is too late?
The post Playing and Being Played on the Road to Nuclear War first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
— President Dwight D. Eisenhower, “Chance for Peace” speech, delivered on 16 April 1953
Seventy years after President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned about the cost of a military-industrial complex, America is still stealing from its own people to fund a global empire.
In 2025 alone, the U.S. has launched airstrikes in Yemen (Operation Rough Rider), bombed Houthi-controlled ports and radar installations (killing scores of civilians), deployed greater numbers of troops and multiple aircraft carriers to the Middle East, and edged closer to direct war with Iran in support of Israel’s escalating conflict.
Each of these “new” fronts has been sold to the public as national defense. In truth, they are the latest outposts in a decades-long campaign of empire maintenance—one that lines the pockets of defense contractors while schools crumble, bridges collapse, and veterans sleep on the streets at home.
This isn’t about national defense. This is empire maintenance.
It’s about preserving a military-industrial complex that profits from endless war, global policing, and foreign occupations—while the nation’s infrastructure rots and its people are neglected.
The United States has spent much of the past half-century policing the globe, occupying other countries, and waging endless wars.
What most Americans fail to recognize is that these ongoing wars have little to do with keeping the country safe and everything to do with propping up a military-industrial complex that has its sights set on world domination.
War has become a huge money-making venture, and the U.S. government, with its vast military empire, is one of its best buyers and sellers.
America’s role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict has already cost taxpayers more than $112 billion.
And now, the price of empire is rising again.
Clearly, it’s time for the U.S. government to stop policing the globe.
The U.S. military reportedly has more than 1.3 million men and women on active duty, with more than 200,000 of them stationed overseas in nearly every country in the world.
American troops are stationed in Somalia, Iraq and Syria. In Germany, South Korea and Japan. In Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Oman. In Niger, Chad and Mali. In Turkey, the Philippines, and northern Australia.
Those numbers are likely significantly higher in keeping with the Pentagon’s policy of not fully disclosing where and how many troops are deployed for the sake of “operational security and denying the enemy any advantage.” As investigative journalist David Vine explains, “Although few Americans realize it, the United States likely has more bases in foreign lands than any other people, nation, or empire in history.”
Incredibly, America’s military forces aren’t being deployed abroad to protect our freedoms here at home. Rather, they’re being used to guard oil fields, build foreign infrastructure and protect the financial interests of the corporate elite. In fact, the United States military spends about $81 billion a year just to protect oil supplies around the world.
America’s military empire spans nearly 800 bases in 160 countries, operated at a cost of more than $156 billion annually. As Vine reports, “Even US military resorts and recreation areas in places like the Bavarian Alps and Seoul, South Korea, are bases of a kind. Worldwide, the military runs more than 170 golf courses.”
This is how a military empire occupies the globe.
For 20 years, the U.S. war machine propped up Afghanistan to the tune of trillions of dollars and thousands of lives lost. When troops left Afghanistan, the military-industrial complex simply shifted theaters—turning Yemen, Iran, and the Red Sea into new frontlines.
Each new conflict is marketed as national defense. In reality, it’s business as usual for the Pentagon’s global footprint, with American soldiers used as pawns in the government’s endless quest to control global markets, prop up foreign regimes, and secure oil, data, and strategic ports—all while being told it’s for liberty.
This is how the military-industrial complex, aided and abetted by the likes of Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and others, continues to get rich at taxpayer expense.
Yet while the rationale may keep changing for why American military forces are policing the globe, these wars abroad aren’t making America—or the rest of the world—any safer, are certainly not making America great again, and are undeniably digging the U.S. deeper into debt.
War spending is bankrupting America.
Although the U.S. constitutes only 5% of the world’s population, America boasts almost 50% of the world’s total military expenditure, spending more on the military than the next 19 biggest spending nations combined.
In fact, the Pentagon spends more on war than all 50 states combined spend on health, education, welfare, and safety.
The American military-industrial complex has erected an empire unsurpassed in history in its breadth and scope, one dedicated to conducting perpetual warfare throughout the earth.
Since 2001, the U.S. government has spent more than $10 trillion waging its endless wars, much of it borrowed, much of it wasted, all of it paid for in blood and taxpayer dollars.
Add Yemen and the Middle East escalations of 2025, and the final bill for future wars and military exercises waged around the globe will total in the tens of trillions.
Co-opted by greedy defense contractors, corrupt politicians and incompetent government officials, America’s expanding military empire is bleeding the country dry at a rate of more than $32 million per hour.
In fact, the U.S. government spent more money every five seconds in Iraq than the average American earns in a year.
Talk about fiscally irresponsible: the U.S. government is spending money it doesn’t have on a military empire it can’t afford.
Even if we ended the government’s military meddling today and brought all of the troops home, it would take decades to pay down the price of these wars and get the government’s creditors off our backs.
As investigative journalist Uri Friedman puts it, for more than 15 years now, the United States has been fighting terrorism with a credit card, “essentially bankrolling the wars with debt, in the form of purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds by U.S.-based entities like pension funds and state and local governments, and by countries like China and Japan.”
War is not cheap, but it becomes outrageously costly when you factor in government incompetence, fraud, and greedy contractors. Indeed, a leading accounting firm concluded that one of the Pentagon’s largest agencies “can’t account for hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of spending.”
Unfortunately, the outlook isn’t much better for the spending that can be tracked.
A government audit found that defense contractor Boeing has been massively overcharging taxpayers for mundane parts, resulting in tens of millions of dollars in overspending. As the report noted, the American taxpayer paid:
$71 for a metal pin that should cost just 4 cents; $644.75 for a small gear smaller than a dime that sells for $12.51: more than a 5,100 percent increase in price. $1,678.61 for another tiny part, also smaller than a dime, that could have been bought within DoD for $7.71: a 21,000 percent increase. $71.01 for a straight, thin metal pin that DoD had on hand, unused by the tens of thousands, for 4 cents: an increase of over 177,000 percent.
The fact that such price gouging has become an accepted form of corruption within the American military empire is a sad statement on how little control “we the people” have over our runaway government.
Mind you, this isn’t just corrupt behavior. It’s deadly, downright immoral behavior.
Americans have thus far allowed themselves to be spoon-fed a steady diet of pro-war propaganda that keeps them content to wave flags with patriotic fervor and less inclined to look too closely at the mounting body counts, the ruined lives, the ravaged countries, the blowback arising from ill-advised targeted-drone killings and bombing campaigns in foreign lands, or the transformation of our own homeland into a warzone.
The bombing of Yemen’s Ras Isa port by U.S. forces—killing more than 80 civilians—is just the latest example of war crimes justified as national interest.
That needs to change.
The U.S. government is not making the world any safer. It’s making the world more dangerous. It is estimated that the U.S. military drops a bomb somewhere in the world every 12 minutes. Since 9/11, the United States government has directly contributed to the deaths of around 500,000 human beings. Every one of those deaths was paid for with taxpayer funds.
With the 2025 escalation, those numbers will only rise.
The U.S. government is not making America any safer. It’s exposing American citizens to alarming levels of blowback, a CIA term referring to the unintended consequences of the U.S. government’s international activities. Chalmers Johnson, a former CIA consultant, repeatedly warned that America’s use of its military to gain power over the global economy would result in devastating blowback.
The 9/11 attacks were blowback. The Boston Marathon Bombing was blowback. The attempted Times Square bomber was blowback. The Fort Hood shooter, a major in the U.S. Army, was blowback.
The U.S. military’s ongoing drone strikes will, I fear, spur yet more blowback against the American people.
