Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

White House covered up chemical spill cancer risk – report

RT | June 2, 2025

The administration of former US President Joe Biden tried to cover up serious public health risks related to a 2023 toxic chemical spill in East Palestine, Ohio, a whistleblower protection and advocacy group has claimed.

The Government Accountability Project (GAP) has published a set of documents obtained through a lawsuit from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which allegedly prove that the White House deliberately chose to withhold the true scale of the catastrophe while intentionally avoiding contact with affected residents.

On February 3, 2023, a Norfolk Southern freight train carrying toxic chemicals, including vinyl chloride, derailed near the village of East Palestine, spilling its hazardous contents into a nearby waterway. Five tankers were later also deliberately ignited in a controlled burn. The incident forced evacuations, was linked to animal deaths, and led to reports of unexplained illnesses in the weeks that followed.

Several months later, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publicly declared that East Palestine residents were “not in danger,” citing air and water monitoring results. Biden had also praised what he called his administration’s “herculean efforts” to resolve the crisis.

The government’s response was heavily criticized at the time, with many calling out Biden for not visiting East Palestine sooner, downplaying the severity of the disaster, and prioritizing public relations over the health and safety concerns raised by residents and experts.

According to GAP investigator Lesley Pacey, the public’s fears have turned out to be justified, with internal documents showing that the White House, the EPA, and FEMA had privately discussed the serious dangers associated with the chemical spill, described internally as “really toxic,” and “deliberately kept this information from the community.”

In an interview with NewsNation published on Saturday, Pacey explained that FEMA knew that the controlled chemical burn resulted in a “really toxic plume” and that it could cause cancer clusters in the region and other health risks that would require 20 years of medical monitoring.

The information was never publicly disclosed or acknowledged by FEMA or the White House as the Biden administration chose to focus on “public reassurances” rather than “worrying about public health,” Pacey told the New York Post.

The emails obtained by GAP have also shown that FEMA’s coordinator – sent to East Palestine to oversee recovery efforts, communicate with residents and assess their needs – was actually directly instructed to avoid engaging with the locals.

“They completely botched this event from the very beginning,” Pacey surmised.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

COVID Doubts Made You a ‘Violent Extremist’

By Jim Bovard | The Libertarian Institute | June 2, 2025

Biden administration policymakers hated you more than you knew.

Four years ago, I warned at the Libertarian Institute:

“Libertarians are in the federal crosshairs… Many libertarians assume they have nothing to fear because they are not engaged in seeking to violently overthrow the government. But the feds will be able to find many other pretexts to target peaceful citizens with supposedly subversive ideas.”

Three years ago, I warned at the Institute that White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was damning anyone who did not kowtow to the regime:

“’When you are not with what majority of Americans are, then you know, that is extreme. That is an extreme way of thinking.’ That wacko definition of extremism designed to vilify anyone who doubts Biden will save America’s soul.”

In October 2023, I warned at the Institute:

“Federal bureaucrats heaved together a bunch of letters to contrive an ominous new acronym for the latest peril to domestic tranquility. The result: AGAAVE—’anti-government, anti-authority violent extremism’—which looks like a typo for a sugar substitute. The FBI vastly expanded the supposed AGAAVE peril by broadening suspicion from ‘furtherance of ideological agendas’ to ‘furtherance of political and/or social agendas.’ Anyone who has an agenda different from Team Biden’s could be AGAAVE’d for his own good.”

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently declassified a December 13, 2021 report by the National Counterterrorism Center. Gabbard’s version had a more honest title than the original version: “Declassified Biden Administration Documents Labeling COVID Dissenters, Others as ‘Domestic Violent Extremists.’”

President Joe Biden’s Brain Trust sounded the alarm on criticisms such as “COVID-19 vaccines are unsafe, especially for children, are part of a government or global conspiracy to deprive individuals of their civil liberties and livelihoods, or are designed to start a new social or political order.” After government lockdowns had destroyed millions of jobs, only the paranoid would fear the government would ever violate their liberties or subvert their livelihoods.

Biden policymakers pretended that the surge in criticism of COVID policies was proof of the psychopathology of Biden’s opponents. But in September 2021, Biden dictated that one-hundred million Americans working for private companies must get the COVID vaccine. The official counterterrorism report stated that it anticipated that “the threat will continue at least into the winter, as many of the new COVID-19 mandates in the U.S….are implemented, including U.S. workplace vaccination policies that carry disciplinary or termination penalties.” The Supreme Court struck down most of that vaccine mandate as illegal in January 2022 but not before it had profoundly disrupted legions of lives and businesses—as well as American health care.

The other factor spurring the surge in COVID criticism was the failure of the COVID vaccines. In early 2022, the effectiveness of the COVID booster shot had fallen to 31%—too low to have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Though most American adults had gotten COVID vaccines, there were more than a million new COVID cases a day in January 2022. Most COVID fatalities were occurring among the fully vaxxed. Studies showed that people who received multiple boosters were actually more likely to be hit by COVID infections.

So obviously, the Biden administration had no choice but to demonize any and all COVID critics. A confidential 2022 Department of Homeland Security report detailed pending crackdowns on “inaccurate” information on “the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines,” among other targets. A few months earlier, Jen Easterly, the chief of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, declared, “We live in a world where people talk about alternative facts, post-truth, which I think is really, really dangerous if people get to pick their own facts.” Plenty of Biden administration officials considered it “really dangerous” to permit people to assert that COVID vaccines were failing.

The National Counterterrorism Center report noted, “The availability of a vaccine for all school-age children might spur conspiracy theories and perceptions that schools will vaccinate children against parents’ will.” Like the same way that some states and many school systems have sought to enable children to change their gender without their parents’ knowledge or consent?

