US pundit challenges ex-Israeli PM over Epstein files
Press TV – July 15, 2025
US commentator Tucker Carlson has called out former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett, urging him to address claims linking disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein to the Israeli regime in a formal interview, rather than dismissing them as conspiracy theories.
In a post on X on Thursday, Carlson invited Bennett to discuss Epstein’s ties to Israel, promising to contact his office to arrange the interview.
This followed Bennett’s Monday statement on X, where he denied accusations, including from Carlson, that Epstein was an intelligence asset for Israel’s Mossad.
“As a former Israeli Prime Minister, with the Mossad having reported directly to me, I say to you with 100% certainty: The accusation that Jeffrey Epstein somehow worked for Israel or the Mossad running a blackmail ring is categorically and totally false,” Bennett wrote, addressing persistent reports that Epstein worked for the Israeli regime.
Epstein’s 2020 death in US federal custody, recently ruled a suicide by the Trump administration, has reignited speculation of a cover-up.
Reports have long suggested Epstein, a wealthy New York socialite, operated a blackmail ring targeting influential figures and was murdered in jail, with many saying he acted on Israel’s behalf.
Bennett dismissed these claims, stating, “Epstein’s criminal and despicable actions had no connection to the Mossad or Israel.”
He accused high-profile figures like Carlson of spreading falsehoods, adding, “There’s a vicious wave of slander against [Israel], and we won’t stand for it.”
Carlson fired back on X, challenging Bennett’s response: “Instead of issuing threats on social media, why not sit for a rational interview about Epstein’s ties to the Israeli government? We’ll reach out to your office today.”
On Friday, speaking at the Turning Point USA conference, Carlson doubled down, asserting it was “obvious” Epstein had ties to a foreign regime, implying Israel.
His remarks were met with enthusiasm from the pro-Trump audience.
Trump’s DOJ Says EPA Will Appeal Landmark Fluoride Ruling
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 14, 2025
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plans to appeal a decision last year by a federal court ordering the agency to address the risks of water fluoridation, according to Michael Connett, lead attorney for plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
“Rather than use the court’s decision as an opportunity to finally end water fluoridation (as most of Europe has already done), the EPA will spend its time legally challenging the court’s order,” Connett wrote in a post on X.
The American Chemistry Council, a trade organization representing the chemical industry, and the American Fluoridation Society, a fluoridation advocacy organization that touts its work undermining local efforts to oppose water fluoridation, filed motions seeking to submit amicus briefs supporting the EPA appeal, he said.
Connett told The Defender that the American Dental Association also plans to file a brief.
The EPA said it will file the appeal on July 18, after which the case will go to a three-judge panel in the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The appeals court will receive briefs from both sides, along with any amicus briefs, and hear oral arguments before issuing its decision.
The Fluoride Action Network (FAN), one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the EPA, said on X that the appeal was “a very disappointing move by EPA.” “A few months ago, @epaleezeldin went on a public speaking tour with @SecKennedy to address why fluoride needs to come OUT of the water. Now the EPA will appeal to keep fluoride IN drinking water.”
Connett noted that the decision to appeal came from the solicitor general at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), who reports to Pam Bondi and the White House, not by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has vocally opposed water fluoridation, but lacks the authority to end it.
“Only the EPA has this power, and it has decided, for now, to forego its historic opportunity (as provided by the court’s decision) to exercise it,” Connett said.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention publishes recommendations from the U.S. Public Health Service on whether communities should add fluoride to their drinking water and at what levels. However, the EPA sets the maximum levels allowed in water under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
The current maximum allowable levels of fluoride in drinking water are 4.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L), which is many orders of magnitude higher than the currently recommended dosage of 0.7 mg/L.
Even the lower recommended dosage has demonstrated a risk to children’s health in numerous studies, and according to the federal ruling that the EPA plans to challenge.
EPA continues to treat fluoride as a ‘protected pollutant’
In September 2024, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen issued the historic decision in the lawsuit against the EPA, ruling that water fluoridation at current U.S. levels poses an “unreasonable risk” of reduced IQ in children and that the EPA must take regulatory action to address that risk.
