Zelensky’s New Counteroffensive Will Spell Disaster for Ukraine – Senior Russian MoD Source
Sputnik -11.04.2024
Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky told German newspaper Bild on Tuesday that his country already has a new plan for a counteroffensive against Russian forces but needs more advanced Western weapons.
A high-ranking source in the Russian Ministry of Defense has stated that the new counteroffensive will end in complete disaster for Ukraine with the ultimate defeat of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
“Due to such non-trivial approaches in military planning, there is no doubt that the implementation of Zelensky’s new plan for a counteroffensive will end in a complete disaster for Ukraine with the final defeat of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the beginning of the path to peace on Russian terms,” a senior Ministry of Defense source told reporters.
According to the source, “In the absence of volunteers in Ukraine willing to further Zelensky’s madness with their lives and health, the Kiev regime is filling the huge personnel shortage in the Ukrainian Armed Forces with fresh cannon fodder, advancing a law on mass compulsory mobilization of citizens.”
Moreover, Zelensky fully relies on the West to provide the necessary weapons for hundreds of thousands of conscripts. There’s nothing left of their own in Ukraine for a long time. Besides, in the West, they’re already down to stripping their troops naked.
The outcome of President Zelensky’s previous counteroffensive plan in 2023, euphemistically referred to by him as “not so successful,” resulted in the deaths and serious injuries of over 166,000 Ukrainian soldiers, as well as the loss of 789 tanks, 2,400 other armored vehicles, and 132 aircraft.
EU state to give Ukraine fixed share of GDP annually
RT | April 11, 2024
Riga has resolved to supply Ukraine with military aid amounting to $120 million (€112 million) this year and will continue giving the equivalent of 0.25% of Latvia’s GDP in aid annually for the next three years, under a new agreement between the two nations.
The document was signed on Thursday by Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky and Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics on the sidelines of a summit of 13 EU nations in Lithuania, and by Ukraine and Moldova.
Under the agreement on “long-term support and security obligations,” Riga will allocate the same portion of its GDP for military assistance to Kiev in 2024, 2025 and 2026. The aid could come in the form of equipment, weapons or military training, according to the text of the document published by Kiev.
The Baltic nation also pledged to back Ukraine’s NATO and EU aspirations. Zelensky praised the development as a “concrete result” of his trip to Vilnius, host of the 15-nation summit. He also thanked Latvia for its “readiness to help” for as long as necessary. Riga has not commented on the agreement so far.
Earlier, another Baltic State, Estonia, vowed to spend the same share of its GDP on annual aid to Kiev. In January, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas told local media outlet ERR that her nation would spend 0.25% of its GDP on assistance for Ukraine for the next four years. She also called on other Western nations to follow suit.
However, Tallinn and Kiev have not yet signed any deals relating to the initiative. In early March, the Baltic nation said that the two states had begun developing a corresponding agreement. Later that same month, Ukrainian media reported that work on the treaty was “in its final stages.”
Estonia has been one of the most hawkish of Kiev’s backers amid its ongoing conflict with Russia. In March, Tallinn backed French President Emmanuel Macron after he raised the prospect of potentially sending NATO troops to Ukraine, with Kallas saying her country would not rule out deploying forces to Ukrainian territory.
Later in March, a poll showed that public trust in the Kallas-led government of Estonia stood at just 17%, down from 21% in February.
Latvia has taken a more moderate stance. In March, Prime Minister Evika Silina said that NATO was not ready for talks about sending troops to Ukraine and called for the focus to remain on military and financial assistance to Kiev instead.
Hungary refuses to submit to EU’s migration pact
MAGYAR HÍRLAP | April 11, 2024
The European Parliament approved on Wednesday the EU’s controversial New Pact on Migration and Asylum, but Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó was quick to reiterate Budapest’s opposition to its implementation and vowed to maintain existing border restrictions.
“This pact would give the green light for tens and hundreds of thousands of migrants to come to European countries and would extend to Central Europe the problem of Western Europe, which started when they gave up the protection of their own identity, their own culture, and their own society, letting in illegal migrants, creating a double society, and increasing the threat of terrorism,” Szijjártó warned.
“We will not allow this in Central Europe. We Hungarians, no matter what pressure we are under, no matter what kind of migration pact the MEPs vote for, we will not give up on the physical border. We will protect the border,” he added.