The report also warned that “new COVID-19 mitigation measures—particularly mandates or endorsements of vaccines for children—will probably spur plotting against the government.” The FDA knew that COVID vaccines sharply increased the risk of myocarditis—an inflamed heart—in young males but the Biden White House browbeat the agency into fully approving the COVID vaccine anyhow. New York Governor Kathy Hochul sought unsuccessfully to mandate vaccines for all schoolkids in the Empire State even though her State Department of Health reported in May 2022 that the Pfizer vaccine was only 12% effective for children during the Omicron surge. The Biden administration included COVID vaccines in the semi-mandatory regimen for young children despite the vaccine’s failure and perils.

The vilification of COVID doubts propelled the Biden crackdown on uppity parents. As governments shut down schools and issued mask mandates in failed responses to COVID, parents raised hell at school board meetings. The National School Board Association denounced such criticism as “a form of domestic terrorism” and urged Team Biden to deploy the FBI and the Patriot Act against protesting parents (an initial draft of the letter called for sending in the National Guard to protect school boards).

On October 4, 2021, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the FBI would speedily “convene meetings” in every state aimed at “addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.” The Justice Department announced that its National Security Division would help determine “how federal enforcement tools can be used” to prosecute angry parents. The Biden administration effectively announced plans to drop legal nuclear bombs on school board critics. An FBI whistleblower revealed that FBI counterterrorism tools were being used to target angry parents. FBI agents across the nation began interrogating parents whose names were reported on a “tip line” set up for people to phone in accusations against anyone who complained about school closures, mask mandates, or other issues.

Portraying doubts on COVID policy as a warning sign of domestic violent extremism unleashed the FBI to target anybody who howled against mandatory injections or the near-total destruction of their freedom of movement. That December 13, 2021 National Counterterrorism Center report may be only the tip of the iceberg of federal mischief. We may soon learn of far more direct machinations to vilify, undercut, or other stifle COVID critics.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Turkey Proposes Law to Censor and Delete Unapproved Quran Translations

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | June 2, 2025

A legislative push in Turkey is drawing sharp rebuke over what many view as a direct assault on religious freedom: a proposed law that would empower the state’s top religious institution to confiscate and destroy Quran translations it deems theologically unacceptable.

The bill, recently approved by the Turkish Parliament’s Planning and Budget Committee, would grant the Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) the authority to initiate legal action against any Quran translation it considers to contradict Islam’s “core principles.” If the Diyanet-appointed board flags a translation, it could petition a court to halt its publication, remove existing copies, and in the case of online content, block or delete it entirely.

Under the proposed changes, the judicial process offers little protection to publishers. Even if an appeal is filed within the mandated 15-day window, the order to destroy or suppress the materials would go into effect immediately. If no challenge is mounted or if the appeal fails, the targeted translation would be permanently eliminated.

Independent MP Mustafa Yeneroğlu condemned the move, warning it opens the door to ideological policing of scripture. “This turns the Diyanet into a censorship body,” he stated, asserting that religious interpretation should not be filtered through a government-approved lens. “No one has the right to classify the Quran according to an official ideology as ‘acceptable’ or ‘objectionable.’”

Yeneroğlu also flagged the bill’s broad language as a threat to legal consistency, calling the criteria for banning a translation dangerously vague. He argued that the measure undercuts constitutional protections on religious practice by allowing the state to determine what constitutes correct belief.

The proposed law fits within a wider campaign by Turkish authorities to tighten control over religious narratives. Since the failed 2016 coup attempt, the government has systematically purged books and materials associated with the Gülen movement, including numerous religious texts and commentaries. Though Ankara blames the group for orchestrating the coup, its followers and Fethullah Gülen himself have denied any role in the events.

The Diyanet, with a budget exceeding that of many key ministries, is already deeply entrenched in regulating religious life, overseeing sermons in more than 80,000 mosques and issuing official religious rulings. This new legislation would allow it to silence divergent interpretations by labeling them as doctrinal violations, bypassing any real public or theological debate.

Should the bill pass the full parliament, where the ruling AKP and its allies maintain a legislative majority, it would cement the Diyanet’s power to act as a gatekeeper of permissible religious thought. Such a move risks criminalizing theological diversity under the guise of defending orthodoxy, with minimal legal safeguards to protect against misuse.

Lawmakers are expected to begin formal discussions on the bill in the near future.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Putting Israel First, Rubio Victimizes Harmless Student Over Op-Ed

Using slander, imprisonment and deportation to suppress Israel criticism

By Brian McGlinchey | Stark Realities | May 31, 2025

Given Marco Rubio’s long history of subservience to the State of Israel — which has earned him a mountain of campaign cash from the country’s US-based collaborators — many Americans were understandably wary that his ascension from senator to secretary of State portended disturbing moves to advance Israel’s interests. However, few foresaw Rubio orchestrating the abduction, imprisonment and deportation of foreign students for using their universal human right of free speech to criticize the Israeli government and advocate for Palestinians.

With President Trump’s blessing, Rubio has targeted many foreign students in this fashion — students who’ve been charged with no crimes. However, no case better illustrates the campaign’s casual cruelty than that of 30-year-old Tufts University PhD candidate Rumeysa Ozturk. Ozturk, who’s been studying child development, was arrested in March and whisked away to a far-off prison merely because — an entire year earlier — she co-authored a Tufts Daily op-ed urging the university to formally characterize Israel’s conduct in Gaza as genocide, and to sell the school’s Israel-associated investments.

