The High Human Cost of Syria Sanctions
By Rick Sterling | Dissident Voice | May 17, 2025
On May 13, U.S. President Trump announced he is ordering the removal of sanctions on Syria.
Some of the U.S. sanctions can be quickly terminated because they were issued by Executive Order. Other sanctions, including the extremely damaging 2019 “Caesar” sanctions, were imposed by Congressional legislation and may require Congressional action to terminate.
The Syrian people are joyous at the prospect of the end of their country’s economic nightmare. In 2010, before the conflict began, Syria was a middle-income country with free education, free healthcare, and no national debt. It was largely self-sufficient in energy and food. After fourteen years of war, occupation, and strangulating Western sanctions, the U.N. reports that “nine out of ten Syrians live in poverty and face food insecurity”.
Why Syria Was Targeted
In 2007, the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, General Wesley Clark, publicly revealed that Washington neo-cons had a hit list of seven countries to be overthrown in the wake of 9-11. The list included Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, Iran.
The list is essentially the same as that identified by Benjamin Netanyahu in his 1995 book Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat the International Terrorist Network. The premise of this book is that Palestinian and Lebanese resistance movements are “terrorist,” and any nation that supports them should be overthrown. He targets Iran, Libya, Syria, and Sudan for supporting Palestinian rights and says. “Take away all this state support, and the entire scaffolding of international terrorism will collapse into dust.”
In 2007, Democratic Party leader Nancy Pelosi visited Syria and tried to persuade Assad to end Syria’s support of the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance movements. When Assad would not comply with US and Israeli wishes, Syria was marked for regime change. The Netanyahu and neo-conservative hit list had somehow been adopted by the Western foreign policy establishment. This was confirmed by the former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas. In a 2013 interview he says, “I went to England almost two years before the start of hostilities (2011). I met British officials, some of whom are friends of mine. They confessed, while trying to persuade me, that preparations for something were underway in Syria. This was in England, not the US. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria… This operation goes way back. It was prepared, conceived, and planned for the purpose of overthrowing the Syrian government because … this regime has an anti-Israeli stance.”
Hybrid Warfare against Syria
The overthrow of the Syrian government was not easy. It involved massive funding from seven countries (USA, UK, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE). In the early years, the CIA budget alone was $1 billion per year. The campaign included military, diplomatic, media/information and economic warfare.
The regime change operation began in March 2011. While part of the population was hostile to the Assad dynasty, the majority supported the government and a secular Syria. The opposition came largely from sectarian jihadist elements, including the Muslim Brotherhood. Hundreds of factions and cells were supplied and funded by a host of countries, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the U.S., and the UK. Thousands of foreigners were recruited and provided access to Syria.
The political and media war on the Assad government was intense. Historian Stephen Kinzer wrote, “Coverage of the Syrian war will be remembered as one of the most shameful episodes in the history of the American press.”
Accusations that the Assad government used chemical weapons against civilians were widely broadcast in the West. They were used to justify Western bombing attacks on Syria. Acclaimed U.S. investigative journalist Seymour Hersh uncovered evidence that the chemical weapons attacks were by the opposition, aided by Turkey, NOT by the Assad government. He had to go abroad to have the explosive article published.
The dubious chemical weapons accusations and US driven political corruption of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) are now exposed in a February 2025 book by one of the technical professionals from the OPCW. The book is titled The Syria Scam: An insider look into Chemical Weapons, Geopolitics and the Fog of War.
By the end of 2018, the Syrian army had largely defeated the diverse jihadists. However, instead of conquering or expelling the opposition, Syria allowed them to have a safe haven in Idlib province on the border with Turkey. With Turkey, Iran and Russia seeking to find a solution through the Astana Accords, the conflict was frozen, and the jihadists were allowed to regain strength. Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) became the de facto leader of the opposition factions and the government of Idlib.
The Frozen Conflict
In 2019, the U.S. turned the screws on Syria and escalated attacks on Lebanon. The extreme Caesar sanctions did what they were intended to do. They crushed the Syrian currency and economy, made it impossible to rebuild, and impoverished the vast majority of Syrians. The spreading poverty and inability to counteract it led to widespread demoralization and dissatisfaction. With consummate cynicism, the “Caesar” sanctions were named the “Caesar Civilian Protection Act”.
Meanwhile, in the HTS safe haven of Idlib province on the Turkish border to the north, conditions were very different. Although HTS was designated a terrorist organization in the U.S. and the West, they were helped economically. The HTS fighters were trained and supplied with modern military weaponry, including drones, sophisticated communications equipment, etc.. Very recently, when people from Damascus traveled to Idlib, they were shocked to find new highways, Wi-Fi widely available, and electricity 24 hours a day. Teacher salaries are ten times higher in Idlib than in Damascus.
The Fall of Damascus
With a demoralized population and Syrian army, the Assad government fell in a few weeks, and HTS, led by Ahmad Al Sharaa, took power on 8 December 2024. The new leader of Syria has been greeted and endorsed by the Gulf monarchies and Western countries that paid for and promoted the overthrow in Syria: the UK, Germany, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and of course, Turkey.
Since the change, there have been numerous sectarian massacres of Alawites and Christians along the coast.
There have been attacks on Druze in Damascus. To date, there have been no punishments for the massacres of civilians. A nun reports, “there is no security” in Damascus or elsewhere in Syria.
Meanwhile, Israel has invaded and occupied all of the Golan and parts of southern Syria. They have built military bases in Quneitra and other strategic locations. Israel has carried out a bombing blitzkrieg, destroying all known Syrian ammunition depots. Israel can now fly over any part of Syria at will.
Instead of condemning the Israeli violation of Syrian land and airspace, Ahmad al Sharaa has criticized Iran and Hezbollah. In recent weeks, the new Syrian regime has arrested Palestinian leaders and closed their offices in Damascus. The normalization of relations with the Zionist state has begun.
Lifting Sanctions on Syria
Of course, the sanctions on Syria should be lifted. They never should have been imposed.
U.S. sanctions, known officially as “unilateral coercive measures”, are condemned by the vast majority of world nations. Over 70% of the world’ nations say that US sanctions are “contrary to international law, international humanitarian law, the Charter of the UN and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States.”
Without exaggeration, the West and their allies sponsored terrorism in Syria through Al Qaeda and other fanatical violent terrorist groups. They destroyed a once prosperous and independent nation. With a diverse Syrian population ruled by a sectarian leadership prone to violence, there may be more dark days ahead. While Israel, Turkey and the Gulf monarchies are pleased with the removal of the Assad government, a very heavy price has been paid by the majority of Syrians. And the cost is ongoing.