The new asylum and migration package was passed largely with votes from lawmakers affiliated with the European People’s Party, the Socialists and Democrats (S&D), and Renew Europe, with MEPs being urged to swallow their criticisms of the scheme and vote for the compromise legislation.
Szijjártó stressed that Hungary has been protecting the external borders of the European Union and the Schengen Area from illegal immigrants for nine years now, for which the government has not only received no support from Brussels, but has also been under constant pressure to abandon the borders and thus the protection of Hungarian culture and identity.
“Today in Brussels, there is a pro-war and pro-migration leadership that is putting pressure and launching attacks against any country that wants to preserve its own security, its own identity, and stand up for peace,” he said.
The minister expressed his regret that the most important issues for the future of Europe are now being debated on ideological grounds, including migration.
“Today, the vast majority of debates are politicized, ideologically based, and dogmatic, and it is difficult to have a normal discussion on important issues,” he said.
Switzerland’s Largest Party Calls for Return to Neutrality in All Conflicts – Statement
Sputnik – 11.04.2024
The Swiss People’s Party (UDC), which holds the majority in parliament, has said on Thursday that the country should return to holding neutrality in all conflicts.
“Switzerland must strictly return to its perpetual and armed neutrality,” the statement said.
Armed neutrality means that Switzerland must be able to protect and defend itself, while the perpetual neutrality means that the country will be credible only if it remains neutral without any exceptions, the UDC explained.
The UDC also demands that all sanctions that have not been adopted by the UN Security Council are lifted, the statement said.
Had UN condemned Israel, there’d be no need for retaliation – Iran
RT | April 11, 2024
Iran feels obligated to punish Israel for its attack on the diplomatic mission in Syria because the UN Security Council has failed in its duty, Tehran’s mission to the world body said on Thursday.
The April 1 airstrike killed seven Iranian officers, including two generals of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force. Israel did not officially claim responsibility for the attack.
“Had the UN Security Council condemned the Zionist regime’s reprehensible act of aggression on our diplomatic premises in Damascus and subsequently brought to justice its perpetrators, the imperative for Iran to punish this rogue regime might have been obviated,” the mission posted on X.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said that Israel “must and shall be punished” for what it did. Israeli and US intelligence has fueled speculation that possible reprisal could entail anything from drone attacks to ballistic missile strikes.
Israel has been bracing for some kind of response for over a week, with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) canceling all leave and starting to spoof GPS signals.
Reports on Wednesday, sourced to anonymous US intelligence officials, spoke of an imminent Iranian strike within 24-48 hours, following the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan and the feast of Eid-al-Fitr. Brent oil futures rose above $90 a barrel in anticipation.
British-based media have reported that Israel has been preparing to attack Iranian nuclear program facilities in case of a missile strike. The US government has declared it would back West Jerusalem against Tehran, but anonymous claims that American jets would join Israeli strikes have not been officially confirmed.
Brits should not be part of the genocide in Gaza
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 11, 2024
How likely is it that the Israeli air force jet which killed three British aid workers in Gaza took off from our base in Cyprus? How much longer can our own government deny that there is a genocide happening each day in Gaza with not only the tacit blessing of the government but in some cases it actually goes the distance and provides the full package of support to murder women and children?
The murky dividing line between the British so-called neutral position on Gaza and the reality of what even our own MPs recently admitted was a genocide which broke a tome of internal laws – seems to be getting more opaque by the day.
The Conservative party is very confused about where it is on the Gaza war and while David Cameron recently admitted that he was “worried” about international law being broken, it is the prime minister who is now in the firing line demanding enquiries about the death of the three nationals killed.
Three of the seven who were killed were British nationals named James Henderson, John Chapman and James Kirby. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak demanded a concrete investigation into the deaths from the Netanyahu government.
But he won’t get concrete investigations from the Netanyahu government as this body has shown the world in recent months that there is no level of depravity which it is not prepared to stoop to as it still continues to shock us each day with video clips on social media breaking new boundaries of poor taste.
Yet IDF soldiers playing with women’s underwear is one thing; it is quite another thing for us to imagine that Britain could be pulled into a massive international law black hole which could go on for years via the ICJ in the Hague.
Surely the deaths of these three should be the right moment to have a re-think on a government level if we can’t have one as a society. Israel has gone over a line on “defending itself” and Britain has been dragged into that quagmire which has made us look like the amateurs we are on the international diplomatic circuit.
But where to draw that line?