The war hawks’ militarization of America—bringing home the spoils of war (the military tanks, grenade launchers, Kevlar helmets, assault rifles, gas masks, ammunition, battering rams, night vision binoculars, etc.) and handing them over to local police, thereby turning America into a battlefield—is also blowback.
James Madison was right: “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.” As Madison explained, “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes… known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.”
We are seeing this play out before our eyes.
The government is destabilizing the economy, destroying the national infrastructure through neglect and a lack of resources, and turning taxpayer dollars into blood money with its endless wars, drone strikes and mounting death tolls.
The nation’s infrastructure is in shambles. Public schools are underfunded. Mental health care is collapsing. Basic needs like housing, transportation, and clean water go unmet. Meanwhile, government contractors drop bombs on third-world villages and call it strategy.
This isn’t just bad budgeting. It’s moral bankruptcy. A country that can’t care for its own people has no business policing the rest of the world.
Bridges collapse, water systems fail, students drown in debt, and veterans sleep on the streets—while the Pentagon builds runways in the desert and funds proxy wars no one can explain.
Clearly, our national priorities are in desperate need of overhauling.
We are funding our own collapse. The roads rot while military convoys roll. The power grid fails while the drones fly. Our national strength is being siphoned off to feed a war machine that produces nothing but death, debt, and dysfunction.
We don’t need another war. We need a resurrection of the republic.
It’s time to stop policing the world. Bring the troops home. Shut down the military bases. End the covert wars. Slash the Pentagon’s budget. The path to peace begins with a full retreat from empire.
At the height of its power, even the mighty Roman Empire could not stare down a collapsing economy and a burgeoning military. Prolonged periods of war and false economic prosperity largely led to its demise. As historian Chalmers Johnson predicts:
The fate of previous democratic empires suggests that such a conflict is unsustainable and will be resolved in one of two ways. Rome attempted to keep its empire and lost its democracy. Britain chose to remain democratic and in the process let go its empire. Intentionally or not, the people of the United States already are well embarked upon the course of non-democratic empire.
This is the “unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex” that President Dwight Eisenhower warned us not to let endanger our liberties or democratic processes.
Eisenhower, who served as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, was alarmed by the rise of the profit-driven war machine that emerged following the war—one that, in order to perpetuate itself, would have to keep waging war.
We failed to heed his warning.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, war is the enemy of freedom.
As long as America’s politicians continue to involve us in wars that bankrupt the nation, jeopardize our servicemen and women, increase the chances of terrorism and blowback domestically, and push the nation that much closer to eventual collapse, “we the people” will find ourselves in a perpetual state of tyranny.
In the end, it’s not just the empire that falls. It’s the republic it hollowed out along the way.
The post Endless Wars, Failing Infrastructure, and a Dying Republic first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
It all started in the early morning hours of 13 June 2025, with what Israel calls “Operation Rising Lion”. Israel’s Air Force launched dozens of air strikes against Iran, targeting its nuclear [energy] program. According to BBC, in Iran’s own words, this is the biggest assault on Iran’s territory since the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-1988.
Iran has no nuclear weapons program, as confirmed multiple times by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), belonging to the UN system. However, after a 2024 inspection, the IAEA apparently reported enrichment to about 60%. This is not enough to make an atomic bomb, requiring at least 90%.
But for Israel which has a nuclear warheads arsenal of several hundred, this justified an unprecedented attack on Iran – a clear declaration of war. Israel’s nuclear bomb stockpile is outside of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement, all quietly tolerated by the west led by the United States.
Only with the explicit backing of the White House, Israel would dare such an assault on a country with a military power that could by far exceed that of Israel.
As these lines are written, the situation on the Israel-Iran war is constantly changing.
The latest state of affairs is that within the last 48 hours the tables have turned by 180 degrees.
According to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ – 13 June 2025), on Monday, 9 June 2025, Prime Minister Netanyahu raised the possibility of strikes against Iran in a phone conversation with President Trump, confirmed by two U.S. officials. Trump responded that he would like to see diplomacy run its course before turning to military options. In an alert to the world, and short-circuiting diplomacy, on Wednesday 11 June, the U.S. pulled some non-essential personnel out of the region in case of an attack.
On Thursday, before the Israeli strike, Trump said he would not describe an attack as imminent, “but it is something that could very well happen.” Clearly, Trump has given Israel green light for an assault, before diplomacy could run its course. Thereby he was betraying not only Iran, but the entire Middle East, or better called Western Asia, but also the entire world, since by doing so he gave Israel carte blanche to potentially start WWIII.
Since Israel’s “surprise” air raid in the darkest early morning hours of Thursday, 13 June, the situation has changed dramatically. Iran has launched hundreds of high-speed warheads most of which penetrated unharmed Israel’s Anti-Ballistic Missile systems. The Iranian missiles could not be stopped by the US THAAD missile defense. See this.
See also this from Fox News – 14 June 2025:
Other dramatic headlines point to “All of Israel is under fire!” Blasts and smoke as Iran launches hundreds of missiles | ITV NEWS, as “Iran launched hundreds of missiles towards Israel; only few were intercepted.” Question: Does Iran have enough missiles and rockets to overwhelm and outlast Israel? The next 72 hours will be crucial.
President Putin, while supporting Iran’s defense, has called on both parties to instantly stop aggressions.
He offered Russia’s good services for mediation. Once upon a time, when Switzerland was still neutral, Bern could have offered Switzerland’s diplomacy to mediate for Peace. No longer, as Switzerland drifts towards NATO, an enemy of Iran – and everything not considered the west.
Mr. Putin most likely warned President Trump to make sure Israel does not retaliate Iran’s response with nuclear weapons. If not Trump, then his Pentagon advisors, must know and understand what this means.
At the behest of Israel, Trump had started negotiations with Iran to reduce their enrichment program to zero, i.e. destroy their enriched uranium which Iran planned to use for civilian purposes. He warned or blackmailed Iran – you agree, or else – which meant you will be assaulted. He gave Iran five days to respond, but Israel launched her attack after day three, certainly not without Trump’s agreement, which meant a flagrant betrayal by the US on Iran and the world.
President Trump entered his second term on 20 January 2025 as a so-called “Peace President,” but resulted instead as a war-President; as one of the biggest deceptions not only for US citizens, but for the world at large.
Instead of making good on his promise, stopping the horrendous bloodshed and genocide caused by Israel in Gaza and now also in the West Bank, Lebanon, and Syria, Trump supports Netanyahu with more weapons to continue his ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza and in all of Palestine.
In the proxy war Ukraine-Russia, Trump is far from reaching an agreement. After this unprecedented US-supported assault by Israel on Iran – a Peace Agreement with Russia has slipped away farther than ever.
Israel also targeted military facilities in Teheran, as well as throughout Iran, killing what is reported dozens high-ranking military officers, including Iran’s top two commanders.
Iran confirmed that the attacks killed Major General Hossein Salami, commander of the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and Major General Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, along with several nuclear scientists. Iran’s envoy to the UN, Amir-Saeid Iravani, stated that 78 people were killed and 320 others injured.
This totally illegal, devastating large-scale attack pushed the Middle East into a new war, if not into a deep abyss. Images on Iranian state television said the Natanz site in central Iran, one of the country’s two main nuclear [energy] plants, was struck around 4.15 AM on Thursday, 13 June.
Trump hails Israel’s airstrike (RT 13 June 2025), as “excellent” and warned that there is “more to come.” He warns Iran, “either make the nuclear deal (zero uranium enrichment) or face slaughter” – see this US President Donald Trump has called Israel’s strike on Iran “excellent” and warned that there is “more to come”.
On the other hand, President Putin (RT – 13 June 25) holds phone conversations with Israeli’s PM and the Iranian President. Mr. Putin condemned the Israeli attack and extended his condolences to Iran, according to the Kremlin press service.