Trump’s Middle East theatricals were all about putting Bibi in his place
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 16, 2025
Was it Bill Clinton in the White House with Benjamin Netanyahu who, in a press conference, muttered those vulgar and certainly immortal words “who’s the f*** superpower around here?” The question was really about whether the U.S. is running Israel and its activities in the Middle East or it is in fact Israel which is running the U.S.
In recent months in both the Biden administration and the Trump one which followed, many pundits have claimed that Israel is in control of U.S. foreign policy, with some even going as far as speculating that this control even goes beyond the Middle East itself. This cabal of online commentators made so much of how Trump adjusted Bibi’s seat when he sat down in the Oval Office.
We can see now though that this idea of the tail wagging the dog, even if once it might have been true to some extent, has now been dealt with head on by Trump.
His visit to the Middle East and his impressive speech in Saudi Arabia which mocked the bellicose approach to bombing civilians was a direct message to Netanyahu in Israel: America is back.
Trump is literally taking control of U.S. foreign policy in the region and pushing back Israel’s attempts to bomb its way to peace, whether this be in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria or, of course, in Iran.
The move comes at a tough time in the region where the country which seemed to bring about a revolution with the Arab Spring – Tunisia – is falling into an abys as it becomes a leading example of a dictatorship which knows no limits on its brutal suppression.
For Netanyahu, a number of pundits now are pointing to the “clear light” between Trump and him with some claiming that these two leaders aren’t even talking anymore. Trump defied him by talking to Iran, negotiating with the Houthis and now scrapping sanctions in Syria.
Israel cannot even dream of attacking Iran with the U.S. help and so a big part of Netanyahu’s mojo has been removed. And now Trump is calling the shots on aid to Gaza, but stopped short of calling for the Palestinians to have their own state.
Yet his move on Syria is telling. Israel’s plans were always to have head-chopping extremists running the show – which they backed in the Syria civil war – with a constant mayhem present so that they can always take advantage of the chaos while ensuring that the path which once stood between Tehran and Beirut is always blocked.
Trump’s announcement that all sanctions will be lifted will not be welcomed by Bibi who will see the move as a stunt by the Donald to demonstrate who is running the show, although the announcement itself might prove to be premature.
Senator Lindsey Graham states only Congress can change the country’s designation as a “state sponsor of terror” and that Trump must make his case to Congress for that to happen.
“That report has not been received, and Congress has the opportunity to review this action if it chooses. The designation of Syria as a state sponsor of terrorism has tremendous ramifications apart from the sanctions,” Graham stated. The senator stated that he is sure that Congress must be informed before sanctions are lifted, and the legislative body would then “make an informed decision on whether or not it should approve the change in designation.” But he also stated that Israel’s opinion matters and that Congress would consult Netanyahu so it’s fair to say that Syria’s fate is still yet to be decided regardless of whatever Trump has said at the podium in Riyadh. It would appear that Bibi and Trump are set to clash now and we shouldn’t be surprised at what resources Trump will deploy to show Israel’s leader that Trump is both serious about peace in the region but also that Israel must put aside its warmongering – which may well include even supporting a two-state solution, pushed more recently by France and the UK. And then we will see who is the f*** super power and who is the client state. Almost certainly the fate of Syria and Gaza will be used as a rod for Bibi’s back until he succumbs to Trump’s rule.
Russia outlines ceasefire conditions in Istanbul talks with Ukraine
Al Mayadeen | May 17, 2025
The Russian Ministry of Defense has revealed the conditions presented by Moscow during the Istanbul negotiations with Kiev, as shared by the Clash Report platform on social media.
The outlined terms reflect Russia’s position on a potential settlement in Ukraine, with an immediate ceasefire as the primary demand.
Russia’s ceasefire conditions
Neutrality modeled on Austria
The first condition proposed by Moscow is that Ukraine adopt a neutral status, similar to Austria’s model. This would prohibit the presence of foreign troops or non-Ukrainian military bases on Ukrainian territory, effectively excluding NATO or other military alliances from operating within the country.
No foreign troops or bases in Ukraine
Moscow emphasized that neutrality must be comprehensive, with Kiev legally committing to reject the stationing of foreign forces and equipment.
Territorial demands and border recognition
Among the key demands, Russia requires Ukraine to formally recognize its constitutional claims over five regions: Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, and the Crimean Peninsula.
The Russian Defense Ministry stressed that the immediate ceasefire is contingent upon the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from all five regions claimed by Russia.
Renunciation of war compensation claims
Moscow is also seeking a mutual legal renunciation of any compensation claims related to war losses, including economic damage and human casualties.
Protection of Russian-speaking citizens
Russia demands that Ukraine commit to European standards on minority rights, specifically to safeguard the rights of Russian-speaking citizens. In addition, Moscow calls for an end to what it terms “nationalist propaganda” within Ukrainian society.
Russia, Ukraine agreed to exchange ceasefire conditions
Later on Saturday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia and Ukraine have agreed to exchange the lists of ceasefire conditions, noting that the Russian side is working on the matter.
The Russian side has prepared such a list and will hand it over, with exchange with the Ukrainian side,” he told reporters.
At the same time, the work on the resolution of the conflict in Ukraine has just started and it will be continued, he added.
Change in Russian delegation to negotiations not being discussed
Peskov pointed out that a change in the composition of the Russian delegation to the negotiations with Ukraine is not being discussed, emphasizing the importance of implementing the agreements reached during the recent Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul.
The Kremlin spokesperson also asserted that the ongoing negotiations “are and should be held in a closed format.”
Putin-Zelensky meeting possible if certain agreements reached
The Russian diplomat highlighted that a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky is possible if delegations of both countries reach certain agreements.
“Such a meeting as a result of the work of the delegations of the two sides is possible when certain agreements of these delegations are reached,” he said.
Elsewhere, Peskov also said that Moscow considers the candidacy of Kiev’s signatory as the main and fundamental thing when signing documents between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations during the negotiations.
First direct talks since 2022
Russia and Ukraine held their first direct peace talks in over three years on Friday in Istanbul, reaching a key agreement on a large-scale prisoner exchange but making little headway on a ceasefire or broader political settlement.
The 90-minute meeting marked the first direct diplomatic engagement between Moscow and Kiev since 2022 and came amid continued hostilities and mounting international calls for a de-escalation of the conflict.
Both sides emerged from the session expressing cautious openness to further dialogue, though no immediate breakthrough was achieved on halting the war, now in its third year.
Ukraine entered the talks seeking an unconditional ceasefire, hoping to bring relief to areas devastated by the conflict and to ease the humanitarian crisis affecting millions.