While it is commonly viewed as acceptable for British nationals to fight ISIS in Syria and Iraq, or indeed, it was more than alright for young Libyans in our society to fight against the terror cell in Libya (MI6 officers at Heathrow airport wished them luck when they left and then welcomed them back into the country), it has become an unthinkable crime with the gravest of punishments for any UK subjects to be linked to ISIS – the recent appeal case of Shamima Begum losing her right to British citizenship as one good example.
But many of these incidents are illogical and often end up betraying their original ethos. In the case of the Libyans known to MI6 who fought ISIS in Libya, one such young man came back radicalised and carried out the appalling terror attack on the Manchester arena attack at the concert of Ariana Grande in May of 2017. The case was a major own goal for the security services but it did at least shed light on the tawdry subject of how the intelligence services pay terrorists around the world to do our dirty work. Some might argue that Shamima Begum should have a second chance as she was indoctrinated as a minor when she left for Syria to be an ISIS bride. Seems an excessive decision given there is no evidence against her of actual terrorist activities.
The real issue is that we can’t effectively navigate around international wars and decide each one on its merits, in terms of who we allow to get involved in them. If we are not in control of our own government getting too involved in the Gaza slaughter, not to mention citizens, then we can only expect having to pay a very high price for it which will make Boris Johnson’s 40bn euro divorce from the EU look like chicken feed. We will soon no doubt see British doctors shot in cold blood by British soldiers in IDF unforms.
Just recently an Oxford-educated Jewish Brit was fired from his job as working as a spokesperson for Israel’s army. What no one seemed to ask in the UK, is what on earth was Eylon Levy doing there in the first place? It’s a similar story with how British journalist Douglas Murray failed to even raise an eyebrow of disdain when he was planning to be part of a fundraiser on behalf of Israel. Astonishing that in overregulated Britain, a country where we have rules for even how we are allowed to think on social media, that these two gentlemen found no resistance to their wartime activism.
Recently, the French government announced that it would take legal action against French citizens who leave the country and go and fight for the Israeli army in Gaza. Currently it is believed there are almost 100 British subjects who have “volunteered” to fight in Gaza with an IDF uniform. I would argue that it is high time that we follow the French model and stop this practice altogether of allowing our citizens to fight in any overseas wars, anyway unless they are dual nationals and are prepared to surrender their British passports at Heathrow when they leave.
How Big a Factor is Iran in the War on Gaza?
By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | April 10, 2024
In both Ukraine and Gaza, the Joe Biden administration has adopted the dangerous doctrine of war management in which, while not stopping a war diplomatically, it attempts to contain it and prevent it from becoming a wider war into which the United States might get drawn.
This difficult to calibrate policy is being threatened in both theaters.
In the Middle East, two Israeli actions have escalated the calibrated strikes between Israel and Iran, up to the threshold that Iran could absorb without feeling the necessity to respond.
One was an airstrike in southern Lebanon that killed Ali Ahmad Hassin, an important Hezbollah commander. The more significant and volatile one was the April 1 attack on an Iranian embassy compound in Damascus that killed seven Iranian officers, including General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, the top Iranian Quds Force commander in Lebanon and Syria.
Zahedi is the most senior Iranian commander to be killed since war broke out on October 7. But what made this strike escalatory and dangerous is that it targeted an embassy compound under Iranian sovereignty. “When they attack our consulate,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a speech on April 10, “it is as if they have attacked our soil.” Khamenei called the decision to escalate to such an attack a “mistake” that “must be punished.”
A direct response by Iran against Israel could risk the nightmare scenario the United States has sought to avoid through its policy of managing wars. In that scenario, Iran retaliates in kind against Israel and Israel responds, drawing Iran and Hezbollah into the war in a manner that pulls in the Houthis as well as militias in Iraq and Syria. A Houthi source told Responsible Statecraft that “In case a full-scale war was to erupt between Hezbollah and Israel, Yemen and its leadership will stand with the party [Hezbollah] militarily, politically and economically” in a way that could even include “sending foot soldiers.” Such a force aligned against Israel could risk drawing the United States into the war.
In a speech on April 5, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah called the attack on Iran’s Damascus embassy “a turning point” and said that it is “certain that the Iranian response to the [bombing] of the Iranian consulate is coming without a doubt.”
He said, perhaps clearly for the first time, that Hezbollah could intervene in the event of a full-scale Israel-Iran war. “Everyone must prepare themselves, arrange their matters and be careful,” he said, “when the Iranian side responds to the targeting of the Iranian consulate and to the Zionist enemy’s possible response to the Iranian response.”