Rubio would like you to assume her essay must have been an unhinged, antisemitic, violence-inciting screed. To the contrary, harkening back to Tufts’ 1989 decision to divest from apartheid South Africa, its tone is decidedly calm and measured. Read this excerpt of the essay’s most pointed language about Israel and judge for yourself:

These [student senate] resolutions were the product of meaningful debate…and represent a sincere effort to hold Israel accountable for clear violations of international law. Credible accusations against Israel include accounts of deliberate starvation and indiscriminate slaughter of Palestinian civilians and plausible genocide.

… the student body is calling for … the University to end its complicity with Israel insofar as it is oppressing the Palestinian people and denying their right to self-determination — a right that is guaranteed by international law. These strong lobbying tools are all the more urgent now given the order by the International Court of Justice confirming that the Palestinian people of Gaza’s rights under the Genocide Convention are under a “plausible” risk of being breached.

Ozturk’s persecution represents a major escalation of an aggravating dynamic in which people in the United States are vilified as dangerous, volatile antisemites for saying things about Israel that are frequently said by respected people and institutions in Israel. For example, in an op-ed of his own, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert this week wrote, “What we are doing in Gaza now is a war of devastation: indiscriminate, limitless, cruel and criminal killing of civilians … Yes, Israel is committing war crimes.”

In March of this year, the State Department revoked Ozturk’s student visa without notifying her — she had no idea that her presence in the country was now illegal. Four days later, in an incident captured on video, she was grabbed off a Somerville, Massachusetts street by masked, plain-clothed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, taken to New Hampshire and then Vermont, before being shackled in chains and airlifted 1,400 miles to a federal detention center in Louisiana.

For the next month and a half, she was stuffed with 23 others in a cell meant for 14. Ozturk says constant exposure to dust and inadequate ventilation sparked more than a dozen asthma attacks — after having previously had only about 13 in her entire life. Sleep was hard to come by, as motion-detecting fluorescent lights repeatedly triggered throughout the night.

Trying to justify the unjustifiable, the Trump administration has gone to slanderous extremes to vilify Ozturk. In a since-deleted social media post following her arrest, Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said “DHS + ICE investigations found Ozturk engaged in activities in support of Hamas, a foreign terrorist organization that relishes the killing of Americans.” (As an aside, note that, while some 43 Americans — including dual nationals — died in the Oct 7 attacks, there’s no history of Hamas ever setting out to target Americans.)

When protests of Israel’s tactics in Gaza erupted in 2022, Israel supporters across government, major media and social media branded all pro-Palestine protesters as Hamas supporters and antisemites. With the ascendency of the second Trump administration, that tactic has evolved from a malicious PR smear to a government-weaponized allegation that’s putting nonviolent foreign students in prisons and derailing their lives — all in service to a foreign country.

In a partial reversal of her appalling treatment, Ozturk was released from confinement on May 9 on the orders of a federal judge, who also denied the government’s wish to make her wear an ankle monitor. However, her troubles are far from over: In addition to the enduring harm of a six-week interruption of her academic pursuits, she is still targeted for deportation.

When DHS initially leveled the “activities in support of Hamas” accusation against Ozturk, many people assumed the government must have something on her other than an essay in a student newspaper. However, as the weeks ground on, the government never pointed to anything else, something US District Judge William Sessions noted when he ordered her to be released from her cage in Louisiana :

“I suggested to the government that they produce any additional information which would suggest that she posed a substantial risk. And that was three weeks ago, and there has been no evidence introduced by the government other than the op-ed. That literally is the case. There is no evidence here... The court finds that Ms. Öztürk has raised a substantial claim of a constitutional violation.”

Judge Sessions called Ozturk’s seizure “a traumatic incident” and said “her continued detention potentially chills the speech of the millions and millions of individuals in this country who are not citizens.” That is most certainly the Trump administration’s goal.

Falling for Rubio’s dishonest portrayal of his prey and failing to scrutinize the facts, many so-called “conservatives” have enthused over his drive to deport anti-Israel activists and rushed to defend it. In their flimsiest argument, you’ll find them claiming Ozturk and others have no right of free speech because they’re not US citizens. That hollow attack rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of rights — one that wrongly views rights as government-granted privileges, rather than something that springs from one’s humanity. As I’ve explained elsewhere at Stark Realities, the Constitution’s Bill of Rights isn’t a granting of rights, it’s a prohibition against government interference with pre-existing rights shared by everyone on Earth.

Employing a quintessential straw man argument, Rubio and others also say “nobody has a right to a visa.” The controversy has never been about any mythical entitlement to visas — it’s about the morality and constitutionality of using visa revocations as a means of punishing and suppressing expression of certain political beliefs.

To mete out that punishment, Rubio and the Trump administration are exploiting the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which recklessly empowers the secretary of State — a single individual — to deport foreigners the secretary deems “adversarial to the foreign policy and national security interests” of the United States. The law provides no elaboration on that standard, much less any provision for its application with any semblance of due process for the affected individual.

Invoking that provision, the administration told a court that DHS and ICE determined Ozturk “had been involved in associations that ‘may undermine U.S foreign policy by creating a hostile environment for Jewish students and indicating support for a designated terrorist organization’ including co-authoring an op-ed that found common cause with an organization that was later temporarily banned from campus.”

First, note how tangential and tenuous the opening and concluding allegations are. The government says Ozturk is being targeted for unspecified “associations,” and because her stance on Israel merely overlaps with the stance of a campus group that was only temporarily banned.

Next, we see the Trump administration dishonestly saying Ozturk “indicat[ed] support for Hamas” by writing an op-ed calling for Tufts to say Israel is committing war crimes, and to divest from the country. The op-ed never mentions Hamas or Oct. 7 or even implicitly endorses the group or its tactics, and there’s been no allegation of any other form of her supposed “support for Hamas.”