Some of Iran’s nuclear facilities are 800-plus meters below the ground and cannot be reached by Israel’s missiles. It is not clear how much of Iran’s nuclear energy program has been destroyed. It may never be known.
Trump’s green-lighting Israel’s attack, makes him complicit in this new Israel-initiated Middle East conflict, that might possibly degenerate into a WWIII scenario.
The Financial Times (FT – 13 June 2025) reports that President Trump warned Teheran on his Truth Social Platform, that the next “already planned attacks” on Iran would be “even more brutal,” adding that “Iran must make a deal [on its nuclear program], before there is nothing left.” “No more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE,” he wrote. Yes, the deal-maker has spoken again.
Trump added that the US “makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the World, BY FAR, and that Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come — and they know how to use it.” The usual megalo-ego-centric rhetoric which is typically not substantiated, and ever less believable, but ever more provoking a sad smile.
Mr. Trump’s notion of negotiations refers to the recent US-imposed reduction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program to zero, when in earlier accords – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) negotiated in 2013 to 2015 with the US Obama Administration and their western allies plus China and Russia, Iran was allowed to enrich uranium to no more than 5%. For 15 years, Iran agreed to enrich uranium only up to 3.67% and not to build heavy water facilities. They complied with the 15-year condition.
Nevertheless, the Israeli Air Force barrage on Iran follows a months-long stand-off over Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran insists and has always done so, its nuclear program is for peaceful civilian purposes, mostly nuclear energy. The UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is closely following Iran’s nuclear program and has never found any evidence that Iran was attempting to build an atomic bomb.
Please NOTE and be reminded that Israel has hundreds of nuclear warheads, outside of the Non-Proliferation Agreement, tolerated by the west, led by the US of A.
The IAEA, like most UN agencies, is following politically the “mandate” of the west. So, it does perhaps not come as a surprise that on Thursday, 12 June, the day before the Israeli attack on Iran, the agency declared that Iran was in breach of its non-proliferation obligations, the first such censure in two decades. It may have been the ultimate justification for Israel’s devastating air raid.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said,
Israel “Should expect a severe punishment. The Zionist regime, through this crime, has created a bitter and painful fate for itself — one it will certainly face,” he said. “With God’s permission, the powerful hands of the Islamic republic’s armed forces will not leave it unpunished.”
For more details see FT 13 June 2025
This new Middle Eastern war is in a constant state of change, possibly escalating and putting the world in danger, once more the works of the Zionist elite, attempting to control the globe, and achieving Greater Israel which would ideally expand their current map to also include Iran.
Peace in the Middle East or better Western Asia would be a great step towards world Peace – an engine for socioeconomic prosperity.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
On June 17, Trump demanded the unconditional surrender of Ayatollah Khamenei, and said “Our patience is wearing thin.”
On June 16, Trump posted to his Truth Social and to Facebook, this warning for everyone in Tehran to evacuate the City:
He has said there that America is in this war not to invade Iran but to protect Israel. However if Iran will have any success, then Americans, and not ONLY Israelis, will be bombing Iran. (And, of course, virtually all of Israel’s weapons do already come from America.)
So, this invasion of Iran IS the policy of the U.S. Government, and not (as the propaganda describes it) ONLY the policy of Israel’s Government.
And here was Trump’s Truth Social post on that day:
In that post, he unintentionally made clear that he never actually “negotiated” with Iran; he ORDERED Iran to do Netanyahu’s bidding. And, NOW, he and Netanyahu intend to forcibly (militarily) regime-change Iran, simply because Iran refused to comply with Netanyahu’s (and Trump’s, and Biden’s) DEMAND (that Iran be subordinated to Israel).
This is now heading into WW3. On June 16, the excellent news-site, which analyzes international-policy issues of protecting Russia from the U.S. empire’s constant aggressions to weaken or replace Russia’s Government, en.topcor.ru/news/, headlined “CRINK Air Force Could Help Iran Stand Up to Israel,” and here was its grim but entirely realistic analysis:
The military defeat of Iran, if it also leads to the beginning of the process of disintegration of the Islamic Republic into a number of quasi-states, will become the gravest geopolitical defeat [that the] informal anti-Western alliance CRINK led by Russia and China [have faced]. The ally [member, actually: Iran is the “I” in “CRINK”] must be saved, but how, exactly?
At the moment, the war between Israel and Iran is characterized by a remote exchange of air strikes using aircraft, ballistic missiles and kamikaze drones, as well as sabotage and terrorist attacks by Israeli special services in the Iranian rear.
Given that they have no common border and the US’s stated non-interference, large-scale ground operations are out of the question, so sending international brigades of Russian, North Korean or Chinese volunteers to help the Persians makes no sense. However, Tehran would certainly not refuse help in the fight against Israeli aviation, so it is worth remembering that something similar has already happened in modern history.
“Flying Tigers”
Let us recall that even before the start of World War II, a war between the Chinese Republic and the Japanese Empire that had attacked it had already begun in the European theater of operations in Southeast Asia on July 7, 1937. At the same time, the Japanese were taking out the poorly prepared Chinese aviation with one hand. However, in that historical period, China enjoyed support not only from the USSR, but also from the USA.
Retired US Air Force Major Claire Lee Chennault, sent there as a military adviser, proposed creating a special air unit in which the pilots would be American volunteers flying American planes. And that was done. President Roosevelt officially allowed US Air Force pilots to take leave and fight on a purely volunteer basis on the side of China against Japan.
A special aviation unit called the Flying Tigers was then created, consisting of three fighter squadrons flying American aircraft purchased under Lend-Lease. Its pilots signed a contract with the Chinese private firm CAMCO (Central Aircraft Manufacturing Company), under the terms of which they received $500 for each enemy aircraft destroyed.
American volunteers successfully fought on the side of the Chinese Republic until 1942, after which the Flying Tigers were withdrawn from the Chinese Air Force and included in the 23rd Fighter Group of the 10th Air Force of the US Army, and in 1943 it was transformed into the 14th Air Force of the US Army, consisting of 60 bombers and more than 100 fighters. Their commander, Claire Lee Chennault, became a general.
Legion “Condor”
Around the same time, the Condor Legion, created in Nazi Germany to help the future Franco regime in Spain, was operating in the European theatre of military operations. The number of this “volunteer” unit was relatively small, reaching 5,5 thousand people.
However, in the Third Reich, Condor was seen as a training ground for personnel, a testing ground for modern weapons, and a source of up-to-date combat experience. In addition to four bomber squadrons and four fighter squadrons, the legion included anti-aircraft and anti-tank defense units, an armored group of four battalions, transport sections, anti-tank artillery, and flamethrower units.
During the Spanish Civil War, the German army trained its best future aces and tested the latest aircraft that later fought in World War II. The Europeans intend to do something similar today, sending a so-called fighter coalition to Ukraine to help the Zelensky regime, which will protect Kyiv and the right bank from Russian missile and air strikes.
CRINK Air Army?
Returning to the topic of Iran, one must ask why, in fact, Russia, the DPRK and China should be interested in Tehran not losing and not following the path of Syria, which lost its sovereignty and turned into a terrorist enclave?
Our country needs Iran as a friendly partner, covering the southern flank and providing access to the Indian Ocean through the Caspian Sea. The oil fields that Israel threatens to bomb already belong to Beijing, which has invested huge amounts of money in the Iranian oil and gas sector. And for Pyongyang, Tehran has long been a technological partner in the development and production of various weapons.
What could the CRINK alliance actually do to help its ally, who has been dealt a vile blow and is being prepared to be destroyed by “Western partners” at the hands of Israel? Based on the above, there are two possible paths.