Russia, however, dismissed the demand, and both sides instead agreed to present their respective “visions” for a potential ceasefire at a later stage, according to Russian lead negotiator Vladimir Medinsky.
Prisoner exchange agreement reached
The only concrete outcome of the talks was an agreement to exchange 1,000 prisoners from each side. Both delegations hailed the deal as a positive humanitarian step.
Ukrainian Defense Minister and chief negotiator Rustem Umerov described the agreement as a “great result”, noting that it set the stage for further negotiations.
Ukraine pushes for Putin-Zelensky summit
Kiev pushed for a direct meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Georgiy Tykhy stressed that progress would require “a meeting of leaders.”
Russia acknowledged Ukraine’s request for a summit but did not commit. Putin declined to attend the talks in Turkey, instead dispatching a lower-level delegation. Zelensky accused Putin of being “afraid” to engage directly and said Moscow was not approaching the talks “seriously”.
Rubio urges ‘peaceful end to the war’
Ahead of the negotiations, Ukrainian representatives met with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump’s special envoy Keith Kellogg, and national security advisors from Britain, France, and Germany.
State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said Rubio had urged “a peaceful end to the war” and emphasized that “the killing needs to stop.”
Speaking at a European summit in Albania, Zelensky called on the international community to impose further sanctions on Russia if the talks failed to yield results, warning of global consequences should diplomatic efforts collapse.
Preliminary talks in Istanbul are a start… the real show to come is Trump and Putin
Strategic Culture Foundation | May 16, 2025
The talks in Istanbul this week provide a prospect for peace. It bears emphasizing that the three-year proxy war could have been avoided if diplomacy had been permitted by Washington in early 2022 instead of being sabotaged.
Three years on, we have a new president in the White House, and there appears to be a more enlightened policy. Or maybe it’s an implicit admission that the U.S. proxy war agenda is a failure and can’t go on.
In any case, Trump and his envoys are unequivocally saying that they want to stop the bloodshed in Ukraine. That’s a big change from his predecessor, Joe Biden, who vowed to back Ukraine for as long as it takes in a fantastical, reckless pursuit to strategically defeat Russia.
It was the Biden administration, along with the British government, that intervened to scupper nascent peace talks in March 2022 between Russia and Ukraine for a peace deal. Washington and London coaxed the Kiev regime to fight on with promises of more weapons.
The result: three more years of intense conflict, which have caused millions of casualties, mainly on the Ukrainian side. The proxy war has come perilously close to provoking an all-out world war between nuclear powers.
Trump appears to want peace. If he is genuine in that intention, then the American president will have to address the root causes of the conflict. Russia has consistently explained the deeper causes of NATO aggression and the militarization of Ukraine as a hostile bridgehead on its borders since the CIA-orchestrated coup in Kiev in 2014.
The American president has shown petulance at times, urging Ukraine and Russia to get down to a peace deal. He has even threatened Russia with more (futile) economic sanctions. What the Trump administration needs to understand is that resolving deep causes of conflict requires commensurate negotiations and a realistic commitment to lasting geopolitical security arrangements.
The talks in Istanbul this week to explore a peaceful resolution were initiated by Russian President Vladimir Putin in an announcement last week.
Russia’s delegation was led by Putin’s senior aide, Vladimir Medinsky. That speaks of consistency and commitment. Medinsky led the peace talks three years ago in Istanbul, which were then sabotaged in April 2022 by the American and British intervention.
This week, the Russian side held preliminary bilateral talks with the Americans led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Subsequently, the Russian and Ukrainian delegates engaged in a meeting convened by Turkish diplomats. It was the first direct encounter between Russian and Ukrainian officials since the March 2022 negotiations.
It is not clear if follow-up meetings will take place. But at least one might say that talks took place.
The key to any prospect of ending the conflict depends on Washington demonstrating the requisite commitment. Trump said this week again that he would like to hold a summit with Putin as “soon as possible.” The Kremlin has also said that a formal presidential meeting is desirable.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov cautioned that there must first be adequate preparation for meaningful discussions. That implies that any top-level meeting must be cognizant of Russia’s demands for a resolution, one that deals with the historic, systematic causes of the proxy war.
Western politicians and media denying Russia’s perspective are delusional or duplicitous. To claim that the conflict is all about “unprovoked Russian aggression” against “democratic Ukraine” and “Russian expansionism” towards Europe is a travesty. It’s a bogus narrative that precludes peaceful resolution. Trump seems to be aware of that. But he needs to go beyond a superficial “peace broker” charade.
If Trump wants a gimmicky big summit with Putin for PR ratings, as his tour of the Middle East this week illustrates his egotistical wont, he can forget it.
The meetings this week in Turkey can be seen as preliminary technical discussions.
However, President Trump needs to take the lead. Appropriately, a peaceful resolution will only happen at the senior level of the U.S. and Russian governments. That’s because the United States is the primary protagonist in the proxy war against Russia.
It is clear from the antics and theatrics of the Kiev regime this week that there is no prospect of a meaningful, lasting peace if negotiations are confined to that level. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky does not even have constitutional legitimacy after cancelling elections last year. His erratic behavior of grandstanding and mudslinging at the Russian diplomatic efforts proves that he is not capable of substantive negotiations.
The European leaders are also an impediment to achieving an authentic peace settlement. Even before delegations met this week in Istanbul, various non-entity European politicians were disparaging Russia’s diplomatic initiative. Macron, Starmer, Merz, Von der Leyen and Kallas were desperately trying to insult the Russian president, indulging Zelensky’s PR stunt demanding a face-to-face meeting with Putin in Istanbul.
The European Union also timed an announcement this week to double its supply of heavy-calibre munitions to Ukraine. Another provocation.
France’s Macron sought to impose a precondition for the talks by demanding a 30-day ceasefire. That was a flagrant attempt to sabotage the negotiations before they even started.
These people are not honest about ending the worst war in Europe since the end of World War Two. Disgracefully, they want the bloodshed to continue for their political survival and gratifying their obsessive Russophobic fantasies.
If Trump wants to end NATO’s proxy war against Russia, he will have to sideline the European naysayers and the Kiev puppet regime. Their involvement is counterproductive. One suspects that Trump already knows that.
An American and Russian agreement at the highest level is the only way to bring the war to an end. It is no use for the American side pretending that they are mere peace brokers. They are the main protagonist, not the European lapdogs nor the Kiev regime.
Preliminary talks are all very well. But they are just that. Preliminary. If the talks have any chance of succeeding, the American side must take responsibility for the war it started and fueled.