The administration also employs the Israeli-propagandist idea that criticism of the State of Israel — a political entity — creates a “hostile environment” for Jewish students. That notion is itself a form of bigotry — as it presumes all Jews endorse Israel’s actions. Of course, that presumption is belied by the significant presence of Jewish students in many protests of Israel’s conduct in Gaza. Meanwhile, the notion that pro-Israel Jews should be protected from hearing contrary views is wildly hypocritical from an administration that — in regard to other topics — has rightly targeted censorship meant to prevent so-called “snowflakes” from having their feelings hurt.

Defenders of the administration’s conduct are compelled to do more than point to its supposed legality under a 1952 law. From FDR putting Japanese-Americans in concentration camps to Woodrow Wilson jailing opponents of the draft, there’s a difference between legality and morality and bona fide constitutionality. Meanwhile, Ozturk’s ongoing challenge of her arrest and pending deportation may well reset the bounds of what’s legal under the Immigration and Nationality Act, with the courts potentially ruling it’s unconstitutional to revoke a visa over the expression of an opinion.

Finally, even the most ardent backers of the Israeli government should recognize that the use of the Immigration Act to round up and deport people whose views are inconsistent with the current administration’s foreign policy threatens to set a dangerous precedent — one that could see a future, Israel-hostile White House seizing, jailing and deporting foreign students who advocate US aid to Israel.

Over his political career, Rubio’s unwavering dedication to the agenda of the State of Israel has earned him a wealth of campaign contributions: Between 2019 and 2024, his largest and third-largest donors were the Pro-Israel PAC and the Republican Jewish Coalition. Those donors are again cashing in as their mercenary carries out a ruthless and deceitful drive to suppress anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian speech.

Consistent with the broader campaign of mass character-assassination that Israel’s advocates have long directed against critics of Israel, Rubio has repeatedly smeared Ozturk by insinuating that she is guilty of behavior that neither the federal government nor anyone else has accused her of, and even implying she is insane. For example, here’s what Rubio said at a March press conference:

“We revoked her visa… and here’s why… If you apply for a visa to enter the United States and be a student and you tell us that the reason why you’re coming to the United States is not just because you want to write op-eds, but because you want to participate in movements that are involved in doing things like vandalizing universities, harassing students, taking over buildings, creating a ruckus, we’re not going to give you a visa…. Every time I find one of these lunatics, I take away their visa. We’re looking every day for these lunatics that are tearing things up.”

Challenged last week in a House Foreign Affairs hearing, Rubio said he “proudly” revoked Ozturk’s visa, defiantly adding “we’re going to do more of them.” Refusing to answer pointed questions about the constitutionality of deporting Ozturk for writing an op-ed, Rubio again reflexively resorted to maliciously dishonest hyperbole, saying “We’re revoking the visas of any lunatics we can identify.”

Ozturk is one of an unknown number of foreign, Palestinian-sympathizing students targeted for deportation by the Trump administration, which is providing very little transparency about the individuals concerned or specific rationales for the revocation of their visas.

The censorship blitz is disturbing enough on its face, but there’s another dimension that makes it even more sinister: In selecting Ozturk and other foreign students for persecution, the Trump administration is apparently heeding the suggestions of two shadowy and menacing pro-Israel organizations that use intimidation tactics on Israel’s behalf: Canary Mission and Betar.

According to its website, Canary Mission “documents individuals and organizations that promote hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews on North American college campuses and beyond.” (Including “the USA” in its mission statement is dishonest pandering; listing it first is a joke.) In practice, Canary Mission works to silence Israel’s critics by using false allegations of antisemitism, doxxing, and the threat of career and reputational harm that could come from landing on its internet blacklist.

In one of the most unsettling incidents attributed to the group, two men in canary costumes stood silently in a George Washington University lobby in 2018 as the student government was set to vote on an Israel divestment resolution. In the days before the vote, Canary Mission flyers posted on campus warned “THERE ARE NO SECRETS. WE WILL KNOW YOUR VOTE AND WILL ACT ACCORDINGLY.”

Shortly after Ozturk’s arrest, Canary Mission posted a triumphant social media thread, saying “sources point to her Canary Mission profile as the primary cause.” That profile is thin. Linking to her Tufts op-ed, Canary Mission only claims she “engaged in anti-Israel activism in March 2024” (the month the op-ed was published) and is “a supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement.”

Betar brags that it is directly providing a list of targets to the administration. Maliciously referring to Ozturk and other peaceful activists as “jihadis,” the group took credit for her arrest: “She was on our list. Many more jihadis are. We will be making a new submission Monday with approximately 1800 more jihadis.”

Betar is a Zionist youth group founded in 1923 by Ze’ev Jabotinsky, who promoted an expansive vision of Israel that would see it take over not only the West Bank and Gaza, but part of Jordan too. The group’s ideology, rhetoric and embrace of vandalism, theft and vigilantism prompted even the staunchly Zionist Anti-Defamation League to list it among extremist and hateful groups.

An appalling incident in February illuminates the enormity of Betar’s Jewish-supremacist fanaticism. When a journalist posted a long list of names of Palestinian infants killed in Israel’s war on Gaza, Betar’s official account replied, “Not enough. We demand blood in Gaza!”

The group has also endorsed the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza. The irony is sickening: The Trump administration arrested Ozturk for saying Israel is committing genocide in Gaza — and the recommendation to revoke her visa came from a group that calls for genocide in Gaza.

While Betar and Canary Mission seem to be playing a key role in identifying targets, the broader scheme of weaponizing the Immigration and Nationality Act by smearing Israel’s critics as pro-Hamas antisemites who undermine US foreign policy was the brainchild of the Heritage Foundation. According to New York Times, the group in 2023 launched Project Esther, “an ambitious plan to fight antisemitism by branding a broad range of critics of Israel as ‘effectively a terrorist support network,’ so that they could be deported, defunded, sued, fired, expelled, ostracized and otherwise excluded from what it considered ‘open society’.”