The first is the creation of an international volunteer unit of Russian, North Korean and Chinese “vacationers” who would receive modern fighters and air defense systems purchased by Iran under Lend-Lease and would go to gain real combat experience in air battles against the ultra-modern Israeli aviation.
Bearing in mind that the Russian Federation is facing a direct conflict with NATO, which has placed its bets on aviation, the DPRK has South Korea right next door, and the AUKUS alliance has already been created against China and a military operation against Taiwan is looming, such relevant experience in air combat would be, to put it mildly, not superfluous. Taking it into account, the Russian and Chinese defense industries could appropriately modify their aircraft and create a center for joint training of pilots from Iran, the DPRK, the Russian Federation and China.
The second path is a little less demonstrative and involves the creation of a hypothetical aviation PMC, for the needs of which Tehran could buy modern aircraft from Russia and China and hire vacationing pilots from the Russian Federation, China and, possibly, North Korea, who would be ready to cover Iran from Israeli air strikes.
There are options, if there is a desire.
All of the propaganda in The West PRESUMES that The West has decency and international law on its side and that all OTHER countries are inferior to it — less good, less decent, than are the U.S.-and-allied nations. The reality is the exact opposite.
For example, the CIA-edited and written Wikipedia (which blacklists — blocks from linking to — sites that aren’t CIA-approved) article on “CRINK” redirects the reader to their article “Axis of Upheaval”, which opens:
“Axis of Upheaval” is a term coined in 2024 by Center for a New American Security foreign policy analysts Richard Fontaine and Andrea Kendall-Taylor and used by many foreign policy analysts,[1][2][3] military officials,[4][5] and international groups[6] to describe the growing anti-Western
collaboration between Russia under Vladimir Putin, Iran, China, and North Korea beginning in the early 2020s. It has also been called the “axis of autocracies“,[7][8][9] “quarte t of chaos“,[10][11][12] the “deadly quartet“[4] or “CRINK“.[13][a] The loose alliance generally represented itself in diplomatic addresses and public statements as an “anti-hegemony” and “anti-imperialist” coalition with intentions to challenge what it deemed to be a Western-dominated global order to reshape international relations into a multipolar order according to their shared interests. While not a formal bloc, these nations have increasingly coordinated their economic, military, and diplomatic efforts, making strong efforts to aid each other to undermine Western influence.[1]
Central to its opening paragraph is the Center for a New American Security (CNAS); and, as is made clear at one of the CIA’s NON-approved sites, the “Militarist Monitor”, their article “Center for a New American Security” (which thus is not used as a source by Wikipedia) makes clear that CNAS is totally neoconservative (a marketing-arm of the U.S. weapons-manufacturing industry), but even that site (MM) says nothing about who funds it. Another CIA-banned site, “WSWS”, has a far more comprehensive article about CNAS, titled “Democratic think tank plots war against Russia and China: What is the Center for a New American Security?”, and it makes explicit that CNAS’s main donors are “Defense contractors” (which sell ONLY to the U.S. Government and its allies) and secondarily “High tech” (which sell both to those Governments and to the public). In other words: the CIA represents the billionaires who are heavily invested in those two industries — as well as in the ‘news’-media (such as Wikipedia) that propagandize for America’s armaments companies in their ‘news’, editorials, and ads. (For example: even if a pharmaceutical company is simply advertising in these billionaires’ ‘news’-media, it is thereby funding the necon operation.) In 1922, Walter Lippmann invented the phrase “manufacture of consent” to refer to this then-new type of ‘democracy’; but it became big-time only after Truman started the Cold War and the U.S. global-hegemonic empire, on 25 July 1945.
The hegemonic (or “hegemoniacal”) global empire that U.S. President Truman started on 25 July 1945, needs now, finally, to be defeated decisively. This means without reaching the stage of a nuclear war against Russia, because that could end ONLY in the defeat of both sides and the end of all human civilization. However, I am personally inclined to think that The West have become SO desperate to rule the entire world, so that Russia — and perhaps all of the CRINK — need now to announce publicly that they will NOT allow Iran to be defeated, and that this means that they ARE willing to go nuclear against America and Israel, in order to PREVENT Iran’s defeat — if that’s what would be needed in order to PREVENT the U.S. from providing such backup to Israel’s invasion of Iran.
Trump (like Biden) never planned for that possibility. If there is to be a WW3, then the most evil empire in all of history, America’s empire, must be prevented from starting it (e.g., by extending Israel’s war against Iran into becoming fully a U.S.-Israel invasion of Iran). It must instead be started by their main targets — CRINK — if it MUST start, at all. The initiator of a war (such as Israel and the U.S. are, in regard to their joint war against Iran) always has the advantage of surprise (such as on June 13th), and thus the higher likelihood of eliminating the other side’s central command (as Israel has largely done). That way (by CRINK’s joining with Iran on this war), if there will be any future afterwards, it WON’T be dominated by the world’s most evil nations — the U.S.-empire nations. Planning for a post-WW3 world has now become important, because of Trump’s commitment now of greatly increased U.S. backup of Israel’s war to conquer Iran. Post-WW3 would be hell in any case, but simply allowing the U.S.-Israel-UK empire to take the entire world would LIKEWISE be hell. And that’s what we all are now heading toward.
The post Trump (Like Biden) is Simply Evil first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
On 11 June, the Substack, Closer to the Edge, penned a letter to the Los Angeles Police Department, and the opening graph says it all:
You shot a journalist on live television. You struck another in the forehead while he was standing alone under a freeway. You sent one man into emergency surgery after punching a hole in his leg with a “less-lethal” round. You bruised a New York Times reporter’s ribcage. You gassed a foreign correspondent while she was wearing a press badge. You shot a 74-year-old woman in the back. You nailed a man in the chest with a 40mm grenade while he was holding a phone. And you left a woman bleeding from the skull in the middle of the street while people begged your officers to call an ambulance—and they didn’t.
And now you’re “investigating.”
Closer to the Edge maintains it has “completed a full, verified investigation of eight people injured by law enforcement during the protests in Los Angeles. Seven were journalists. One was a protester. All of them were harmed under your watch.”
The Substack notes that it is “publishing” the stories of the victims of police violence “[w]ith verified quotes. With real names. With witness footage, medical updates, and your own damn statements when available. You told the public you’re investigating? Then we’ll do it faster, better, and with the one thing your officers seem allergic to: accountability.”
Reuters is reporting that there has been over 30 incidents of police violence against journalists as tracked by the LA Press Club. According Reuters Helen Coster, “Journalists have been among those injured during protests” in recent days.
Among the injured were Lauren Tomasi (Nine News Australia) who was struck by a rubber-bullet projectile; Toby Canham, freelance photojournalist for the New York Post, was hit in the forehead by a “hard rubbery” projectile; Nick Stern, a British photojournalist, was shot in the thigh with a projectile and required emergence surgery.
The post LAPD Running Amok, Dishing out Numerous Injuries to Protesters and Journalists in LA first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Note: In polite company or in public arenas or in schools and conferences, what have you, what is it to be anti-semitic according to the Israel Occupation Forces legions of facilitators like the ADL, AIPAC, and a list of tens of thousands of Jewish controlled non-profits and foundations?
Pro-Israeli circles often try to invent an anti-Semitic element behind every legitimate criticism of Israel.
But this is a cheap and increasingly exposed exploitation and manipulation of true anti-Semitism a morbid form of racism that ought to be denounced.
However the behaviors of the shipyard dogs of Zionism would have us believe that true anti-Semites are no longer those who hate Jews for being Jewish but rather those Zionist fanatics criticize for criticizing Israel for being criminal murderous and evil.