Nasrallah said that an Iranian response is inevitable and seemed to caution against the size of the Israeli counter-response, saying, not only that “everyone must prepare themselves,” but reminding that Hezbollah has “not used the main weapons nor the main forces and we have not called in the reserves.”
Nasrallah may have been leveraging a fuller Hezbollah entrance into the war to caution Israel and the United States against an even more escalatory Israeli counter-response to the response Iran feels it must deliver. Iran may have gone one step further, leveraging its entrance into the war in an attempt to stop the war altogether.
As Trita Parsi, Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute first reported, an Arab diplomatic source told Jadeh Iran that Iran will respond to the Israeli attack on its embassy with a direct attack on Israel unless the United States orchestrates a ceasefire in Gaza. According to reporting in Jadeh Iran, “Iran has vowed to respond to the assassination of Zahedi.” However, in an “exchange of messages between Tehran and Washington” whose aim is “to contain escalation,” an Iranian proposal “stipulated a ceasefire in Gaza as a price” for not striking Israel in retaliation.
Though a causal line cannot be drawn, it is interesting that, in an interview recorded on April 3, President Joe Biden said, “I think what [Netanyahu’s] doing is a mistake. I don’t agree with his approach,” and then said, “So what I’m calling for is the Israelis to just call for a ceasefire, allow for the next six, eight weeks, a total access to all food and medicine going into the country.”
It is also interesting that the United States is participating in the latest round of ceasefire negotiations in Cairo. In an April 8 press conference, National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby said that CIA Director Bill Burns was in Cairo for the talks. He said that the Biden administration “is doing everything possible to broker a deal that secures the release of all the hostages and leads to an immediate ceasefire. And there’s simply no higher priority.”
CNN went further, reporting that Burns wasn’t just present or participating, but that he “presented a new proposal to try to bridge the gaps in ongoing negotiations to broker a deal to bring about a ceasefire.”
Hezbollah may be responding to the killing of one of their commanders by leveraging the threat of its entering the war to prevent the war from entering an uncontrolled series of escalations. Iran may be responding to the airstrike on its embassy that killed a general by leveraging its entering the war to stop the war altogether. How big a factor Iran is, and how powerful its leverage, may help determine what comes next, how big the Israeli counter-response to Iran’s promised response is and even, perhaps, the prospects of a future ceasefire.
China tells US it won’t be bullied on Russia
RT | April 10, 2024
Relations between Beijing and Moscow are their business alone, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning has said, responding to veiled threats by a senior American diplomat.
US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said on Tuesday that any further Russian advances in Ukraine will “have an impact” on the US-China relationship.
“China and Russia have the right to carry out normal cooperation. Such cooperation should not come under external interference or constraint,” Mao said, when asked about Campbell’s comments at Wednesday’s press briefing. “China will not accept the accusations and pressuring.”
Speaking to the nonprofit National Committee on US-China Relations, Campbell – who recently took over from Victoria Nuland – said that recent Russian gains could “alter the balance of power in Europe in ways that are, frankly, unacceptable” to Washington, and that the State Department has told Beijing as much.
“On Ukraine, China has always taken an objective and just position and played a constructive role in actively promoting peace talks,” Mao told reporters. “If certain countries truly care about peace and want an early end to the crisis, they should reflect on the root cause of the crisis and do something that will actually help bring about peace, rather than deflect the blame to China.”
Beijing has repeatedly resisted US pressure to side with Kiev and join the Washington-led embargo against Moscow.
Campbell’s remarks echoed the statements made by US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen during her visit to China earlier this week. Mao responded by saying that China would “take resolute measures to safeguard our legitimate rights and interests.”
On Wednesday, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman also condemned US travel warnings as “totally unwarranted,” “wrongful” and “groundless,” noting that they have “deterred many Americans” who wanted to visit the country.
China and other members of BRICS have helped Russia mitigate the “illegal policy of unilateral sanctions” by the West, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday, after meeting his counterpart Wang Yi in Beijing.
Moscow’s trade with the rest of the world has surged over the past two years, more than offsetting the embargo by the US and its allies, imposed over the Ukraine conflict.