At the time of the ruling, more than 200 million Americans were drinking water treated with fluoride at the “optimal” level of 0.7 mg/L.
Chen ruled that a preponderance of scientific evidence showed this level of fluoride exposure may damage human health, particularly that of pregnant mothers and young children.
Environmental and consumer advocacy organizations, including FAN, Moms Against Fluoridation and Food & Water Watch, along with individual parents and children, filed the lawsuit against the EPA in 2017 under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) after the EPA denied their citizens’ petition to reexamine water fluoridation.
During the trial that followed, Chen reviewed existing regulations, regulatory frameworks and current science on fluoride’s risks to children and pregnant women presented through peer-reviewed papers and experts on both sides.
The case dragged on for seven years, after numerous delays by the EPA, and attempts by HHS officials to block the release of the key piece of evidence in the case, a government report on fluoride’s toxicity.
Chen’s 80-page ruling, issued seven months after closing arguments in February 2024, offered a careful and detailed articulation of the EPA’s review process for hazardous chemicals and summarized the extensive scientific data on fluoride’s toxicity.
Chen concluded that the risk to health at current levels of exposure demanded a regulatory response by the agency.
Evidence against fluoride keeps piling up
Since the end of the trial, the body of scientific evidence showing fluoride’s adverse impacts on children’s health has grown. Scientists at the National Toxicology Program in January published a meta-analysis in JAMA Pediatrics linking fluoridated water and IQ loss in children.
The program also published a monograph in August 2024 that found a link between higher fluoride exposure and lower IQ in children.
In May 2024, a study in JAMA Open Network found children born to Los Angeles mothers exposed during pregnancy to fluoridated drinking water were more likely to have neurobehavioural problems.
FAN’s executive director, Stuart Cooper, said the group has long sought to end the “unnecessary life-long and life-altering brain impairment in children specifically due to artificial fluoridation schemes” and the many other side effects to people’s liver, kidneys, thyroid and bones.
For nine years, he said, the EPA has been working against them. “From day one of our interactions with them, they’ve treated fluoridation chemicals as a protected pollutant, likely due to the government’s role in promoting their use and guaranteeing their ‘safety’ for over 80 years.”
Cooper added:
“While the science is clear and the lower court’s ruling was very strong and comprehensive, it’s not necessarily a surprise that the appeal has occurred. Our case is precedent-setting. We were the first to sue the EPA under TSCA. I suspect that corporate polluters who have learned how to manage and influence the EPA to their benefit don’t want citizens groups to use TSCA to force the EPA to regulate harmful chemicals.”
Another plaintiff in the lawsuit, Moms Against Fluoridation, told The Defender it was“deeply disappointed” that the EPA plans to appeal the ruling.
“The science is clear, and our lawsuit’s findings are undeniable: fluoridation is a toxic legacy that must end, like asbestos, DDT, and lead,” it said. “The agency’s plan to appeal only underscores their prioritization of industry interests over the well-being of our children and vulnerable populations. Moms Against Fluoridation will not back down — we will continue to fight tirelessly for the health and safety of all Americans.”
60+ towns and counties and two states vote to end fluoridation
Since the federal ruling last year, more than 60 U.S. towns, counties and two states — Utah and Florida — have voted to stop fluoridating their water, according to FAN.
During that time, there has been an ongoing campaign by the American Dental Association, the American Fluoridation Society and mainstream media to discredit the court’s ruling.
Typically, they assert that water fluoridation is an important, safe and effective way to prevent tooth decay — and that without it, rates of cavities will soar, costing billions. They cite a study published by researchers funded by pro-fluoridation groups.
Yet, overwhelming scientific research shows that fluoride’s benefits to teeth are topical, not the result of ingesting fluoride, and a 2024 Cochrane Review found adding fluoride to drinking water provides very limited dental benefits, especially compared with 50 years ago.