Well we are supposed to be living in a moral universe where no people should have more rights than the rest of mankind.
Proceeding from this timeless basic logic if criticizing Israel including questioning the moral legitimacy of Israel’s very existence amounts to anti-Semitism then humanity has a moral obligation to be anti-Semitic.
Opponents of Israel it must be proclaimed loudly don’t hate Israel because Israel is Jewish; they hate Israel because Israel happens to be a gigantic crime against humanity a virulent practitioner of ethnic cleansing and apartheid which is committed to the national destruction of another people the Palestinian people.
Yes anti-Judaism is wrong and should be rejected. However if Judaism especially Jewishness can not maintain a decent and peaceful existence outside the realm of racism apartheid and genocidal supremacy then people will have second thoughts about Judaism. — effing 2012 Op-Ed, The absurdity of equating opposition to Israel with anti-Semitism
No lover of ANY POTUS, especially Truman, but, that broken white psychosis can get it right once in a blue moon:
In 1948 President Harry Truman was infuriated by Jewish terrorism which was nothing in comparison to Israel’s terror these days angrily wrote in a letter to Eleanor Roosevelt: “I fear very much that the Jews are being like all underdogs. When they get on top they are just as intolerant and cruel as the people were to them when they were underneath.” (Eleanor and Harry: The Correspondence of Eleanor Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman Eleanor Roosevelt, [Scribner/Drew, 2002] p.187.)
No fan of Stanley, as he calls the American University the most Jewish of institutions; however,
Jason Stanley, a philosophy professor who recently decided to leave Yale to go teach in Canada, recently explained on PBS’ Amanpour & Company why he thinks the Trump administration’s efforts are actually boosting antisemitic tropes:
This is reinforcing antisemitic tropes all across the political spectrum. … What are the most toxic antisemitic tropes? Well, “Jews control the institutions.” This is absolutely reinforcing this. Any young American is going to think: Remember what happened when they took down the world’s greatest university system on behalf of Jewish safety? And this will go down in history books — the history of this era will say that Jewish people were the sledgehammer for fascism. So if we don’t speak out, if we American Jews do not speak out against this, this will be a grim chapter in our history as Americans. It’s the first time in my life as an American that I have been fearful of our status as equal Americans — not because of the protests on campus, which, as I said, had a lot of Jewish students in them. But because we are suddenly at the center of U.S. politics. It’s never good to be in the crosshairs for us. And we are being used to destroy democracy.
So, this following little doozy would be put on the targets for IOF and others loving the Jewish Raping Murdering Starving Displacing Poisoning Polluting Occupied State of “Israel”/Palestine.
Over an effing billion of these Goy-ionists?
Days later, India launched Operation Sindoor, a wave of air strikes, describing them as “non-escalatory” in nature. Yes, that is the face of Judaism in that part of the world, where Benzion Mileikowsky works wonders on the Jewish Population where 84 percent plus want all Palestinians wiped from lower Greater Israel.
Many of the drones used in the operation were Israeli-made.
Among the systems deployed was the Harop, a “suicide drone” developed by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). Designed to hover above a target area before diving for impact, the Harop carries a 10-kilogram warhead and can remain airborne for nearly six hours.
Since acquiring the Harop, India has increasingly relied on it.
Oshrit Birvadker, a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, told The Times of Israel that India’s use of Harop drones reflects “Israel’s growing footprint in Indian defense.”
That’s fourth globally in arms sales, Jewish State of Murdering Maiming Raping Starving Poisoning Polluting Displacing Israel (sic).
Marching to get into the Katz’s and Benzion Mileikowsky’s heads? For fuck’s sake!
Chris Hedges: This is the end. The final blood-soaked chapter of the genocide. It will be over soon. Weeks. At most. Two million people are camped out amongst the rubble or in the open air. Dozens are killed and wounded daily from Israeli shells, missiles, drones, bombs and bullets. They lack clean water, medicine and food. They have reached a point of collapse. Sick. Injured. Terrified. Humiliated. Abandoned. Destitute. Starving. Hopeless.
In the last pages of this horror story, Israel is sadistically baiting starving Palestinians with promises of food, luring them to the narrow and congested nine-mile ribbon of land that borders Egypt. Israel and its cynically named Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), allegedly funded by Israel’s Ministry of Defense and the Mossad, is weaponizing starvation. It is enticing Palestinians to southern Gaza the way the Nazis enticed starving Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto to board trains to the death camps. The goal is not to feed the Palestinians. No one seriously argues there is enough food or aid hubs. The goal is to cram Palestinians into heavily guarded compounds and deport them.
Some bulwarks across international community would stop this. Fuck, it is a Jewish project across all DNA-lines.
Given Britain’s continued support for Israel, from refusing to implement a full arms embargo to continuing to send RAF spy flights over Gaza from the British base at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, Ahmed questions whether efforts have indeed been enough.
Israeli drones sprayed the Madleen with a white substance and an Israeli boat rammed the aid vessel before commandos boarded it, all because it contained things like baby food, medicine and prosthetics. Israel must defend itself from those things, apparently.
Is this a certain brand of Jewish Inspired, Supported, Financed death and murder cult? Is the question antisemitic?
Dirty dirty Sweden:
The Temporary Protection Directive (2001/55/EC) (commonly referred to as collective temporary protection) was activated in March 2022, granting Ukrainians seeking refuge temporary protection in EU countries, including Sweden. This directive provides residence permits, access to work, education, and limited social benefits without requiring individuals to go through the standard asylum process.
However, the practicalities of the Directive’s use differed significantly between countries. Sweden, despite its, until recent, reputation of being relatively liberal in its migration policies, has at times, lagged behind its Scandinavian neighbors in supporting Ukrainian displaced people. To illustrate this, it is useful to compare the Swedish approach to that of other Nordic states, as well as Poland.
Bizarrely, Israel’s act of piracy was described by the BBC as “diverting” the Madleen. In what universe was this a diversion? When you capture people in international waters who have committed no crime, you have not diverted them, you have kidnapped them. The crew of the Madleen are hostages, and not only that, Israel is already bragging about how it plans to abuse them.
The crew of 12, who the media describe as “activists”, comprised of journalists, politicians, and a doctor. They are to be taken to the port of Ashdod where they will be psychologically tortured by the IDF/IOF.
Israel Katz says he has given the order to make the crew watch footage of October 7th to show them “exactly who the terrorist organization they came to support and for whom they work is”. Presumably, they will only watch the killings carried out by Hamas and not the enactment of the Hannibal Directive killing hundreds of Jews by Jews.
Pointing out the non-Jews and Jews involved, is that antisemitic?
Remember this Jewish guy?
1992 document published by the US Department of Defense, known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine (because it was co-written by Paul Wolfowitz, who then served as US undersecretary of defense for policy, before later returning as Secretary of Defense under George W. Bush).
The Pentagon’s Wolfowitz Doctrine stated (emphasis added):
Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union, and Southwest Asia.
The Trump administration’s foreign policy is still consistent with much of the Wolfowitz Doctrine. Although Trump has de-prioritized Western Europe and the territory of the former USSR, he has dedicated significant resources to US military operations in East Asia and Southwest Asia (also known as the Middle East).
Yep, even CIA-drenched Wikipedia advances Ratner’s Judaism:
Ely Ratner, who served as the assistant secretary of defense for Indo-Pacific security affairs in Biden’s Pentagon, wrote approvingly on X/Twitter, “Rhetoric aside, on actual defense policy Secretary Hegseth’s speech was near total continuity with the previous administration”.
“That’s good, but we’ll need heightened urgency, attention, and resources to address the China challenge”, Ratner added.