Achieving new heights of hypocrisy, Rubio this week declared that “free speech… legally enshrined in our constitution, has set us apart as a beacon of freedom around the world.” His soaring rhetoric came as he announced a new policy that will deny visas to “foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans.”

While Ozturk’s story has received significant media attention, the same mainstream media that relentlessly promoted the 2020 Russia-collusion hoax is now failing to cast the Trump administration’s campaign against pro-Palestinian campus activism for what it is: The unconstitutional suppression of the human right of free expression in appalling subservience to a foreign government and its domestic, America-Second accomplices.

In case you’re inclined to shrug off Rubio’s campaign because its victims are foreigners, make no mistake — there are people inside and outside the US government who would love to see American citizens similarly seized and shackled for criticizing the State of Israel. Over the past several years, those forces have been aggressively pushing various means of using government power to suppress Israel’s critics:

  • The proposed Antisemitism Awareness Act, which would use an expansive definition of antisemitism to inflict penalties on schools that allow various forms of criticism of Israel to be expressed on their campuses — even by American citizens
  • The successful enactment of state laws requiring contractors to certify that they will not participate in boycotts of Israel — alongside repeated attempts to pass a similar federal law
  • Lawfare in the form of bogus lawsuits filed against universities, accusing them of failing to prevent “antisemitic incidents” that are simply expressions of opinions about Israel that Zionists revile
  • The Trump administration’s withdrawal of federal education funding from schools that tolerate “antisemitism” — with that term purposefully misdefined to encompass criticism of the Israeli government

Amid Americans’ steadily-shrinking support for Israel — even 50% of Republicans under 50 years old now view the country unfavorably — those forces are only going to grow more desperate and brazen in their assault on free expression in the United States. It’s the patriotic duty of every American — including Israel’s backers and critics alike — to resist them every step of the way.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Australian doctor reports victims at Gaza aid distribution point shot in head, chest

MEMO | June 2, 2025

Australian Doctor Ahmed Abu Sweid said that several people shot by Israeli occupation forces yesterday morning at an aid distribution point in Rafah, southern Gaza, had been hit by bullets in the head and chest.

Dr Abu Sweid, who is volunteering in the emergency department at Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Yunis, said: “We have only been here for a few days, and the level of trauma I have seen here is unlike anything I have witnessed before.”

“Today, we’ve had a significant number of casualties, with hundreds of confirmed injuries.”

Dr Abu Sweid, a specialist in emergency medicine, explained that the hospital is “full” and that medical teams are struggling due to a lack of essential medical equipment.

He continued: “We have only been here for a few days, but the doctors here have been dealing with the same situation for the past 200 days, and they are exhausted.”

He confirmed that all the victims were civilians. “They were instructed to collect food but instead suffered gunshot wounds and shrapnel injuries. Most are in critical condition,” adding that some victims “were already deceased upon arrival, having been shot in the head and chest.”

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Iran and Russia: Three steps into strategic convergence

By Hazal Yalin | The Cradle | June 2, 2025

As Iran prepares for an official state visit by Russian President Vladimir Putin, the political signal could not be clearer: Iran and Russia are intent on formalizing their deepening partnership amid a global order in flux.

Iranian officials have confirmed that preparations are underway, even if the Kremlin has yet to set the date. For both countries – under siege from western sanctions and entangled in regional flashpoints – this visit is more than a ceremony; it marks an intensifying convergence of strategic purpose.

Putin’s trip follows a string of high-level engagements with his Iranian counterpart, President Masoud Pezeshkian, who took office in July of last year. Since then, the two leaders have met three times: in Ashgabat in October, in Kazan at the BRICS summit, and in January in Moscow to ink a long-term defense agreement. In the post-Ukraine war calculus, few relationships carry the same weight as the Islamic Republic in Russia’s pivot eastward.

Economic convergence through the EAEU

Ties between Tehran and Moscow have never advanced in a straight line. Even in their most frictionless periods, progress required determined effort. Still, three crucial milestones passed over the past year suggest that their bilateral relationship is set to accelerate.

The first milestone came on 25 December 2024, when Iran joined the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) as an observer member state. Initially seen as a post-Soviet mechanism to deepen regional economic ties, the bloc’s broader ambitions – particularly from Moscow’s perspective – quickly became clear. Iran’s accession had been a long-standing Russian objective since at least the mid-2010s.

The path to membership began in 2018 with a provisional agreement, but was drawn out by two key factors. The first was Israel’s negotiations with the bloc over free trade zones – launched despite a 2016 framework deal – which appeared designed to sabotage Iran’s entry. They largely succeeded.

The more substantive obstacle was internal. Under former Iranian president Hassan Rouhani, whose administration tilted westward, the EAEU was seen more as leverage in western talks than a genuine priority. By contrast, late Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi, a strong advocate of Iran’s ‘Look East’ policy, placed higher strategic value on deepening ties with Russia, propelling Iran’s EAEU bid forward.

By 2023–2024, trade between Iran and EAEU states hovered around $3.5 billion. The new agreement slashed tariffs: Iranian duties on EAEU goods dropped to 4.5 percent, while the bloc’s tariffs on Iranian exports fell from 6.6 to 0.8 percent.

Within five to seven years, trade volume is projected to hit $18–20 billion – a substantial gain for a petro-economy whose $60 billion in exports are more than 80 percent oil and gas. The bloc may also serve as a conduit to third-country markets.

Iran’s membership holds political as well as economic value for Moscow. Chief among these is the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), a 7,200-kilometer route connecting St. Petersburg to Mumbai via Iranian territory. Completion of the Chabahar–Mumbai leg depends on India-Iran ties; the corridor’s viability also requires modernizing the Caspian Sea route–a project that gained urgency post-2022.