Most media reports also highlight the fact that fluoride is a “naturally occurring mineral.” However, they don’t mention that the fluoride added to water supplies is not.
The fluoride most commonly added to U.S. drinking water supplies is hydrofluorosilicic acid, the byproduct of phosphate fertilizer production. Chemical companies sell the byproduct to local water departments across the country.
Communities that have recently ended fluoridation have found themselves saddled with a chemical that they must dispose of as hazardous waste, per EPA regulations — an expensive and time-consuming process.
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.
Turkiye backs extremists in Lebanon as ‘blackmail’ over Cyprus ties
The Cradle | July 14, 2025
Turkiye has expressed “deep concern” over Lebanese President Joseph Aoun’s recent visit to Cyprus and has plans to “blackmail” Beirut if it chooses to counter Ankara’s influence in the Mediterranean, a senior Lebanese source told The Cradle on 14 July.
“Ankara expressed deep concern over Aoun’s visit to the Cypriot capital, Nicosia, and viewed it as a worrying sign of Beirut’s potential openness to Mediterranean and European partnerships that are inconsistent with its agenda in the Eastern Mediterranean,” the source said.
“Northern Lebanon is witnessing a worrying increase in the number of displaced Syrians with complex security backgrounds,” the source added, noting an increase in cross-border [weapons] smuggling operations which are taking place “under the direct sponsorship and cover of Syrian and Turkish security agencies.”
According to the Lebanese source, Aoun’s visit to Cyprus “revealed files of political and security blackmail prepared by Turkiye for use later if Beirut decides to pursue strategic options that conflict with Ankara’s interests in Lebanon and the region.”
The source went on to say that Ankara “considers northern Lebanon as its traditional area of influence and will not tolerate any new official positioning by Beirut that threatens its geopolitical position in the Mediterranean.”
Turkiye invaded Cyprus in 1974 and controls the northern part of the island. Ankara views Greek Cyprus as a main regional and geopolitical rival.
The Cradle’s Malik Khoury wrote that Ankara is unlikely to take kindly to an improvement of Lebanese–Cypriot ties, and has strong ambitions for northern Lebanon.
“Turkiye has long-standing historical ties to northern Lebanon,” he said. Citing Lebanese sources, he noted Ankara’s “interest in the port of Tripoli.” Geographically and maritime-wise, this is the largest port in the Mediterranean in terms of potential. “If rehabilitated, it could rival the Israeli port of Haifa. Ankara also has its eye on the Qlayaat Airport, near the Syrian border, as well as large areas of the Akkar Plain, rich in minerals and natural resources,” he added.
Thousands of extremist Islamist prisoners, including Syrians linked to the groups now affiliated with authorities in Damascus, are held in Lebanon’s Roumieh prison.
Reports from after the fall of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government said that Syria was planning to request their repatriation.
A day after Aoun’s visit to Cyprus last week, a source quoted by Syria TV threatened to revive the issue of Syrian prisoners in Lebanon, while hinting at the potential closure of the Syrian–Lebanese border. The report said Damascus is unhappy with Beirut’s “handling” of the situation and is planning a political and diplomatic escalation if the issue is not resolved.
“If you want to breathe air via Cyprus, you will suffocate by land from Damascus,” the source said.
The information provided by the Lebanese source to The Cradle comes as there has been growing concern about potential ambitions by Syria’s extremist-dominated military to take over swathes of northern Lebanon.
There have been reports recently that extremist fighters from Syria have been infiltrating Lebanon.
The Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) denied these reports on Sunday and said they are working to ensure the security of the border.
Ten people, including two foreign nationals, were detained during an LAF operation in the town of Btebyat in Metn in the Mount Lebanon governorate, according to an army statement Sunday evening. The suspects’ nationalities were not specified.
Initial findings indicated that the individuals were not linked to any extremist organizations. The army’s statement did not acknowledge circulating reports of attempts to stockpile weapons across the country in preparation for attacks.
A report by Israel’s i24 in early July claimed Syria is demanding control over the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli during ongoing talks between Damascus and Tel Aviv.
The concern caused by this report and others like it was compounded on Friday, when US envoy Tom Barrack warned that Lebanon is “going to be Bilad al-Sham (historical name for Greater Syria) again” if Hezbollah does not surrender its arms.
“Syrians say Lebanon is our beach resort,” Barrack added.
The threat of extremist factions, which now make up the bulk of the Syrian state, is not new to Lebanon.
The Syrian army is predominantly made up of what used to be known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), an extremist Al-Qaeda-linked organization which was headed by Syria’s new President Ahmad al-Sharaa (known back then as Abu Mohammad al-Julani).
HTS was formerly known as the Nusra Front – Al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria. The organization, responsible for deadly suicide attacks inside Lebanon, took over large swathes of the Syrian–Lebanese border in the first few years of the war in Syria, including the barrens of Arsal and Ras Baalbek.
The organization was eventually fully repelled by Hezbollah and the Lebanese army in 2017 in what is referred to as “The Second Liberation.”
HTS and the other groups, which have been incorporated into the Syrian Defense Ministry, have long operated under the direct tutelage of Turkish intelligence.
Iranian FM: Netanyahu ‘openly dictating’ US in talks with Iran
Press TV – July 13, 2025
The Iranian foreign minister has stated that Israel’s prime minister has failed to achieve any of his objectives through the regime’s latest war of aggression against Iran.
Abbas Araghchi commented that Benjamin Netanyahu is “openly dictating” what the US should or should not say or do in discussions with Iran, despite his failures during the recent aggression against the Islamic Republic.
He made these remarks in a social media post in response to Netanyahu’s assertion that Iran must limit the range of its missiles to 480 kilometers.
Araghchi described it as absurd to expect Iran to accept advice from “a war criminal.”
He emphasized that Netanyahu’s aspirations to undermine more than 40 years of peaceful nuclear advancements were unrealistic.
He noted that every one of the dozen Iranian scientists killed by mercenaries trained over 100 capable successors, who will demonstrate their capabilities to Netanyahu.
“But his arrogance doesn’t end there. Having miserably failed to achieve any of his war objectives in Iran and compelled to turn to ‘Daddy’ when our powerful missiles targeted secret Israeli sites—which Netanyahu is still censoring—he is now openly dictating what the US should or shouldn’t say or do in talks with Iran,” he stated.
On June 13, Israel launched a blatant and unprovoked act of aggression against Iran, assassinating many high-ranking military commanders, nuclear scientists, and ordinary civilians.
More than a week later, the United States also entered the war by bombing three Iranian nuclear sites in a grave violation of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the NPT.
In response, the Iranian Armed Forces targeted strategic sites across the occupied territories as well as the al-Udeid air base in Qatar, the largest American military base in West Asia.
On June 24, Iran, through its successful retaliatory operations against both the Israeli regime and the US, managed to impose a halt to the illegal assault.
Bornholm Island: NATO’s Baltic Bridgehead for Aggression Against Russia
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 14.07.2025
Copenhagen is using the old ‘Russian threat’ excuse to justify the militarization of its easternmost island, but NATO operational planning and drills reveal otherwise.
Where is Bornholm?
Situated about 140 km southeast of Copenhagen in waters between Sweden, Poland and Germany, the 588 km2 island has been a strategic stronghold since medieval times, used by Vikings, Scandinavian kings, Napoleon and the Nazis for both defensive and offensive operations.
In 2022, NATO announced plans to turn the Baltic Sea into a ‘NATO lake’. Bornholm would play a key role in this calculus.
Breaking Old Agreements
Freed from the Nazis by the Red Army in WWII, Bornholm was returned to Denmark by Moscow on the understanding that foreign troops would never again be stationed there. Denmark reneged in 2022, okaying large-scale NATO drills on and around the island.
Drills have included deployments of US HIMARS MLRS (300 km max range) and Typhon missile system components (2,500 km range). The Typhon TEL can fire SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles, whose payload, notably, can include nuclear warheads.
Military Infrastructure Buildup
- construction of a 85m spy tower in Ostermarie (2017)
- inclusion in NATO’s Baltic “island chain” strategy alongside Gotland and Aland (2023)
- plans to add 5k troops to the local garrison (2025)
Air and Naval Power Projection
Bornholm’s Ronne Airport has a military apron, and has been used in drills by Finnish F-18 jets (2024). Moscow has accused USAF strategic bombers flying toward Russian cities including Kaliningrad and St. Petersburg of hiding in the island’s airspace to avoid interception by Russian jets.
Ronne’s seaport has undergone expansions (2023) to accommodate large ships, including military and support vessels.
Fictitious Justifications
“Bornholm’s militarization is taking place under the false pretext of the need to protect the island from the ‘Russian threat,’” even though Russia “has never had aggressive intentions toward Denmark,” Ambassador Vladimir Barbin has said.
NATO Preparing Moldova for “Porobable Armed Conflict” with Russia – SVR
Sputnik – 14.07.2025
NATO is actively preparing to involve Moldova in a potential armed conflict with Russia, and a decision has been made in Brussels to accelerate the country’s transformation into the alliance’s “forward outpost” on the eastern flank, the press office of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) stated.
“The press office of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service reports that, according to information received by the SVR, NATO is actively preparing to engage Moldova in a probable armed conflict with Russia. A decision has been made in Brussels to speed up the transformation of the country into the ‘forward outpost of the alliance on the eastern flank, taking into account the advancement of Russian forces in Ukraine,'” the statement reads.
NATO is working to make Moldova’s territory suitable for the rapid deployment of the alliance’s troops to Russian borders, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service reported.
“NATO forces are intensively turning what was once a peaceful agricultural republic into a military testing ground. Moldova’s territory is being made suitable for the operational redeployment of NATO troops to Russia’s borders. Projects are underway to switch to European railway standards and increase the capacity of bridges. Logistic hubs, large warehouses, and areas for concentrating military equipment are being built. The Marculesti and Balti airfields, located near Ukraine, are being modernized with a focus on enabling the reception of a significant number of combat and military transport aircraft,” the statement said.
The Western military bloc expects that Moldovans will become “cannon fodder” in the event of armed actions against Russia, said the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service.
Moldova is heavily relying on NATO support for the pro-presidential “Action and Solidarity” party in the upcoming parliamentary elections, the press office reported.
Trump issues threat to Russia over Ukraine conflict
RT | July 14, 2025
US President Donald Trump has threatened to impose “severe” tariffs of up to 100% on Russia’s trading partners unless a deal is reached to end the Ukraine conflict within 50 days.
Trump issued the warning on Monday during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office.
“We’re very, very unhappy – I am – with [Russia], and we’re going to be doing very severe tariffs if we don’t have a deal in about 50 days,” he stated.
Trump blamed his predecessor Joe Biden for dragging Washington into the conflict, saying the US had spent approximately $350 billion on aid for Ukraine.
The US president also mentioned a congressional bill that would impose tougher sanctions on Russia, saying, “I’m not sure we need it, but it’s good they’re doing it… could be very useful.” A Senate vote is expected next week.
He noted that, if there was no progress on Ukraine, slapping Russia with secondary US tariffs would not require congressional approval.
Secondary tariffs are sometimes introduced on countries that do business with a sanctioned country.
Trump also announced that the US will send weapons to Ukraine through NATO, which would handle both payment and distribution.
“We’ve made a deal today where we are going to be sending them weapons, and they’re going to be paying for them,” he said.
Russia has repeatedly denounced the West for supplying Ukraine with weapons, warning that this only serves to prolong the conflict and makes no impact on its outcome.
The Russian stock market soared on Trump’s remarks, with the main index jumping nearly 3%, according to data from the Moscow Exchange.
Who profits when nations bleed: Pentagon, Trump or the arms lobby?
By Nazmelis Zengin | Daily Sabah | July 3, 2025
In recent months, the drums of war have started beating once again in Washington. This time, however, the noise comes not from the front lines, but from boardrooms, lobbying corridors and the heart of an invisible yet relentless power struggle.