This fellow for years advanced his Jewishness for sure Zyklon or Final Solution Blinken:
Biden’s neoconservative Secretary of State Antony Blinken had also maintained a hardline anti-China position.
In a speech in 2022, Blinken announced what was essentially a containment policy targeting China.
“We cannot rely on Beijing to change its trajectory. So we will shape the strategic environment around Beijing”, he said.
Blinken added, “The scale and the scope of the challenge posed by the People’s Republic of China will test American diplomacy like nothing we’ve seen before”.
Tucker Carlson has posted an extraordinary article on X that could potentially stop a war with Iran. As everyone knows, Carlson’s political views are admired by President Donald Trump who sees the former Fox commentator as a blunt, but fair-minded analyst who sees the world in similar terms as himself. And while there’s no evidence that the two men communicate regularly, a number of pundits believe that Carlson has influenced Trump’s thinking, particularly on matters related to foreign policy. That said, it is entirely possible that Trump will read Carlson’s June 4 post on Iran, and see that—once again—influential neocons are making every effort to drag the US into another bloody conflict in the Middle East to achieve Israel’s ambition of becoming the preeminent power in the region. Here’s Carlson:
Mark Levin was at the White House today, lobbying for war with Iran. To be clear, Levin has no plans to fight in this or any other war. He’s demanding that American troops do it. We need to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons, he and like-minded ideologues in Washington are now arguing. They’re just weeks away.
If this sounds familiar, it’s because the same people have been making the same claim since at least the 1990s. It’s a lie. In fact, there is zero credible intelligence that suggests Iran is anywhere near building a bomb or has plans to. None. Anyone who claims otherwise is ignorant or dishonest. If the US government knew Iran was weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, we’d be at war already.
Iran knows this, which is why they aren’t building one. Iran also knows it’s unwise to give up its weapons program entirely. Muammar Gaddafi tried that and wound up sodomized with a bayonet. As soon as Gaddafi disarmed, NATO killed him. Iran’s leaders saw that happen. They learned the obvious lesson.
So why is Mark Levin once again hyperventilating about weapons of mass destruction? To distract you from the real goal, which is regime change — young Americans heading back to the Middle East to topple yet another government. Virtually no one will say this out loud. America’s record of overthrowing foreign leaders is so embarrassingly counterproductive that regime change has become a synonym for disaster. Officially, no one supports it. So instead of telling the truth about their motives, they manufacture hysteria: “A country like Iran can never have the bomb! They’ll nuke Los Angeles! We have to act now!” Tucker Carlson (tuckercarlsonliveshowpodcast)
*****
Back to the death spiral of the Jewish Controlled Palestine:
In his book One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, Omar El Akkad writes:
Should a drone vaporize some nameless soul on the other side of the planet, who among us wants to make a fuss? What if it turns out they were a terrorist? What if the default accusation proves true, and we by implication be labeled terrorist sympathizers, ostracized, yelled at? It is generally the case that people are most zealously motivated by the worst plausible thing that could happen to them. For some, the worst plausible thing might be the ending of their bloodline in a missile strike. Their entire lives turned to rubble and all of it preemptively justified in the name of fighting terrorists who are terrorists by default on account of having been killed. For others, the worst plausible thing is being yelled at.
You can see his interview with El Akkad here.
You cannot decimate a people, carry out saturation bombing over 20 months to obliterate their homes, villages and cities, massacre tens of thousands of innocent people, set up a siege to ensure mass starvation, drive them from land where they have lived for centuries and not expect blowback. The genocide will end. The response to the reign of state terror will begin. If you think it won’t you know nothing about human nature or history. The killing of two Israeli diplomats in Washington and the attack against supporters of Israel at a protest in Boulder, Colorado, are only the start.
Chaim Engel, who took part in the uprising at the Nazis’ Sobibor death camp in Poland, described how, armed with a knife, he attacked a guard in the camp.
“It’s not a decision,” Engel explained years later. “You just react, instinctively you react to that, and I figured, ‘Let us to do, and go and do it.’ And I went. I went with the man in the office and we killed this German. With every jab, I said, ‘That is for my father, for my mother, for all these people, all the Jews you killed.’”
Does anyone expect Palestinians to act differently? How are they to react when Europe and the United States, who hold themselves up as the vanguards of civilization, backed a genocide that butchered their parents, their children, their communities, occupied their land and blasted their cities and homes into rubble? How can they not hate those who did this to them?
What message has this genocide imparted not only to Palestinians, but to all in the Global South?
It is unequivocal. You do not matter. Humanitarian law does not apply to you. We do not care about your suffering, the murder of your children. You are vermin. You are worthless. You deserve to be killed, starved and dispossessed. You should be erased from the face of the earth.
“To preserve the values of the civilized world, it is necessary to set fire to a library,” El Akkad writes:
To blow up a mosque. To incinerate olive trees. To dress up in the lingerie of women who fled and then take pictures. To level universities. To loot jewelry, art, food. Banks. To arrest children for picking vegetables. To shoot children for throwing stones. To parade the captured in their underwear. To break a man’s teeth and shove a toilet brush in his mouth. To let combat dogs loose on a man with Down syndrome and then leave him to die. Otherwise, the uncivilized world might win.
There are people I have known for years who I will never speak to again. They know what is happening. Who does not know? They will not risk alienating their colleagues, being smeared as an antisemite, jeopardizing their status, being reprimanded or losing their jobs. They do not risk death, the way Palestinians do. They risk tarnishing the pathetic monuments of status and wealth they spent their lives constructing. Idols. They bow down before these idols. They worship these idols. They are enslaved by them.
At the feet of these idols lie tens of thousands of murdered Palestinians.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Armored National Guard trucks rumbling down Sunset Boulevard. The mayor declaring a citywide curfew. LAPD officers in riot gear firing flash bangs and rubber bullets. Street medics rushing to neutralize tear gas. I watched all this unfold on the streets of Los Angeles five years ago — in June 2020, when I lived in the city and saw firsthand how peaceful Black Lives Matter protesters were met…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
In 2024, for the fifth year in a row, the world’s nine nuclear-armed nations increased spending on nuclear weapons, according to a report published by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). The annual report, entitled, “Hidden Costs: Nuclear Weapons Spending in 2024,” reveals that last year, the nine nuclear states increased spending by 11 percent ($9.9 billion)…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
Roughly 200 protesters occupied the lobby of Maersk’s Manhattan headquarters on June 11 to demand that the multibillion-dollar shipping conglomerate stop sending military cargo to Israel amid the genocide in Gaza. The intergenerational, multifaith coalition — organized by the Palestinian Youth Movement and Jewish Voice for Peace — poured through the revolving doors of a Midtown East skyscraper…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
As we have those great warriors leading our nation, let’s look at their military service. You know, the important things that so many love to thank them for. Let’s see, we have Donnie Trump, who supported the Vietnam War but just could not serve, due to 4 student deferments and then one medical for bone spurs in his foot. Yet, he stood tall in his salute to our boys in The Shit as the Nam was called. W Bush was one who served during the height of the Vietnam War, with the Texas Air National Guard. Now, for those who do not know or perhaps have forgotten, the Air Guard would be the LAST group to ever be called to leave our borders. By the way, W’s dad, Poppa Bush, was a Texas congressman at that time who vehemently supported the war, but made sure Junior would never go.
Fast forward to today. We have JD Vance, who served in the Marines for four years but never had to see combat. JD was a public affairs officer — safe and sound, way behind the lines. His political counterpart, Captain Ron DeSantis, was another Iraqi War hero who served as a Navy lawyer… also never anywhere near the hornet’s nest. JD does love to talk tough now about China, our new enemy. Those damn Reds are making fortunes selling their shit to Wal-Mart, while they make deals with so many of our enemies worldwide — and yes, even our allies.