BRICS … and a whopping strategic partnership

Politically, the Kremlin’s need to forge a multipolar alliance structure – not a full-fledged global bloc, but a web of regional coalitions – has grown as confrontation with the west intensifies.

In this context, Iran’s accession to BRICS on 1 January 2025 marked the second major milestone. BRICS remains politically disjointed – a union of unequals – but its economic logic is compelling. It enables preferential access to massive markets and encourages bilateral flexibility between members.

Though it may not directly shape Iran–Russia relations, BRICS allows both states to expand cooperation in media, culture, and tourism – deepening their ties beyond traditional economic or military frameworks.

But the most consequential event of the year was the signing of a comprehensive strategic cooperation agreement between Tehran and Moscow. As with Iran’s drawn-out EAEU accession, the talks revealed lingering distrust. Negotiations began after Russia’s February 2022 military intervention in Ukraine.

Russia’s motives were transparent: Boxed in by NATO, Moscow sought to strengthen military alliances with regional powers and reap associated economic benefits.

The model agreement was the “comprehensive strategic partnership” signed with North Korea, which included commitments to scale up trade and a mutual defense clause. If either party is attacked or drawn into war, the other pledges to assist “by all means.”

A similar clause was expected in the Iran–Russia agreement, but never materialized. Instead, the pact reads more like a memorandum of understanding than a military alliance. The gap between its title and substance suggests unresolved disagreements during talks.

Two issues caused the rift. First, Moscow demanded that any military assistance be predicated on Tehran’s position being legally airtight under international law – lest Russia be entangled in a nuclear conflict with Tel Aviv. The definition of “aggression” became a flashpoint: What Tehran labels a provocation, Moscow feared Tel Aviv could call a justified “response.”

Second, the scope of assistance – especially the categorical exclusion of nuclear weapons – sparked further discord.

Though a compromise may have been within reach, unconfirmed reports indicate Moscow proposed the transit of Russian personnel or military preparation on Iranian soil – something the deeply sovereign Tehran outright rejected. This categorical refusal ultimately ensured the deal would remain declaratory.

The weight of history

Historical and ideological factors underpin Iran’s caution. Since the Caucasus wars of the 19th century – especially the 1826–1828 conflict – securing Iran’s northern frontier has been a persistent concern.

That anxiety intensified under the Pahlavi dynasty’s staunch anti-communism, compounded in the 1940s by two events: Soviet occupation of northern Iran until 1946, and the Soviet-backed, Kurdish-secessionist Mahabad Republic, widely viewed as an attempt to partition the country.

Simultaneously, Soviet Azerbaijani territorial demands and communist agitation in Iranian Azerbaijan further soured ties. Though these events belong to a pre-revolutionary era, the Islamic Republic’s early years were no less wary of Moscow – fueled in part by Iranian communists’ strategic missteps. The USSR, much like in Turkiye, was branded the “lesser Satan,” and anti-communism fused with inherited Russophobia.

These sentiments persist and are fueled by pro-west propaganda outlets. Among Iranian elites, accusations that Russia has “stabbed Iran in the back” are a common rhetorical tool for western-aligned factions. In 2023, a diplomatic crisis erupted after the Russian Foreign Ministry’s equivocal stance on sovereignty over contested Persian Gulf islands and muddled comments about the waterway’s name.

This blunder – unfolding as Iran’s EAEU talks progressed – not only inflamed Iranian Russophobia but handed ammunition to domestic pro-west voices, reinforcing the trope of “colonial Russia” as an unreliable partner.

What lies ahead

Even so, the Iran–Russia strategic pact is far from toothless. Though it omits a mutual defense clause, it commits both states to deepen security and defense ties and explicitly pledges cooperation to counter external destabilizing forces in the Caspian, Central Asia, the Caucasus, and West Asia. The emphasis is timely – especially in the wake of Syria’s devastation.

Today, Tehran faces heightened threats. Analysts and officials alike debate whether Israel will launch direct strikes against Iran, whether the US will try – or even be able – to restrain such moves, and whether US forces will intervene if Tel Aviv provokes open conflict. No clear decisions have emerged.

This uncertainty may prompt caution in the short term. But in the long run, only the alliances forged today will determine whether Tehran can deter tomorrow’s wars.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Indonesia chief accuses foreign-backed NGOs of fueling division

Al Mayadeen | June 2, 2025

Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto used his Pancasila Day address to issue a stark warning about the threat of foreign interference, specifically accusing foreign-funded NGOs of acting as vehicles for division and soft-power manipulation. His remarks echoed growing global concerns over the use of civil society organizations to exert influence on domestic politics, often under the banner of democratic reform.

“They [foreign countries] are still provoking us. They are funding NGOs to fuel division … I am not telling Indonesians not to trust other countries, but we must not let ourselves be manipulated. We remember what our founding fathers said: the Indonesian people must stand on their own feet,” Prabowo declared.

The president’s warning comes amid heightened scrutiny of several Indonesian NGOs and media outlets accused of pushing foreign-aligned narratives. Although no specific organizations were named, the administration’s message aligns with broader concerns seen in other parts of the world, where governments have taken steps to curb foreign-funded groups involved in political advocacy.

Sovereignty Shield

Analysts draw parallels between Prabowo’s remarks and cases in countries such as Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan, where “color revolutions”, protest movements aimed at changing the leadership, were supported by NGOs funded by Western entities, including the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and USAID.

While often portrayed as democratic uprisings, these movements have been criticized by several governments as externally orchestrated attempts to reshape sovereign policy from the outside.