CDC Demonstrates Failure of Public Health Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic
BY DR. HARVEY RISCH | APRIL 1, 2024
In so many words—and data—CDC has quietly admitted that all of the indignities of the Covid-19 pandemic management have failed: the masks, the distancing, the lockdowns, the closures, especially the vaccines, all of it failed to control the pandemic. It’s not like we didn’t know that all this was going to fail, because we said so as events unfolded early on in 2020, that the public health management of this respiratory virus was almost completely opposite to principles that had been well established through the influenza period, in 2006. The spread of a new virus with replication factor R0 of about 3, with more than one million cases across the country by April 2020, with no potentially virus-sterilizing vaccine in sight for at least several months, almost certainly made this infection eventually endemic and universal.
Covid-19 starts as an annoying, intense, uncomfortable flu-like illness, and for most people, ends uneventfully two-three weeks later. Thus, management of the Covid-19 pandemic should not have relied upon counts of cases or infections, but on numbers of deaths, numbers of people hospitalized or with serious long-term outcomes of the infection, and of serious health, economic and psychological damages caused by the actions and policies made in response to the pandemic, in that order of decreasing priorities. Even though numbers of Covid cases correlate with these severe manifestations, that is not a justification for case numbers to be used as the actionable measure, because Covid-19 infection mortality is estimated to range below 0.1% in the mean across all ages, and post-infection immunity provides a public good in protecting people from severe reinfection outcomes for the great majority who do not get serious “long-Covid” on first infection.
Nevertheless, once the Covid-19 vaccines were rolled out, with a new large wave of the delta strain spreading across the US in July-August 2021 even after eight months of the vaccines taken by half of Americans, instead of admitting policy error that the Covid vaccines do not much control virus spread, our public health administration doubled down, attempting then to compel vaccination on as many more people as could be threatened by mandates. That didn’t work out too well as seen when the large Omicron wave hit the country during December 2021-January 2022 in spite of some 10% more of the population getting vaccinated from September through December of 2021.
A typical mandate example: in September 2021, Washington Governor Jay Inslee issued Emergency Proclamation 21-14.2, requiring Covid-19 vaccination for various groups of state workers. In the proclamation, the stated goal was, “WHEREAS, COVID-19 vaccines are effective in reducing infection and serious disease, and widespread vaccination is the primary means we have as a state to protect everyone … from COVID-19 infections.” That is, the stated goal was to reduce the number of infections.
What the CDC recently reported (see chart below), however, is that by the end of 2023, cumulatively, at least 87% of Americans had anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to and thus had been infected with SARS-CoV-2, this in spite of the mammoth, protracted and booster-repeated vaccination campaign that led to about 90% of Americans taking the shots. My argument is that by making policies based on number of infections a higher priority than ones based on the more serious but less common consequences of both infections and policy damages, the proclaimed goal of the vaccine mandate to reduce spread failed in that 87% of Americans eventually became infected anyway.
In reality, neither vaccine immunity nor post-infection immunity were ever able fully to control the spread of the infection. On August 11, 2022, CDC stated, “Receipt of a primary series alone, in the absence of being up to date with vaccination through receipt of all recommended booster doses, provides minimal protection against infection and transmission (3,6). Being up to date with vaccination provides a transient period of increased protection against infection and transmission after the most recent dose, although protection can wane over time.” Public health pandemic measures that “wane over time” are very unlikely to be useful for control of infection spread, at least without very frequent and impractical revaccinations every few months.
Nevertheless, infection spread per se is not of consequence, because count of infections is not and should not have been the main priority of public health pandemic management. Rather, the consequences of the spread and the negative consequences of the policies invoked should have been the priorities. Our public health agencies chose to prioritize a failed policy of reducing the spread rather than reducing the mortality or the lockdown and school and business closure harms, which led to unnecessary and avoidable damage to millions of lives. We deserved better from our public health institutions.