As was spoken in the Groucho Marx film Duck Soup: “This means war!”
Then we have little Marco Rubio, now a lieutenant for Trump Central. Marco was born in 1971, so could have served in the Iraq War in 2003 that he was proud to support wholeheartedly. Little Marco talks tough about our so-called adversary China, along with his great fervor for Israel’s genocide of Gaza (and that includes the West Bank).
When all these great patriots walk by you or are on camera please stand up and salute them. For without them what would war really be?
The post Thank You for Your (Safe) Service first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Palestine Action has blockaded the Bristol head office of Alliance Insurance, to call out the company’s continued complicity in Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Palestine Action blockade Alliance Insurance head office
From 6.15am on Monday 9 June, activists began the successful blockade to demand the firm stop investing in, and providing insurance for Israel’s biggest weapons producer, Elbit Systems:
BREAKING: Palestine Action shut down the Bristol-based head office of Allianz Insurance.
By providing Elbit with insurance, Allianz enable the production of Israeli weapons — that’s why we’re here to shut it down! pic.twitter.com/zSCndln1Hd
— Palestine Action (@Pal_action) June 9, 2025
Th activists blocked each entrance to the premises at 10 Victoria Street, Bristol. Each attached themselves to a lock-on contraption within suitcases, in order to maximise disruption of the office building:
Using repurposed fire extinguishers, they doused the building in red paint to symbolise the bloodshed of the Palestinian people:
In tandem with this, in London, activists put up posters with the image of Allianz Insurance’s CEO Colm Holmes. They read:
WANTED: For complicity in war crimes and genocide… If seen please report to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Sustained action will continue until Allianz cuts all ties with Elbit
The action comes as part of a sustained direct action campaign against Allianz. Palestine Action says it will only cease targeting Allianz, when the company end all ties with Elbit Systems.
Palestine Action also shut down the same office in April. Two protestors also blockaded the entrance and sprayed the building in paint. This followed a series of hits since October 2024 when activists launched actions against 10 Allianz sites. This included a canopy occupation of the Guildford headquarters. Following this, activists mounted a co-ordinated wave of actions in January 2025 at 15 sites across Europe where they smashed windows at multiple branches causing them to close for subsequent weeks.
Additional actions have taken place in Rotterdam and Berlin, as well as the London branch in March. Activists in Twickenham also flew a drone carrying a Palestine flag to disrupt a Six Nations game in the Allianz-sponsored stadium.
In addition to targeting of Allianz, Palestine Action has made repeated interventions in Bristol to their primary target, Elbit. After sustained actions forced Elbit to close its London offices, the company relocated its headquarters to Bristol. They also host the Elbit’s new research and development facility in Filton, which activists have targeted for repeated actions. Most notably, in August 2024, six activists broke into the factory and dismantled quadcopter drones. The action cost Elbit £2m in damages and has seen 18 people subsequently remanded to prison.
Allianz ‘business as usual’: profiting from genocide
In January this year it was confirmed that Elbit had been continuing to ship weapons to Israel during the 15 months of genocide, including from the Filton facility. Today’s action in Bristol comes as Israeli airstrikes have killed at least 44 people in Gaza. Moreover, it follows the Israeli military intercepting the Madleen Freedom Flotilla overnight, which was carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza.
A spokesperson from Palestine Action said:
By insuring Elbit, Allianz enable the production of Israeli weapons on British soil. We will not allow Allianz to continue with ‘business as usual’, which involves profiting from the most depraved and severe crimes being enacted against the Palestinian people.
Palestine Action will continue to take direct action against the insurance firm, until they cease all ties with Israel’s biggest weapons producer.
Featured image and additional images supplied
By The Canary
This post was originally published on Canary.
The European Legal Support Centre (ELSC) has pursued legal action in an attempt to halt the scheduled transfer of Skylark drone parts from Germany to Israel this coming week.
According to open-source intelligence and export documentation, the flight is expected to carry components of Skylark, a miniature unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), manufactured by Elbit Systems, one of Israel’s main military suppliers.
The plane shipment will be arriving from Budapest and is then due to travel from Frankfurt on an El Al passenger flight to Tel Aviv on Tuesday June 10.
German authorities urged to prevent plane carrying Skylark drone parts from flying to Israel
The ELSC, acting on behalf of a Palestinian plaintiff from Gaza, has filed two emergency motions with the Administration Courts of Frankfurt and Berlin last Friday, to urge German authorities to block the transit of these drone components through Frankfurt Airport.
Partner lawyer with the ELSC Ahmed Abed said his client has lost more than 60 family members, including his father and sister whom he had to leave bleeding with serious head wounds, to rescue the rest of his family from bombing. The two of them could not be saved, and both died. Five more of his siblings all under the age of 18 were also killed.
Released data by the German Ministry for Economic Affairs reveals Germany has exported weapons to Israel worth more than €485 million between October 2023 and May 2025. Germany is the second largest exporter of arms to Israel, amounting to 30% of Israel’s arms, following the U.S. at 69%.
This is a continuation in Germany’s pattern of allowing transit of weapon parts to Israel as reported over the past year, by Irish publication The Ditch, which found Lufthansa, Germany’s national airline, to be heavily involved in the transportation of weapons to the IDF through Irish airspace.
ELSC: “one day accountability will come”
A ELSC spokesperson told the Canary:
We are discussing arms deliveries that persisted even after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s assault on Gaza constitutes a plausible case of genocide. These deliveries continued long after numerous UN bodies and international human rights organizations—entities that Europe and Germany routinely rely on in other contexts—raised numerous alarms.
Germany knowingly and willfully continued to supply weapons to Israel in violation of international law. Beyond providing military support, it has publicly defended and justified Israel’s crimes, systematically silenced critics of its complicity, and remained in blatant denial of the atrocities broadcast to the world in real time.
This is complicity with full awareness. And one day, accountability will come.
In addition to the ICJ ruling, in June 2024 UN experts called on states and arms manufacturers supplying weapons, parts, and ammunition to Israeli forces, to end their arms transfers to Israel, or risk being complicit in serious violations of international human rights and international humanitarian laws, and possibly genocide.
Since then, leading Palestinian and international human rights organisations, the world’s top genocide scholars, and Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the situation in Palestine, have all reached the same conclusion – Israel is committing a genocide.
By filing this urgent motion, ELSC is looking to prevent further irreparable harm to civilians in Gaza and to hold the German state accountable for its legal obligations under international humanitarian and criminal law and The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
It’s time to hold politicians and weapon companies to account
Lawyer Ahmed Abed told us that:
Words of sorrow by the German government are worthless for the Palestinians in Gaza as long as it lets arms be used to kill them. It is time to bring accountability against the politicians and manufacturers who support the weapon export for the genocide.
The Skylark drones are being used by the Israeli military to identify and surveil targets in Gaza, relaying real-time coordinates for artillery strikes. These strikes have resulted in the large-scale killing of civilians and the destruction of critical infrastructure.
On Elbit’s website, Skylark is described as a ‘battle-proven, high performance’ system, which has been delivered to over 30 different users worldwide, and has ‘outstanding capabilities based on operational experience gained through tens of thousands of operational sorties by the IDF and various NATO and other international users’.
The drone was first used in large quantities during Operation Protective Edge, in which Israel killed more than 2200 Palestinians in Gaza, including at least 500 children, in the Summer of 2014.
El-Al is Israel’s national airline, and although privately owned, is known for its close relationship with the Israeli government, regarding security and for performing military operations, with the airline not only handling civilian air travel but also supporting national security initiatives, including logistics for the military.
Featured image via the Canary
By Charlie Jaay
This post was originally published on Canary.