US House Judiciary Committee Warns EU and Poland’s Tusk Government Over Censorship Threat to US Free Speech
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | May 15, 2025
The US House Judiciary Committee is sounding the alarm over an escalating threat to free expression, warning that censorship efforts by Poland’s current government, coupled with the European Union’s regulatory framework, could extend their reach into American speech online.
In a letter addressed to EU Commissioner for Justice and Rule of Law Michael McGrath, Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and four congressional colleagues requested a briefing on how the EU plans to respond to what they described as disturbing developments under Prime Minister Donald Tusk.
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
Since coming to power in December 2023, Tusk’s government has launched legal actions against members of the conservative Law and Justice (PiS) party.
These efforts include removing the legal immunity of PiS leader Jarosław Kaczyński, pressing forward with criminal charges that appear politically motivated, and subjecting detainees to harsh treatment.
One former aide denied access to her attorney during questioning, reportedly suffered a fatal heart attack shortly after. Another case involved the arrest and alleged mistreatment of Father Michał Olszewski, a Catholic priest tied to the former justice minister.
The Judiciary Committee points to these incidents as evidence of a political strategy designed to suppress opposition speech ahead of Poland’s 2025 presidential election.
According to the letter, the pattern includes targeting conservative activists and media outlets. A key example is the Polish government’s threat to revoke the license of Telewizja Republika, a station known for criticizing the Tusk administration.
Lawmakers expressed concern that these actions are taking place without pushback from EU institutions. They argue that the European Commission, which was quick to condemn the previous PiS-led government for its alleged violations of democratic norms, has so far failed to hold Tusk’s coalition to the same standard. The result, the committee says, is a perceived double standard that undermines the EU’s credibility and emboldens further censorship.
Of particular concern is the potential for EU censorship laws to ripple beyond Europe. The Digital Services Act, which requires platforms to remove “misleading or deceptive content,” may end up influencing global content moderation practices. Because platforms typically apply one uniform set of rules, the DSA could effectively establish a worldwide censorship template. The committee warned that this might restrict Americans’ speech online as companies adjust to foreign legal requirements.
Supporting this concern, the committee cited documentation showing that Poland’s Ministry of Digital Affairs, through the National Research Institute, requested the removal of TikTok videos that criticized electric vehicles. The content in question was not overtly political, but the request demonstrates, in the committee’s view, a willingness to use regulatory power to suppress opinions the government dislikes.
This pattern of behavior, if left unchecked, could allow foreign governments to influence global information flows. The letter emphasized that such interference is unacceptable, particularly when it has the potential to impact the speech of American citizens. The concern is not merely theoretical; as the letter points out, the Tusk government accused foreign actors of electoral interference through online ads just one day after the Committee’s communication to the EU.
The letter was signed by Chairman Jim Jordan, Subcommittee Chairman Darrell Issa, and Representatives Chris Smith, Warren Davidson, and Andy Harris. Their message to Brussels is direct: silence in the face of repression is not neutrality. If left unchallenged, the EU’s regulatory apparatus and inaction on political censorship risk becoming tools for silencing voices far beyond Europe’s borders.
Russia, Ukraine prepare for peace by getting ready for war
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | May 17, 2025
May 16 will stand out as a turning point, for good or bad, in the Ukraine conflict. The main thing is, Russia-Ukraine ‘peace talks’ have resumed in Istanbul and will hopefully carry forward the threads of the draft agreement negotiated in March 2022. But caveats must be added. The fact that it took Turkish President Recep Erdogan three hours to persuade Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to green light the negotiations speaks for itself.
On the other hand, Zelensky showed remarkable flexibility by violating his own presidential decree banning any such negotiations on the part of Ukrainian officials other than himself with Russian officials. Turkey showed again that it remains a significant influencer in the Ukraine conflict.
The result was an extraordinary spectacle. Reports mention that the Russian delegation had not one but three meetings, in fact — with a Turkish-American team followed by a Turkish-American-Ukrainian team and culminating in an exclusive huddle with the Ukrainian team.
The ‘bilateral’ Russian-Ukrainian negotiations reportedly touched on the topics of ceasefire options in the Ukraine conflict; a major prisoner exchange; a potential meeting between Zelensky and Russian president Vladimir Putin; an agreement in principle to hold a follow-up meeting and so on.
The Ukrainian media reported that the Russian side repeated their demands for Kiev’s forces to vacate the remaining parts of the four eastern and southern regions that Moscow has annexed. Ukraine of course rejected the demand. Indeed, these talking points at the Istanbul meeting would have been a plateful for a meeting that lasted only for an hour and forty minutes.
Turkiye has joined as a stakeholder, as the pacemaking in Ukraine provides an opportunity for it to work closely with the US, which could have positive fallouts for the two main discords that put strains on it in the recent years — Syria and the Kurdish problem. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has taken a historic decision on May 12 to give up armed struggle and dissolve itself, which opens the possibility to end decades of political violence in Turkiye. The ‘peacemaker president’ in the White House can help Ankara to mediate a Kurdish settlement.
Turkiye has promoted the US’ normalisation with the Islamist government in Damascus. Trump’s meeting with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa in Riyadh on Wednesday alongside the lifting of Washington’s sanctions against Syria, which shake up the geopolitics of the Middle East, will bring Turkiye and the US on the same page.
Notably, all this is happening against the backdrop of a ‘westernist’ tilt in the Turkish foreign policies during the past year following Erdogan’s re-election as president. Traditionally, the equations between Trump and Erdogan remained cordial and friendly. Suffice to say, Trump can expect Erdogan’s cooperation in the peacemaking in Ukraine talks, where the Turkish leader’s excellent equations with Zelensky are an added factor, which was on display in Ankara yesterday.
Erdogan held Zelensky’s hand through thick and thin. The high-tech Turkish drones supplied to Ukraine, which are to be manufactured locally, will significantly boost Kiev’s military capability. Turkiye, as the inheritor of the Ottoman legacy, is home away from home for an influential Tatar community. Tatar language is an Oghuz language descended from Ottoman Turkish. In fact, Turkey has refused to recognise Crimea as part of Russia. Ukrainian Defence Minister, a close associate of Zelensky, is an ethnic Tatar.
Moscow understands all this. Putin hastened to put behind the friction in Russo-Turkish relations in the downstream of the regime change in Syria last December to reach out to Erdogan on May 11 to discuss the direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul. The Kremlin readout said Erdogan “expressed his full support for Russia’s proposal and emphasised his willingness to provide a venue for the talks in Istanbul. The Turkish side will offer all possible assistance in organising and holding talks aimed at achieving sustainable peace… The leaders have also expressed mutual interest in further expanding the bilateral ties in trade and investment and, in particular, implementing joint strategic projects in energy.”