Harvey A. Risch, MD, PhD
References Cited
1. Inglesby TV, Nuzzo JB, O’Toole T, Henderson DA. Disease mitigation measures in the control of pandemic influenza. Biosecur Bioterror. 2006;4(4):366-75. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/bsp.2006.4.366
2. Ramirez VB. What Is “R-naught”? Gauging Contagious Infections. Healthline, June 14, 2023. https://www.healthline.com/health/r-naught-reproduction-number
3. Worldometer. United States Coronavirus Cases. March 28, 2024. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
4. Gupta S. Was I wrong about the Covid infection fatality rate?. UnHerd, April 5, 2023. https://unherd.com/newsroom/how-wrong-was-i-on-covid-ifr/
5. Inslee J. PROCLAMATION BY THE GOVERNOR AMENDING PROCLAMATIONS 20-05 and 20-14: 21-14.2. COVID-19 VACCINATION REQUIREMENT. Issued September 27, 2021. https://governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/proclamations/21-14.2%20-%20COVID-19%20Vax%20Washington%20Amendment%20(tmp).pdf
6. CDC. 2022-2023 Nationwide COVID-19 Infection- and Vaccination-Induced Antibody Seroprevalence (Blood donations). March 22, 2024. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#nationwide-blood-donor-seroprevalence-2022
7. Our World in Data. Total number of people who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Downloaded March 27, 2024. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/people-vaccinated-covid
8. Massetti GM, Jackson BR, Brooks JT, Perrine CG, Reott E, Hall AJ, Lubar D, Williams IT, Ritchey MD, Patel P, Liburd LC, Mahon BE. Summary of Guidance for Minimizing the Impact of COVID-19 on Individual Persons, Communities, and Health Care Systems – United States, August 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2022;71(33):1057-1064. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7133e1.htm
Dr. Harvey A. Risch MD, PhD is a Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health and a guest contributor for Peter Navarro’s Taking Back Trump’s America
Featured Video
Daniel Davis: U.S. Military Options & War Narrative Collapse
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Excerpt
“Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism!” The Science is Settled. Right?
ICAN urges the IACC to actually study infant vaccines and autism
By Aaron Siri | Injecting Freedom | March 16, 2026
On behalf of ICAN, we just sent a copy of chapter 11 of Vaccines, Amen to the newly appointed members of the federal Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC).
If you haven’t already read this chapter, you can read the whole thing in the attached letter. I trust that after you read it, you’ll see why the statement “vaccines do not cause autism” is a belief, not science!
IACC Public Comment Letter
1.53MB ∙ PDF file
Includes chapter 11 of Vaccines, Amen
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Washington’s War on Cuba Is Older Than You Think
- Daniel Davis: U.S. Military Options & War Narrative Collapse
- Protesters call on Brussels university to cut partnership with Israeli defense-linked firm
- Weapons makers cash in on Trump’s Iran war
- Why Trump’s anti-Iran naval coalition in Strait of Hormuz is doomed to fail
- IRGC says regional energy sites linked to US will be reduced to ashes
- Qatar condemns ‘dangerous’ Israeli attack on gas field
- Iran made ‘unexpectedly substantial’ offer during Geneva talks, US envoys ‘dragged’ Trump into war: Report
- Russia condemns Israel’s attack near Bushehr plant, files complaint
- Russia Strongly Condemns Actions Aimed at Harming Health of Iranian Leadership – Kremlin
- If Americans Knew
- How ignorance, misunderstanding and obfuscation ended Iran nuclear talks
- Israeli media reports grotesque settler attack in West Bank
- UK security adviser attended US-Iran talks and judged deal was within reach
- Tucker Carlson says ‘neocons’ will try to destroy Joe Kent over resignation
- Lebanon death toll exceeds 900, another assassination in Iran, bombing in Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 159
- Trump’s counterterrorism chief, whose own wife was killed by ISIS, quits over Iran War saying Tehran posed ‘no imminent threat’
- Here’s what US could fund instead of Bibi’s war on Iran
- Israel Killed Over a Dozen Lebanese Paramedics in Three Days, Now Claiming That Ambulances Are “Hezbollah” Targets
- War on Iran: These are the heritage sites devastated by US and Israeli attacks
- Four news stories from Israeli media that illustrate Israeli “justice”
- No Tricks Zone
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
- Storing Green Energy To Last Germany 10 Days Would Require A 60-Million Tonne Battery
- New Studies: UK Sea Levels Were 4 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Destructive Green New Deal: German Energy And Metal Group Warns Of Drastic Crisis
- New Study Documents A 20-Year Pause In Arctic Sea Ice Decline – Driven By Internal Variability
- Wake-up Call: Survey Shows Majority Of Germans Now Favor Postponing Climate Targets!
- Televised! Leading German Political Candidate Tells Schoolchildren CO2 Makes Sun Hotter!
- New Study: A Century Warming Of 1.1°C Is ‘Commonplace’ And ‘Not Unusual’ During This Interglacial
- New Study: ‘Internal Noise’ And Volcanic Forcing Can Trigger 10-15°C Warming Within Decades
Aletho News 