While Keir Starmer U-turned on his leadership pledges to bring water, energy and mail into public ownership, he is re-nationalising 36,347 military homes. The 1996 sell off under Tory prime minister John Major was a massive scam that cost the public purse billions.
As James Schenider, former communications director for Jeremy Corbyn, pointed out on LBC:
In 1996 UK govt sold off armed forces’ housing to a private equity-backed investor.
Almost 30 years later, with billions paid in rent and 2/3 of the homes in urgent need of repairs, the govt is buying them back to upgrade them.
Lesson: privatisation is a scam & must be reversed pic.twitter.com/FJpT26SGF7
— James Schneider (@schneiderhome) June 2, 2025
Hold on Labour, so rent’s a bad thing?
The Labour government says that the deal will save £230 million in rent per year. It continues:
Billions of pounds will be saved by the deal over the next decade, delivering savings for taxpayers and enabling additional investment into homes for military families. The landmark move reverses a sale undertaken by the Government in 1996.
This certainly raises the question why any of us are renting our housing from the private sector, rather than a system where home ownership is provided publicly and paid at cost price. The fact that Real Estate is the most profitable industry in the UK underscores this. Top companies average an astonishing £686,000 of profit per year per employee. That’s a private tax on homes at 23 times the UK average salary, per employee.
Labour’s trumpeting of the nationalisation of armed forces homes also raises the question of why the NHS is renting infrastructure from the private sector. And it raises the question of why we will continue to rent trains from ‘rolling stock’ companies. Labour is only bringing the operating companies into public ownership.
The military homes sell off con
In 2018, the NAO found that privatising the military homes in 1996 cost the public between £2.2bn and £4.2bn more than if the government had maintained public ownership. That’s partly because of rent and partly because of the ever inflating housing bubble. From 1996-2018, UK property prices rose by 284% (this in itself is a major scam maintained by politicians and real estate investors). It’s no wonder the 1996 deal became known as “the goldmine of the decade” for private buyers.
Investors in Annington – the company created to manage and own the properties – received returns of 13.4% between 1996 and March 2017.
On top of that, the military homes did not receive maintenance under private ownership. And the backlog of repairs could cost an additional £4bn.
Speaking about the 1996 deal, Robert Razzell, chief financial officer at UK Government Investments, made plain why privatisation is a failure across the board. The private company did not maintain a basic standard for the homes:
The problem was the MoD as [the] tenant couldn’t redevelop the estate. What tenant could ever redevelop an estate? They were getting a government rental stream. There’s no risk to that. Why would they tear down those units and redevelop them, taking all that construction and development risk? They didn’t have many obligations under the lease. In fact, it’s hard to think of any obligations they had.
This exactly applies to utilities like water and energy, where the companies are guaranteed an income stream from UK households. That’s because everyone needs water and energy everyday. It’s why we don’t see investment in the sewage system and instead see raw sewage dumped in our environment.
So, it’s time for Starmer to go further and nationalise the utilities he initially pledged to. Rent in itself is almost always a scam.
Featured image via the Canary
By James Wright
Unpopular governments always retreat to grounds of lazy convenience. Instead of engaging in exercises of courage, they take refuge in obvious distractions. And there is no more obvious distraction than preparing for war against a phantom enemy.
That is exactly where the government of Sir Keir Starmer finds itself. Despite a mammoth majority and a dramatically diminished Tory opposition, the Prime Minister acts like a man permanently besieged, his Labour Party seemingly less popular than Typhoid Mary. His inability to be unequivocal to questions of whether he will contest the next election suggest as much.
The same cannot be said about his enthusiasm for the sword and sabre. There are monsters out there to battle, and Sir Keir is rising to the plate. Sensing this, the military mandarins, most prominently General Sir Roland Walker, head of the Army, have been more than encouraging, seeing the need to ready the country for war by 2027. Given the military’s perennial love affair with astrology, that state of readiness could only be achieved with a doubling of the Army’s fighting power and tripling it by 2030.
Given that background, the UK Strategic Defence Review (SDR) was commissioned in July 2024. Led by former Labour Defence Secretary and NATO Secretary General Lord George Robertson, the freshly released report promises a fat boon for the military industrial complex. Like all efforts to encourage war, its narrative is that of supposedly making Britain safer.
Starmer’s introduction is almost grateful for the chance to out the blood lusting enemy. “In this new era for defence and security, when Russia is waging war on our continent and probing our defences at home, we must meet the danger head on.” The placing of noble Ukraine into the warming fraternity of Europe enables a civilisational twist to be made. The Russian military efforts in Ukraine are not specific to a murderous family affair and historical anxieties but directed against all Europeans. Therefore, all Europeans should militarise and join the ranks, acknowledging that “the very nature of warfare is being transformed” by that conflict.
In pursuing the guns over butter program, Starmer recapitulates the sad theme of previous eras that led to global conflict. As Europe began rearming in the 1930s, a prevalent argument was that people could have guns and butter. Greater inventories of weaponry would encourage greater prosperity. So, we find Starmer urging the forging of deeper ties between government and industry and “a radical reform of procurement”, one that could only be economically beneficial. This would be the “defence dividend”, another nonsense term the military industrial complex churns out with such disconcerting ease.
The foreword from the Defence Secretary, John Healey, outlines the objectives of the SDR. These include playing a leading role in NATO “with strengthened nuclear, new tech, and updated conventional capabilities”; moving the country to a state of “warfighting readiness”; nourishing the insatiable military industrial Moloch; learning the lessons of Ukraine (“harnessing drones, data and digital warfare”); and adopting a “whole-of-society approach”, a sly if clumsy way of enlisting the civilian populace into the military enterprise.
The review makes 62 recommendations, all accepted by the grateful government. Some £15 billion will go to the warhead programme, supporting 9,000 jobs, while £6 billion will be spent on munitions over the course of the current Parliament. A “New Hybrid Navy” is envisaged, one that will feature Dreadnought and the yet to be realised SSN-AUKUS submarines, alongside “support ships” and “autonomous vessels to patrol the North Atlantic and beyond.” Submarine production is given the most optimistic assessment: one completion every 18 months.
The Royal Air Force is not to miss out, with more F-35s, modernised Typhoons, and the next generation of jets acquired through the Global Combat Air Programme. To his splurge will be added autonomous fighters, enabling global reach.
Mindless assessments are abundant in the Review. The government promises a British army 10 times “more lethal to deter from the land, by combining more people and armoured capability with air defence, communications, AI, software, long-range weapons, and land drone swarms.” Some 7,000 new long-range weapons will be built and a New CyberEM Command established “to defend Britain from daily attacks in the grey zone.” Keeping those merchants of death happy will be a new Defence Exports Office located in the Ministry of Defence, one intended “to drive exports to our allies and growth at home.”
The fanfare of the report, festooned with fripperies for war, conceals the critical problems facing the British armed forces. The ranks are looking increasingly thinned. (In 2010, regular troop numbers stood at 110,000; the current target of 73,000 soldiers is being barely met.) Morale is ebbing. The state of equipment is embarrassingly poor. The UK’s celebrated submarine deterrent is somewhat less formidable in the deterrence department, with its personnel exhausted and subject to unpardonably lengthy stints at sea. The 204-day patrol by HMS Vanguard is a case in point.
Whether the SDR’s recommendations ever fructify remains the hovering question. It’s all very good to make promises about weapons programmes and boosting a country’s readiness to kill, but militaries can be tardy in delivery and faulty in execution. What saves the day may well be standard ineptitude rather than any firebrand conviction in war. To the unready go the spoils.
The post Off to War We Go: Starmer’s Strategic Defence Review first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.