Responding to such concerns, countries like Russia have enacted “foreign agent” laws requiring NGOs receiving overseas funding and engaging in political work to register as foreign agents. Kyrgyzstan and Hungary have also adopted similar restrictions.

Prabowo’s rhetoric now places Indonesia within this rising global tide of states seeking to insulate their domestic affairs from covert foreign pressure.

Ideological Resilience

Drawing from Indonesia’s own experience of colonization, Prabowo said that foreign destabilization efforts have not vanished; they have simply evolved into more discreet forms, such as ideological funding and narrative engineering.

“Disagreements should not become a reason for conflict. This is what foreign countries hope for,” he warned, calling for social cohesion in the face of such influence.

The speech served not only as a condemnation of foreign interference but also as a reaffirmation of Pancasila, Indonesia’s state philosophy born in the wake of independence from Dutch rule in 1945.

Composed of five pillars, belief in one God, civilized humanity, national unity, wisdom-led democracy, and social justice, Pancasila remains a unifying framework in a diverse and populous archipelago.

National Fortification

Prabowo noted that these principles must serve as a shield against modern threats to sovereignty. He called on Indonesians to deepen their commitment to national unity and self-reliance, framing these values as essential defenses against foreign agendas that seek to exploit social fractures.

While the speech drew support from nationalist sectors, some observers cautioned against the potential suppression of independent civil society voices.

Nonetheless, many view the move as a calculated effort to consolidate national cohesion and ensure that policymaking remains firmly in the hands of Indonesians.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Corruption | | Leave a comment

Details of Russian peace proposal revealed

RT | June 2, 2025

The peace memorandum developed by Russia and presented to the Ukrainian delegation during the talks in Istanbul, Türkiye, on Monday calls on Kiev to withdraw its troops from the former Ukrainian territories that have joined Russia and confirm its neutral and non-nuclear status, according to the text of the document seen by RT.

The proposal consists of three parts, which include the conditions for a comprehensive settlement of the Ukraine conflict, steps toward achieving a ceasefire, and a peace roadmap that includes some unilateral steps by Russia.

The “final settlement” of the conflict would require international recognition of the former Ukrainian territories as parts of Russia. The two Donbass republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions, officially joined Russia following a series of referendums in autumn 2022. Crimea voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 in the wake of the Western-backed Maidan coup in Kiev.

Ukraine would also have to withdraw all its forces and armed groups from those territories, the document said.

Kiev would have to reaffirm its neutral status and introduce a ban on any military activities of third-party states on Ukrainian territory, as well as to withdraw from international treaties incompatible with such a status. It would also have to reaffirm its nuclear-free status and prohibit the acquisition, transit, or deployment of nuclear weapons on its territory.

The memorandum expects Ukraine to set certain limits on the size of its armed forces, as well as military equipment, but does not provide any fixed numbers. All Ukrainian nationalist armed groups within the armed forces and the National Guard would have to be disbanded, according to the document.

Under the peace proposal, Kiev would have to guarantee the rights of the Russian and Russian-speaking people in Ukraine and grant Russian the status of an official language, stop the persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, ban Nazi propaganda and any nationalist groups, as well as lift sanctions imposed against Moscow. Both Russia and Ukraine would renounce claims to compensation of damage linked to the conflict.

The document suggests two options for reaching a ceasefire. One of them requires Kiev to start withdrawing its troops from the territories that have joined Russia and pulling them away from the Russian borders to a certain distance. This process would have to be completed within 30 days.

The second option – the “package option” – would include a ban on any Ukrainian troop movements (except for the withdrawal of forces) and the cessation of the Ukrainian mobilization campaign and Western military aid to Kiev, including arms shipment and intelligence sharing. The sides would then establish a bilateral monitoring center and release each other’s citizens held by the other side.

Ukraine would also have to lift martial law and set a date for presidential and parliamentary elections. All the steps listed within this option would also have to be completed within 30 days, according to the document.

According to the proposal, the final peace treaty between Moscow and Kiev would be signed after the elections in Ukraine and endorsed by a legally binding UN Security Council resolution.

Last week, Reuters published what it called the details of Ukraine’s peace proposal where Kiev reportedly rejected Moscow’s demands for the recognition of Ukraine’s former territories as parts of Russia, and also ruled out abandoning its ambition to join NATO. The Ukrainian memorandum also demanded reparations from Russia.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

What Russia and Ukraine Agreed in 2nd Round of Istanbul Talks

Sputnik – June 2, 2025

Russian delegation head Vladimir Medinsky, an aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, reported the key outcomes of the negotiations with Ukrainian representatives in Istanbul.

Key statements:

  • Russia handed Ukraine a draft memorandum on settlement, which Kiev took for study
  • The Russian settlement memorandum is in two parts and is detailed and well-developed
  • The first part focuses on how to achieve genuine long-term peace
  • The second part outlines steps for a full ceasefire, allowing for flexibility and multiple paths to that goal
  • Russia will unilaterally transfer 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian soldiers to Kiev next week, having identified all the deceased
  • The parties agreed on the largest-yet prisoner exchange
  • The total exchange will be at least 1,000 prisoners, possibly more
  • Sick and seriously wounded prisoners will be exchanged on an “all for all” basis
  • Moscow and Kiev will create a commission to exchange seriously wounded troops without political decisions
  • The sides will exchange soldiers under the age of 25
  • Russia offered Ukraine a concrete ceasefire for two to three days in certain frontline sectors
  • Moscow and Kiev agreed to a ceasefire in specific areas so commanders can retrieve the bodies of their soldiers
  • The Ukrainian armed forces promised to work out the ceasefire proposal for those areas soon
  • Kiev turned the issue of ‘child abductions’ into a ‘show for sentimental Europeans’
  • No children have been kidnapped by Moscow, only rescued by Russian soldiers
  • Russia received a list of 339 children from Ukraine who are in difficult situations due to the conflict
  • Moscow returns children to Kiev if their parents or legal guardians are present
  • Russia is working on reuniting families separated by the Ukraine conflict
  • The negotiations with Ukraine were conducted in Russian

The Russian delegation was satisfied with the results of the second round of talks with Ukraine, Medinsky said.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Kiev comments on latest round of negotiations with Moscow

RT | June 2, 2025

Moscow and Kiev have agreed to exchange the bodies of thousands of fallen soldiers, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov announced on Monday following the second round of direct talks in Istanbul, Тürkiye.