A critical conflict is unfolding not between the U.S. and Iran, but between two rival power blocs within the U.S. itself. On one side stands the Pentagon, advocating strategic caution and increasingly aligning with President Donald Trump. On the other side is a powerful alliance of defense industry lobbies, pro-Israel actors and rising private sector forces.
The arms lobby and private capital feed not only on increased defense spending but also on the economic opportunities that war presents. Senator Lindsey Graham has long been one of the most loyal champions of this lobby. Since the Iraq War, he has served as a political emissary for defense giants like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. His rhetoric today mirrors the past: “U.S. deterrence is only possible through resolve.” But behind this call for resolve lies a multi-billion-dollar procurement pipeline.
Following the U.S. airstrikes on Iran’s Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan facilities on June 22, 2025, the Pentagon attempted to frame the narrative. Department of Defense spokesperson Pete Hegseth stated, “This mission is not about regime change … It was a precision strike aimed at the nuclear program.” Gen. Dan Caine, chair of the Joint Chiefs, added, “Our B2 mission inflicted severe damage, but it is too early to fully assess the impact.” These statements reflect the Pentagon’s cautious public posture, even as more aggressive steps unfold behind the scenes. The repeated emphasis on “retaliation risk” signals that the military is reluctant to be drawn into full-scale war.
Trump, in contrast, portrayed the strike as a victory: “Iran’s nuclear infrastructure has been destroyed.” He soon posted on social media: “If the current Iranian regime can’t ‘Make Iran Great Again,’ why not consider regime change?” This starkly contradicted Pentagon messaging and suggested Trump was leveraging the war narrative for domestic political gain ahead of the elections. Early June 2025 polls showed Trump’s approval among Republican voters rose slightly post-strike, while independents remained skeptical.
Iran responded swiftly with missile strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq and cyber operations targeting American infrastructure, signaling it would not remain passive. The United Nations Security Council convened an emergency session, where European and Chinese representatives warned that escalation could destabilize the entire region. Meanwhile, oil prices surged 18% in the week following the strikes, adding global economic pressure.
Trump’s decision won enthusiastic support from Senator Graham and Tom Cotton. However, Democrats responded sharply. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez declared, “This strike was carried out without Congressional approval and is unconstitutional,” reviving impeachment discussions. Within the Republican Party, Vice President JD Vance and commentator Tucker Carlson distanced themselves from Trump’s hawkish faction, while the arms lobby viewed the intervention as a strategic opportunity. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon Technologies shares rose by 11% and 9% respectively in the week after the strikes.
Washington Post columnist Jason Willick warned, “Trump’s actions risk repeating the mistakes made in Iraq, this time in Iran.” The Guardian’s Stephen Wertheim echoed this concern: “The U.S. is on the verge of repeating its Iraq error in Iran.” A RAND Corporation report noted that regime change efforts typically produce protracted conflicts with unforeseen consequences.
Private sector actors in the U.S. no longer settle for market share; they now seek to shape strategic direction. Companies like Starlink and SpaceX are embedded within the Pentagon, gaining technological footholds and influence over decision-making. SpaceX’s new 2.1 billion contract for missile tracking satellites exemplifies how tech giants are reshaping national security priorities. The alliance between defense contractors and tech giants is redefining the very notion of national interest.
This evolution weakens traditional state institutions and circumvents democratic oversight, not just a shift in strategy, but what could be described as a modern civilian cloaked coup. This recalls political scientist C. Wright Mills’ 1956 concept of the “power elite.” Mills warned that when state, military, and economic actors form a mutually reinforcing triangle, democratic accountability gives way to elite consensus. Similarly, Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens’ Democracy in America? demonstrated that economic elites and large corporations exert more influence on U.S. policy than average voters. RAND and Stockholm International Peace Research Institution (SIPRI) data confirm that this nexus intensifies during military interventions. For example, RAND’s 2024 report found that military spending increased by up to 30% directly due to private sector lobbying, while SIPRI’s 2023 data showed that 65% of major defense contracts during crises were awarded without competitive bidding. These findings illustrate how ties between lobbyist capital and the state tighten during war and crisis periods.
In this context, the boundaries of free market intervention in public policy are no longer theoretical; they are existential. Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz has emphasized, “Market failures produce not only economic consequences but political ones as well.” When inequality concentrates not just wealth but decision-making power, democracy begins to erode. Public authority must retain its regulatory and directional role for markets to function properly.
Moreover, economist Mariana Mazzucato’s theory of the “entrepreneurial state” offers a necessary counterpoint. She argues that the public sector should not merely correct market failures but also take on a proactive investment role. Yet today we witness the opposite: public policy is shaped by private sector logic, endangering the state’s protective and innovative capacities. The transformation of the state from a guiding force into one that is guided reflects a sacrifice of long-term public good for short-term private profit.
Protests have erupted across major U.S. cities, with demonstrators denouncing the war as “a war for corporate gain.” Brookings public opinion research shows a sharp rise in distrust of the government’s motives behind foreign interventions.
Today, private actors born under the guise of the free market no longer settle for profit alone; they seek to steer foreign policy. As the U.S. returns to the Middle East after two decades, it does so not out of moral necessity or strategic urgency but under the pressure of corporatist interests eager for enrichment.
The real question is: Who inside the United States wants this war most, and perhaps more crucially, who has the power to stop it?
Zelensky threatens ‘long-range strikes’ in Russia
RT | July 14, 2025
Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has threatened new strikes deep inside Russia, days after the US pledged to resume military aid to Kiev.
Zelensky made the remarks after a meeting with Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces Aleksandr Syrsky, and Chief of the General Staff Andrey Gnatov on Sunday.
“Our units will continue to destroy the occupiers and do everything possible to bring the war onto Russian territory. We are preparing our new long-range strikes,” Zelensky wrote on X.
He added that Ukraine is preparing for a visit by US presidential envoy Keith Kellogg and will “work with partners on arms deliveries and scaling up joint production of essential defense assets.”
Among its recent attacks far from the front line, Ukraine targeted military airfields housing strategic bombers in several Russian regions last month. Ukrainian drones and missiles also repeatedly struck apartment blocks and other civilian infrastructure. According to Moscow, Ukraine was responsible for the passenger train derailment on March 31, which left seven people dead.
The EU has allocated hundreds of billions of euros in recent months to expand its military-industrial complex and support Ukraine’s domestic armament production.
Berlin will provide Ukraine its first batch of long-range missiles financed by Germany in the coming weeks, Major General Christian Freuding, who oversees the coordination of the country’s military support for Kiev, has said.
US President Donald Trump said earlier this week that the Pentagon will resume deliveries to Kiev, following weeks of suspension, and reportedly considers approving a first new aid package since returning to office.
Russia has said that it views the use of foreign-supplied missiles as direct participation by Western states in the conflict and claimed that Ukrainian troops cannot operate sophisticated weapons systems on their own.
Lasha Kasradze: Azerbaijan as the Next Frontline Against Russia & Iran?
Glenn Diesen | July 13, 2025
As Azerbaijan takes an increasingly hostile approach to both Russia and Iran, it risks becoming a proxy in a wider regional war. Azerbaijan’s Zangezur corridor connects Azerbaijan closer to Turkey, and thus NATO. Many uncertainties emerge in terms of what happens to Armenia, to what extent Turkey and NATO can project power that deep into the South Caucasus, and how Russia and Iran will react. Lasha Kasradze is an international affairs analyst from Georgia, and an expert on the wider region.
Featured Video
No More Ukraine Proxy War? You’re a Traitor!
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The lies about the 1967 war are still more powerful than the truth
By Alan Hart | June 4, 2012
In retrospect it can be seen that the 1967 war, the Six Days War, was the turning point in the relationship between the Zionist state of Israel and the Jews of the world (the majority of Jews who prefer to live not in Israel but as citizens of many other nations). Until the 1967 war, and with the exception of a minority of who were politically active, most non-Israeli Jews did not have – how can I put it? – a great empathy with Zionism’s child. Israel was there and, in the sub-consciousness, a refuge of last resort; but the Jewish nationalism it represented had not generated the overtly enthusiastic support of the Jews of the world. The Jews of Israel were in their chosen place and the Jews of the world were in their chosen places. There was not, so to speak, a great feeling of togetherness. At a point David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father and first prime minister, was so disillusioned by the indifference of world Jewry that he went public with his criticism – not enough Jews were coming to live in Israel.
So how and why did the 1967 war transform the relationship between the Jews of the world and Israel? … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Bill Francis on Chris Minns Defends NSW “Hate… Sheree Sheree on I was canceled by three newspa… Richard Ong on Czech–Slovak alignment signals… John Edward Kendrick on Colonel Jacques Baud & Nat… eddieb on Villains of Judea: Ronald Laud… rezjiekc on Substack Imposes Digital ID Ch… loongtip on US strikes three vessels in Ea… eddieb on An Avoidable Disaster Steve Jones on For Israel, The Terrorist Atta… cleversensationally3… on Over Half of Germans Feel Unab… loongtip on Investigation Into U.S. Milita… loongtip on Zelensky’s Impossible De…
Aletho News- How Policies From The Bi-Parisian Foreign Policy Establishment Led To Trump’s Venezuela War
- No More Ukraine Proxy War? You’re a Traitor!
- Sexual Blackmail Makes the World Go ‘Round
- Powerful Israeli Strikes on South Lebanon and Bekaa
- UAE-backed militia in Yemen reaches out to Israel for alliance against ‘common foes’: Report
- The UAE’s reverse trajectory: From riches to rags
- Chris Minns Defends NSW “Hate Speech” Laws Linking Censorship to Terror Prevention
- Majority of Belgians oppose theft of Russian assets – poll
- Czech–Slovak alignment signals growing dissatisfaction with Brussels’ authoritarianism
- Colonel Jacques Baud & Nathalie Yamb Sanctioned: EU Goes Soviet
- If Americans Knew
- Amnesty: ‘Utterly preventable’ Gaza flood tragedy must mobilize global action to end Israel’s genocide
- Israel Propagandists Are Uniformly Spouting The Exact Same Line About The Bondi Beach Shooting
- Ha’aretz: Free the Palestinian Activist Who Dared to Document Israel’s Crimes in the West Bank
- Garbage Is Poisoning Gaza
- Palestinian journalist recounts rape and torture in Israeli prison
- Gaza is crumbling, but its people persevere – Not a Ceasefire Day 69
- Pro-Israel billionaire Miriam Adelson green-lights a Trump 3rd term
- Australians Being Massacred Shouldn’t Bother Us More Than Palestinians Being Massacred
- Garbage, stench, sewage, and rats plague Gaza – Not a Ceasefire Day 68
- The Zionist Billionaire Circle Hiding in Plain Sight
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: 8000 Years Ago Relative Sea Level Was 30 Meters Higher Than Today Across East Antarctica
- The Wind Energy Paradox: “Why More Wind Turbines Don’t Always Mean More Power”
- New Study Reopens Questions About Our Ability To Meaningfully Assess Global Mean Temperature
- Dialing Back The Panic: German Physics Prof Sees No Evidence Of Climate Tipping Points!
- Astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon Challenges The Climate Consensus … It’s The Sun, Not CO2
- Regional Cooling Since The 1980s Has Driven Glacier Advance In The Karakoram Mountains
- Greenland Petermann Glacier Has Grown 30 Kilometers Since 2012!
- New Study: Temperature-Driven CO2 Outgassing Explains 83 Percent Of CO2 Rise Since 1959
- Climate Extremists Ordered By Hamburg Court To Pay €400,000 In Damages
- More Evidence NE China Is Not Cooperating With The Alarmist Global Warming Narrative
Aletho News 