Erdogan is a difficult interlocutor to handle but Putin has been largely successful in keeping the relationship stable and (mostly) predictable. The Turkish factor can be a game changer if at some point Zelensky ceases to be the captive of the CoW4 (the four European musketeers of the so-called ‘coalition of the willing’ — Britain, France, Germany and Poland.) Trust Erdogan to shift gears to an activist role.
On the whole, Russia has scored a diplomatic victory insofar as its initiative on ‘Ukraine direct talks without preconditions’ has found acceptability with Trump. The format of yesterday’s talks implied a resumption of the Russian-Ukrainian talks in Istanbul in 2022. Putin manoeuvred brilliantly to scatter the game plan of the CoW4 which strove to pull aside Trump incrementally and become party to continuing the war in Ukraine.
The CoW4 felt encouraged lately by a certain perception that Trump may impose draconian sanctions if Russia lacked sincerity of purpose. But so far, Trump has remained engaged with Putin. Last week, Trump stated that a breakthrough in the Ukraine conflict will be possible only out of a summit between him and Putin. Suffice to say, the dramatic happenings in Turkey yesterday signify a setback to the CoW4.
The leader of the Russian delegation and presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky (who also headed the Russian team at the talks in Istanbul in 2022) has told the media that Moscow is “satisfied” with the results of the talks and is ready to “resume contacts” with Kiev.
That said, Moscow will not let down its guard either. Putin held a briefing session on May 15 with the permanent members of the Security Council, Russia’s highest policymaking body, to deliberate on the upcoming Istanbul talks, which was attended by the members of the Russian negotiating group. The Kremlin readout stated that Putin “set tasks and charted the negotiating position” of the Russian delegation in Istanbul.
On the other hand, the Kremlin also asserted simultaneously that no matter the talks in Istanbul, Russia’s military operations in Ukraine shall continue. With immaculate timing, Putin chose May 15 to also make the stunning announcement of the appointment of Colonel-General Andrey Mordvichev (nicknamed “General Breakthrough”) as the Commander of the Russian Ground Forces.
Gen. Mordvichev has a tough reputation as the commander of the 8th Guards Combined Arms Army of Russia’s Southern Military District, which was heavily involved in the devastating 2022 siege of Mariupol, and in the Battle of Avdiivka in 2023-2024, a turning point in the conflict in Ukraine. Gen. Mordvichev’s appointment comes amidst reports claiming that Russia is preparing to launch a major new offensive in Ukraine. Ukraine claims that over 600,000 Russian troops are presently deployed in Ukraine.
But then, Zelensky is also moving on a dual track. Ukraine’s Finance Minister Sergeii Marchenko, 43, told a high-level panel at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development annual meeting on March 14 in London, “To prepare for peace, you have to get ready for war. We have to plan. You may call me a cynic, but actually I’m just a Finance Minister.”
Germany: Police block activists from leaving country to attend Remigration Summit in Italy in major crackdown
Remix News | May 16, 2025
German activists leaving the airport for the Remigration Summit taking place in Milan on Saturday were stopped and detained at the airport, interrogated for hours, and issued with an exit ban from leaving the country.
The summit will be attended by well-known activists from across Europe, such as the Austrian author Martin Sellner, Dutch commentator Eva Vlaardingerbroek, and Belgian activist Dries Van Langenhove.
The latter currently faces a potential prison sentence for memes that were posted in a group chat seven years ago. However, not only are German police now cracking down on activists, even leaving the country for the event, but Italian police are also showing up at the hotels of activists attending the event.
Sellner has been putting out a video and posting updates on X on the various actions taken against activists involved in the summit.
“I know them, they are great guys, Generation Identity activists, who have been detained for hours by the German police. They were arrested at the airport in Munich. Two of them were arrested on the plane, where they tried to enter a plane to Milan, Italy, to attend a conference about remigration. And the German state now bans them from exiting Germany for several days until the conference is over. Bans them from exiting. They banned me from entering, and then they threw me out of several cities and basically crushed my readings, and now they’re banning their own citizens, EU citizens from exiting.”
Sellner says that the German government’s reasoning is “crazy,” arguing that allowing the activists to leave “would be detrimental to the German state, the reputation of the German state, if they would go outside and take part in those events, because this would look like the German state endorses those events.”
Sellner argues that the German state is headed into dark territory, mimicking the GDR, communist East Germany, with this exit ban.
“No, you are our property, and it’s our property, our citizens. If you go there, it’s bad for our reputation. That’s why we lock you in like nasty little children. The German state is going full GDR. That’s exactly what the GDR did with the Berlin Wall. They didn’t let their own citizens leave the country, and that’s the case right now. It would be now punishable by law if they try to exit to Italy, Austria, and Switzerland. They’re banned from going to Switzerland, Austria, and Italy for a certain amount of days. The German state can extend this at will.
Of course, they will take immediate legal measures. They have very good lawyers. You need good lawyers in Germany. If you’re an activist, if you’re posting memes on X, you need an excellent lawyer by now. But it’s really crazy. These laws exist, but they might be lying dormant for a while and now the German state is shutting down, switching off the democracy simulation, and moving up and activating the totalitarian mode, the GDR mode.
As for the German activists, six men and two women who were stopped at the airport, Sellner stated they were released after hours of interrogation. They must now report to the police station twice a day.
“Eight young Germans are now banned from LEAVING Germany. If they try it, they commit a crime. They have to check in daily at their local police station. If not, they have to pay an extra fine. The democracy simulation is shutting down,” wrote Sellner.
The explanation they were given for the exit ban was also delivered to them in written form. It reads:
“In the event of an exit from German right-wing extremists, there is a considerable risk of damage to the reputation of the Federal Republic of Germany due to the stays of German right-wing extremists who promote the transnational networking of the right-wing extremist scene, actively promote the inhuman ideology and give it more scope, thus harbors the risk of radicalization of other people and their trips for the development of financial resources and the like.”
Freilich also writes that “it is also due to the history of Germany that the arrival of the activist concerned gives the international impression that the Federal Republic of Germany supports the right-wing extremist ideas openly spread at the event or at least does not adequately address them.”
Essentially, the German state is attempting to make the argument that allowing the activists to attend the summit would be the equivalent of endorsing their beliefs and harming the reputation of Germany. If that is the standard, then apparently it could be argued that any activists Germany does not detain in the future for any conference is a sign that the German state officially endorses the contents of that conference? Such reasoning reaches into the realms of the absurd.
The exit ban on the activists not only applies to Italy, but also to countries like Switzerland and Austria, and will be in effect until May 17, just a minute before midnight.
The activists also shared photos of the last moments they had before they were detained at the airport.
Although Sellner says the Italian police are not involved in this travel ban, and it is the German police at fault, he recently also posted an update on X, noting that an activist staying in Milan was also visited by police and questioned at his hotel.
Sellner says that booking the Remigration Summit has been fraught with difficulties, as vendors and hotels have been continuously canceling on organizers, likely due to pressure from activists. Antifa groups are also active and may try to disrupt the conference, or even more importantly, physically attack those involved.
BLOOD CLOTS IN 5 MINUTES? CELL PHONE RADIATION UNDER THE MICROSCOPE
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | May 15, 2025
Jefferey Jaxen breaks down a stunning ultrasound study showing real-time blood changes after just 5 minutes of smartphone exposure. With links to fertility issues, cancer, and hormonal disruption, the data raises urgent questions about the health impacts of EMF and why government agencies are choosing not to act.
Hep B Vaccines Come With High Risk, Little Benefit — Why Does CDC Recommend Them for Every Newborn?
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | May 13, 2025
As public concern grows over the large and growing number of shots on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) childhood immunization schedule, several critics are sounding the alarm about one shot in particular — the hepatitis B (Hep B) vaccine.
Among the 76 vaccine doses on the schedule, the CDC recommends that every infant born in the U.S. get their first dose of the Hep B vaccine on the day they are born. Studies show that more than 90% of infants typically do so.
By age 24 months, most of those infants have received the recommended three doses of the vaccine.
Hepatitis B is a liver disease caused by the hepatitis B virus (HBV), which can range from a mild, short-term, acute illness lasting a few weeks to a serious, long-term, chronic infection.
The virus is transmitted through bodily fluids, most often via intimate contact such as sex or sharing intravenous (IV) drug equipment. Being an IV drug user is the most common risk factor for the disease.
Infected pregnant mothers can also pass the disease to their infants, but relatively few do — about 25,000 pregnant women per year, or 0.69%, have Hep B, and about 1,000 of them pass it to their babies, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The CDC says, “almost all children and older adults infected with acute HBV recover completely with no lasting liver damage.”
Women can be tested for the disease to see if their babies would benefit from vaccination, but that’s not what the CDC recommends.
Instead, today the Hep B vaccine is required for children to attend either childcare, school, or both, in every state except Alabama.
School-age children don’t fit the profile of those at risk for contracting Hepatitis B. Also, the CDC has no evidence that Hepatitis B has ever been transmitted in a school setting, according to a records search posted on Substack by attorney Aaron Siri, who made the request.
Siri argues the Hep B mandate is about profit, not about protecting children from a contagious disease.
“The Hepatitis B vaccine is a case study in agency capture,” Siri wrote. All children would not be required to take the shot, he said “if pharma didn’t stand to earn billions through a wider mandate of this product.”
The Hep B vaccine market, valued at more than $8 billion in 2023, is projected to grow to over $13 billion by 2032, with the U.S. making up the largest market for the vaccine, Fortune Business Insights reported.
Why did the Hep B vaccine get added to the childhood schedule?
In a Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law and Ethics article, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) CEO Mary Holland questioned the constitutionality of mandating the Hep B vaccine for children to access education, especially given that CDC data show that transmission is unlikely through routine contact among children.
She said the CDC’s position on mass vaccination for children changed after the pharmaceutical companies got legal protection from liability.
When the CDC vaccine advisory committee made its first Hep B vaccine recommendation in 1982, the agency observed that the U.S. was a place of “low HBV prevalence.” CDC officials recommended the shot only for people at higher risk, including healthcare workers, people likely to be in sexual or “needle stick” contact with an infected person and infants born to mothers infected with the virus.
In 1988, the committee called for all pregnant mothers to be screened to determine if vaccination would be necessary. At that time, it was estimated that 16,500 mothers per year were infected and that without vaccination, an estimated 3,500 infants would become chronic carriers.
Later that year, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), created by the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, was established. The law protects vaccine makers from liability for injuries related to vaccines on the CDC’s childhood schedule, and the VICP is meant to provide an alternative means of compensating people who suffer “accidental injury or death” from taking those vaccines.
By 1991, the CDC had begun describing HBV risks differently, stating that the consequences of infection were “major health problems” in the U.S. — even though rates had not changed and the number of children infected with HBV was just a few hundred.
The CDC’s advisory committee concluded that because it was challenging to vaccinate those at risk for HBV, mass immunization against the virus was “the most effective means of preventing HBV infection and its consequences.”
The committee recommended all infants be vaccinated, regardless of their mothers’ hepatitis B status, and the Hep B vaccine was added to the childhood immunization schedule.
Dangers of the Hep B vaccine
Then and now, there are two Hep B vaccines licensed for infants at birth: Merck’s Recombivax HB and GSK’s Engerix-B. Both are made using a genetic engineering technology that was new when the vaccines were developed.
The clinical trials for both brands included only a small number of children, and researchers followed up on safety monitoring with infants for only four or five days in the different trials.
No medium or long-term studies were done, no comparisons were made between vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects, and the vaccines were administered only to healthy babies.
According to the Recombivax HB label, during clinical trials, 434 doses of the drug were administered to 147 healthy infants and children up to age 10, who were each monitored for five days after each dose. During those five days, 10% of infants experienced systemic reactions, including “irritability, fever (≥101°F oral equivalent), diarrhea, fatigue/weakness, diminished appetite, and rhinitis.”
Among the much larger group of 1,252 healthy adults, reactions were wide-ranging and sometimes serious. They included injection site issues and fevers, upper respiratory infections, influenza, body pain, insomnia and hypotension.
The Engerix-B package insert doesn’t specify how many babies were included in its clinical trials. However, it does indicate the trial subjects were monitored for only four days. The insert lists similar adverse events to those of Recombivax HB.
Post-marketing studies, which collect voluntary reports of adverse effects registered in places like the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the Vaccine Safety Datalink, or with the vaccine makers, showed many more serious side effects reported for both versions of the Hep B vaccine.
Examples include immune system disorders like systemic lupus erythematosus, thrombocytopenia, Guillain-barré syndrome, multiple sclerosis, transverse myelitis, febrile seizure, Bell’s Palsy, herpes zoster, encephalitis, and many more.
Premature infants who take either Hep B vaccine have also experienced sleep apnea, which the labels warn about.
The inserts indicate it is impossible to determine whether the vaccine caused any of the reported events. Heritage Foundation Policy Analyst Catherine Pakaluk, Ph.D., criticized this approach to identifying adverse effects.
She wrote:
“To the extent that clinical trial data are insufficient to draw robust safety conclusions, patients are effectively used as test subjects post-licensure, but without knowledge that they are part of the test and without hope that their own adverse experiences will be scientifically useful as they would be in the case of a controlled trial. Voluntary adverse event data are suitable for identifying safety signals, but not for drawing conclusions about real risks.
The available data comes mostly from clinical trials that had small sample sizes, no control groups, and only a few days of follow-up, she added. The only other data source is post-licensure data, “which suffer from a lack of statistical usefulness.”
Peer-reviewed research also links the Engerix B vaccine to CNS inflammatory demyelination — a group of diseases in which the immune system attacks and damages the myelin sheath that protects the brain and spinal cord — namely multiple sclerosis in children.
Studies of children in the U.S. also linked the Hep B vaccine to arthritis, acute ear infections and sore throats. And a 2008 study associated Hep B vaccination of male newborns with autism diagnoses at three times the normal rate.
In a recent presentation about the Hep B vaccine, CHD science team member Heather Ray highlighted other safety concerns. For example, Ray noted that vaccine dosage is the same for newborn infants as it is for adults. Vaccine dosage doesn’t vary for a 7-pound infant or a 210-pound linebacker, she said.
The dose exposes babies to both the genetically engineered antigen and the aluminum adjuvant.
“Aluminum is a heavy metal that’s a proven neurotoxin and can cross the blood-brain barrier,” Ray said. “It has scientifically been shown to cause autism, asthma, autoimmune diseases and other horrendous neurological diseases and chronic illnesses.”
Infants’ organ membrane barriers are more permeable than those of adults, making them more susceptible to aluminum.
Until 2001, the Hep B vaccines also contained 25 micrograms of the mercury-containing preservative thimerosal.
Since the VAERS was established in 1990, there have been 18,950 adverse events reported in children under age 2 following Hep B vaccination, and 31,082 reports in children under age 17.
VAERS has been estimated to contain approximately 1% of adverse events, according to David Kessler, former head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Critics say Hep B vaccine poses many risks and no benefits for most babies
In terms of efficacy, the Hep B vaccine package inserts say the vaccine has been shown to produce antibodies to hepatitis B, and “appears to have protected infants whose mothers tested positive for hepatitis B antigens.”
Pakaluk wrote, “Therefore, we can conclude that the vaccine provides a robust antibody response to a disease to which they are not regularly exposed, and how long that antibody response lasts is unknown. In other words, for children not exposed to hepatitis B, there is no known benefit.”
Substack writer J.B. Handley, who has called for the elimination of the vaccine from the childhood schedule, wrote, “It’s a nearly useless vaccine, unless you are in the tiny minority of babies who have a mother with Hepatitis B.”
The Informed Consent Action Network, in 2020, filed a petition with the FDA demanding that the licensure of the Hep B vaccines be revoked or suspended until their safety was determined in a properly designed clinical trial.
CHD Senior Research Scientist Karl Jablonowski said,
“The CDC immunization schedule was simply not written for most people. The childhood Hep B recommendation is a prominent example. It is a pathogen that is primarily transmitted between humans through dirty needles and unprotected sex.
“In rare circumstances, it may be transmitted between people who live together — if one of them has an active infection — by things like shaving razors. Most children have zero risk factors and zero exposure. Most children should not be vaccinated against hepatitis B.”
Watch Heather Ray’s Hep B presentation here.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel’s Gaza genocide
MEMO | May 16, 2025
In the latest example of escalating repression against Palestine solidarity activism on US campuses, New York University (NYU) has withheld the diploma of student speaker Logan Rozos after he used his commencement address to denounce Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza and the US’s complicity.
Rozos, graduating from NYU’s Gallatin School of Individualised Study, told his fellow students on Wednesday: “The only thing that is appropriate to say in this time and to a group this large is a recognition of the atrocities currently happening in Palestine.”
In his speech, Rozos condemned the genocide “supported politically and militarily by the United States, paid for by our tax dollars and livestreamed to our phones for the past 18 months.” He further stated: “I do not wish to speak only to my own politics today, but to speak for all people of conscience, and all people who feel the moral injury of this atrocity.”
Razos’s remarks were met with widespread applause from students. NYU swiftly responded by issuing a statement denouncing Rozos, accusing him of violating university rules and announcing it would withhold his diploma pending disciplinary action.
The university also removed Rozos’s student profile from its website, adding to concerns about institutional retaliation.
This incident comes amid a wider crackdown on free speech and pro-Palestinian activism at US universities. NYU, like many elite institutions, has adopted the highly controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism, which conflates political opposition to Zionism and Israel’s colonial violence with anti-Jewish hatred. Critics, including human rights scholars and Jewish groups, warn that such measures are being weaponised to suppress Palestinian advocacy and silence dissenting voices.
Rozos’s speech, and NYU’s reaction, follows a pattern of repression at the university. Over the past year, NYU administrators have called police to disperse peaceful encampments and arrested dozens of students and faculty protesting Israel’s war on Gaza. The university has also updated its conduct guidelines to classify phrases such as “Zionist” as discriminatory, explicitly erasing the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.
In December 2024, NYU declared two tenured professors, Andrew Ross and Sonya Posmentier, “persona non grata” after they joined a sit-in demanding the university divest from companies profiting from Israel’s war crimes in Gaza. Months later, NYU cancelled a talk by Doctors Without Borders’ former president Dr Joanne Liu, deeming her slides on Gaza civilian casualties potentially “anti-Semitic.”
Human rights advocates and academic freedom organisations have condemned these actions, warning that universities like NYU are sacrificing core principles of free speech and academic independence under pressure from pro-Israel donors, political figures, and lobby groups.
Rozos’s speech, which framed Israel’s war on Gaza as a genocide livestreamed in real time, resonates with warnings from genocide scholars, legal experts and international bodies that Israel’s actions meet the legal definition of genocide. Despite this, Rozos now faces institutional reprisals for expressing what many human rights defenders see as an urgent moral truth.
Israel kills over 100 Palestinians in northern Gaza attacks
Bodies of Palestinians, who lost their lives after Israeli attacks, are brought to Indonesia Hospital in Gaza City, Gaza on May 16, 2025. [Abdalhkem Abu Riash – Anadolu Agency]
MEMO | May 16, 2025
More than 100 Palestinians were killed in several attacks carried out by the Israeli occupation army in northern Gaza at daybreak today.
Medical sources told Anadolu that the Israeli occupation army carried out “horrific massacres” targeting civilians.
They reported several casualties when the Israeli army targeted an ambulance in the town of Jabalia in northern Gaza, the latest in a series of attacks on medics and healthcare facilities.
“Since early Friday, rescue teams have recovered 50 bodies from under the rubble following Israeli air strikes on 11 residential homes in northern Gaza,” Gaza Civil Defence spokesman Mahmoud Basal said.
He added that “over 50 others are still trapped beneath the debris.”
He warned that the actual death toll is likely much higher, as emergency crews have been unable to reach several areas due to the ongoing bombardment across the enclave.
Basal added that Israeli occupation forces not only struck densely populated homes but also targeted paramedics attempting to rescue victims and retrieve bodies in the aftermath of the attacks.
“There are bodies still lying in the streets of Beit Lahia, Jabalia, Jabalia refugee camp, and Beit Hanoun,” he said. “Rescue teams cannot access them because of the intensity of the strikes.”
The Israeli army has pursued a brutal offensive on the Gaza Strip since October 2023, killing more than 53,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children.
Declassified files expose secret Western support for Israeli assassinations
MEMO | May 16, 2025
Newly declassified documents have revealed that Western intelligence services secretly collaborated with Israel’s Mossad in the 1970s, providing critical intelligence that enabled the assassination of Palestinian activists across Europe, without any parliamentary oversight or democratic scrutiny. The revelation has fuelled concerns that similar clandestine intelligence-sharing arrangements are likely facilitating Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza today.
According to a detailed exposé by the Guardian, a covert network known as “Kilowatt”—comprising at least 18 Western intelligence agencies including those of the UK, US, France, and West Germany, was established in 1971 to share sensitive intelligence on Palestinian groups. The information shared included personal details, safe house locations, and vehicle registrations of Palestinian individuals who were subsequently targeted by Mossad hit squads.
Dr Aviva Guttmann, the historian who uncovered the encrypted cables in Swiss archives, confirmed that the intelligence shared was granular and critical to Israel’s covert killings, many of which took place in Paris, Rome, Athens, and Nicosia. “At the very beginning, perhaps officials were unaware of the extrajudicial assassinations, but later, they certainly knew and continued sharing intelligence,” Guttmann told the Guardian.
This covert support, the paper reported, operated entirely beyond the purview of elected officials, and would likely have triggered public outrage had it been exposed at the time. Indeed, some of those assassinated were publicly disputed as innocent, such as Wael Zwaiter, a Palestinian intellectual gunned down in Rome in 1972, whom Israel accused of being linked to the Black September Organisation. Evidence supporting such claims was largely based on intelligence fed through the Kilowatt system.
The revelations, while historical, have sparked urgent comparisons to the present day, where Israel is prosecuting what rights experts and genocide scholars widely describe as an ongoing genocide in Gaza, once again behind a wall of secrecy and political impunity.
Dr Guttmann herself underlined the relevance of these disclosures, warning that the shadowy practices of intelligence-sharing without political oversight remain largely unchanged: “International relations of the secret state are completely off the radar of politicians, parliaments, or the public. Even today, there will be a lot of information being shared about which we know absolutely nothing,” she stressed to the Guardian.
Critics argue that such secrecy underpins the UK’s and other Western states’ complicity in Israel’s Gaza genocide, which since October 2023 has killed over 53,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children. Despite the International Court of Justice opening a genocide case against Israel, British intelligence cooperation with Israeli agencies continues in the dark, with no democratic accountability or transparency. The UK government has also refused to clarify the purpose of more than 500 Royal Air Force surveillance flights over Gaza, raising fears these may be contributing to targeted killing.
Featured Video
No Threat Can Force Iran’s Surrender /Trita Parsi & Lt Cl Daniel Davis
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
An Expert Military Analysis of War with China
Actually, None is Necessary
By Fred Reed • Unz Review • December 13, 2020
The Correlation of Armed Forces: U.S. goods and services trade with China totaled an estimated $634.8 billion in 2019. Exports were $163.0 billion; imports were $471.8 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with China was $308.8 billion in 2019. Trade in services with China (exports and imports) totaled an estimated $76.7 billion in 2019. Services exports were $56.5 billion; services imports were $20.1 billion. The U.S. services trade surplus with China was $36.4 billion in 2019.
There is talk within the Washingtoniat of a possible war with China. Steve Bannon, who apparently was dropped on his head as a child, actually favors such a war. We hear the usual shoo-the-boobs alarm about how the Chinese are doing something terrible and we must gird our loins and American values and show them what for, bow wow, woof. The danger is that the current game of who-blinks-first in Asian waters might actually provoke a shooting war. You know the kind of thing: One warship refuses to get out of the way of another, a collision ensues, some retard lieutenant who signed up on waivers opens fire, and we’re off and running. It is not a good idea to let children play with matches.
The said war is discussed either in emotional terms by idiots or in purely naval terms by those familiar with such things, so we hear of the First Island Chain and the Second Island Chain and whose missiles against the other’s missiles and so on. This would be appropriate if we were fighting World War Two again. Which we aren’t. Let’s take a quick-and-dirty look at how such a war might go.
To begin the war, America would overestimate itself and underestimate China. This is doctrine in the Pentagon. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Theodore Postol: Iran’s Missiles & Drones Were Underestimated
- Iran To Target Military Industrial-Tech Complex That Facilitated Gaza Genocide
- Collapsing Empire: The Resistance Disarms ‘Israel’
- Suicide Should Not Be a Government Service
- Rethinking America’s greatest threat: Iran vs. Israel-Firsters
- Iran accuses adversaries of false flags to strain Turkey ties
- Poland rules out sending Patriot missiles to US/Israel amid war on Iran
- Tehran approves new Hormuz plan with major restrictions
- No Threat Can Force Iran’s Surrender /Trita Parsi & Lt Cl Daniel Davis
- UK’s New Pandemic Plan Would Turn Big Tech Into a Mass Location Tracking Network
- If Americans Knew
- Ann Coulter Rips Into Fox News for Iran War Coverage, Compares to False Rigged 2020 Election Reporting
- Joe Kent Urges Americans To Call White House and Congress To Object To Sending Troops Into Iran
- DNC Resolution to Reject AIPAC Funding Puts Democratic Leaders in the Hot Seat
- Swedish foundation to build 400 schools as over 650,000 Gaza children remain without education for 2 years
- Israeli army admits photshopping image of slain Lebanese journalist
- This is how Israel is systematically killing health workers under the cover of war in Lebanon
- Carrying life under fire: Israeli invasion of Lebanon leaves pregnant women facing deadly risks
- Champagne all around for the new death penalty (for Palestinians) law – Not a ceasefire Day 172
- Why are Palestinian books struggling to be seen on Amazon?
- The Line Between Affinity and Conspiracy
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- 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
Aletho News 