Speaking to the press after the negotiations, Umerov, who led Kiev’s delegation, stated that the two sides had discussed a number of topics, including a ceasefire, humanitarian issues, and a potential meeting between Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

On the question of prisoner exchanges, Umerov said Moscow and Kiev had agreed to “focus on specific categories, not numbers.” Both sides have reportedly reached an agreement to exchange all seriously wounded and seriously ill prisoners of war in an “all-for-all” format.

“The second category is young soldiers aged 18 to 25. Also all for all. We also agreed to return 6,000 for 6,000 bodies of dead soldiers,” Umerov said.

Umerov added that Kiev has proposed holding a third round of talks at some point between June 20 and 30.

Monday’s talks mark the second time Russian and Ukrainian negotiators have met directly to discuss the resolution of the Ukraine conflict since Kiev abandoned peace efforts back in 2022. The first round of the renewed talks was held at the initiative of Putin on May 16.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

North Korea slams ‘hostile’ Western report on ties with Russia

RT | June 2, 2025

North Korea has slammed a report by a Western sanctions monitoring group’s on its ties with Russia, calling it a “political provocation.” Cooperation with Moscow is a “legitimate exercise of the DPRK’s sovereign rights,” Pyongyang has insisted.

The report was released last week by the Multilateral Sanctions Monitoring Group (MSMT), created by the US and South Korea to monitor enforcement of UN sanctions against North Korea.

It alleges “illegal” military cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang, including purported arms transfers from North Korea to Russia, troop deployments and training, excess petroleum shipments, and financial coordination.

Citing data from its 11 members and open-source intelligence, the report claims these actions violate UN Security Council resolutions aimed at curbing North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.

Pyongyang considers the MSMT report a “hostile act” and the organization a “ghost group without any legitimacy” and a “political tool” operating “according to the geopolitical interests of the West.”

“The hostile acts of the MSMT… are a flagrant violation of the international legal principles of sovereign equality and non-interference in internal affairs and a mockery of the fair and just international community,” the country’s Foreign Affairs Ministry said in its statement on Sunday, as cited by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA). The ministry called the report a fabrication and denounced it as politically biased and “provocative.”

Military cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang is “aimed at protecting the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security interests” of the countries and “ensuring peace and stability in the Eurasian region,” the ministry claimed. It stressed that it is a “legitimate exercise of sovereign rights” of both countries in accordance with the UN Charter.

Moscow has not yet commented on the MSMT report.

In June 2024, Russia and North Korea signed the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement, which includes a clause providing for military and other assistance in the event of armed invasion of either side. Several weeks later, South Korean and US media reported the deployment of North Korean troops to Russia’s Kursk Region, which at the time was under Ukrainian attack. Moscow and Pyongyang confirmed the military presence in late April after Russian forces declared the region fully liberated.

The MSMT group was created last October after the disbandment of the UN Panel of Experts on DPRK, which had monitored the implementation of UN sanctions on North Korea until a Russian veto ended its mandate. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova at the time called MSMT “illegal,” saying it was created by “uninvited enthusiasts bypassing the UN Security Council” who “demonstrate blatant disregard for international law.”

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite | , , | Leave a comment

UK preparing for war – PM

RT | June 2, 2025

Britain is going on a war footing with the launch of a major rearmament campaign, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in a keynote address on Monday.

Starmer unveiled his cabinet’s Strategic Defense Review, which includes an expansive armaments program mirroring similar efforts across NATO. Last week, UK Defense Secretary John Healey said London was sending “a message to Moscow” by allocating billions of pounds for new munitions plants, long-range missile systems, and other capabilities. Russia has accused Western nations of using alarmist rhetoric to justify shifting public funds toward military spending.

”We are moving to war-fighting readiness,” Starmer said at a shipyard in Govan, Glasgow, adding that “our defense policy will always be NATO first.” He vowed to transform the UK into “a battle-ready, armor-clad nation with the strongest alliances and the most advanced capabilities equipped for the decades to come.”

According to Starmer, the overhaul will enable Britain to make its “biggest contribution to NATO since its creation.” He also pledged that the country would become “the fastest innovator in NATO,” with defense research operating at a “wartime pace.” The reforms are expected to make the British military “ten times more lethal by 2035,” he claimed.

The prime minister reaffirmed his government’s goal to increase defense spending to 3% of GDP. He framed the effort as replacing the post-Cold War “peace dividend” with a “defense dividend” through the creation of thousands of new jobs in weapons manufacturing, including production of nuclear arms.

Starmer blamed Moscow for what he called a series of provocations, accusing Russia of “menacing” the UK, demonstrating “aggression” in British waters, and “driving up the cost of living here at home,” harming British workers.

Russian lawmaker Aleksey Pushkov has accused the UK of planning an “ice war” with Russia, noting that “there is no difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party” in their attitude.

Commenting on Starmer’s pledge to build additional nuclear submarines, Pushkov asserted that no British investments could bring the country to an equal footing with Russia, the US, and China. However, “Starmer needs them [those boats] to report his achievements” to domestic and international players who stand to benefit financially from the project, Pushkov claimed.

June 2, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries