Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Panic and production cuts at Pentagon suppliers as China tightens exports

Inside China Business | August 7, 2025

Forever wars in the Middle East, and now in Ukraine, have drained NATO arsenals. But while the US and NATO countries have made giant pledges to boost defense spending, China’s export bans on critical materials are blowing up supply chains for Pentagon weapons makers. 

Resources and links:

Wall Street Journal, China Is Still Choking Exports of Rare Earths Despite Pact With U.S. https://www.wsj.com/world/china/china…

Wall Street Journal, China Is Choking Supply of Critical Minerals to Western Defense Companies https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/china-…

Zerohedge, China’s Grip On Critical Minerals Disrupts U.S. Defense Supply Chain https://www.zerohedge.com/military/ch…

78% of US military weapon systems vulnerable to China’s critical mineral dominance https://theoregongroup.com/commoditie…

Nearly one in 10 ‘Tier 1’ subcontractors to defense primes are Chinese firms: Report https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/n…

China Adds 28 U.S. Defense Companies to Export Controls List https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/ch…

Defence expenditures and NATO’s 5% commitment https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/to…

Antimony Is A Strategic Metal That Is Critical For The Defense Industry & The West Doesn’t Have Much https://robertsinn.substack.com/p/ant…

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | 1 Comment

The Price of Speaking Truth

Dr. Martin Feeley and the cost of courage

By Trish Dennis | July 31, 2025

In April 2023, The Irish Times published a quietly devastating article under the headline:

The doctor who questioned Ireland’s Covid policy and lost his job: ‘We destroyed young people’s lives for what?’

This article told the story of Dr. Martin Feeley, a man who had already lived an extraordinary life before becoming a reluctant public dissenter during one of the most charged periods in Irish history.

A vascular surgeon by training, Martin Feeley was also an Olympian, representing Ireland in rowing at the 1976 Summer Games. Born in Lecarrow, County Roscommon in 1950, he qualified from UCD in medicine and later became a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. In 1985, he earned a Master’s in surgery, and by 2015, he had been appointed Group Clinical Director of the Dublin Midlands Hospital Group, one of the most senior medical administrative roles in Ireland’s Health Service Executive (HSE.)

By any measure, Dr. Martin Feeley was an exceptional person, not just accomplished, but genuinely liked and respected by his colleagues, patients, friends and everyone who knew him through the Irish rowing community. He was known and loved not just for his clinical expertise, but also for his warmth, integrity, intelligence and humour. Those who worked alongside him described a kind, principled man, generous with his time, supportive of younger colleagues, and unwilling to play politics with the truth.

A sample few of the many heartfelt tributes left in the Condolence Book on RIP.ie following Dr. Feeley’s death in December 2023, read:

“I had the privilege to work with Mr Feeley in AMNCH and that made all the difference to me. He exemplified integrity, empathy and good sense. Authentic, kind and encouraging, a Colossus amongst men and medics. And always brilliantly funny.”

“A decent man, a great teacher, much respected.”

A patient shares:

“Thank you Mr. Feeley for saving my life in 2013. Fly high with the Lord. RIP.”

What stands out in the many tributes is how deeply admired he was, not just for his medical expertise, but for his warmth, kindness and humour and the deep impression he left on those who worked with him. Again and again, the tributes spoke of his decency and integrity.

And yet, when it really mattered, during a period in Irish life when decency and integrity were needed most, it was precisely those qualities that cost Dr. Feeley his job.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, Dr. Feeley raised a profoundly important question, one that has aged far better than the policies it challenged: Was the State’s response proportionate to the actual risk faced by the population, particularly children and young adults?

Dr. Feeley did not deny the virus or downplay the risks. He simply raised a measured, evidence-based concern, which was that the restrictions being imposed were doing real and lasting harm. Drawing on clinical experience and moral clarity, he warned of the damage being done, especially to children and young people, through shuttered schools and colleges, cancelled sports, and the loss of everyday human connection. He believed that those at low risk could, in time, build natural immunity, helping to reduce the danger to the most vulnerable.

His critique wasn’t vague or emotional. It was specific, well-informed, and in hindsight, remarkably prescient. Among the key points he raised:

  • Restrictions should have focused on those most at risk, not applied as blanket rules to everyone. Healthy younger people, he argued, could have built immunity more safely, helping society reopen sooner and more fairly.
  • He condemned the government’s communication strategy, especially the daily case counts, calling them a form of “deliberate, unforgivable terrorising of the population.”
  • His concerns were later echoed by others, including former HSE infection control chief Professor Martin Cormican who suggested that Dr. Feeley wasn’t alone in his thinking, just in his willingness to say it out loud.
  • He examined ICU projections and found they didn’t match the alarmist tone of official briefings. On the ground, he was seeing only a handful of Covid patients in intensive care, far fewer than the public had been led to expect.
  • He urged staff to keep perspective, pointing out that statistically, a healthy person under 65 was more likely to be injured cycling than to die of Covid.
  • He objected to the new definition of a “case”, expanded to include any positive test result, even in people with no symptoms, a shift that he believed inflated fear and distorted the public understanding of risk.

And Dr. Feeley never backed down. If anything, he felt that the passing of time only confirmed the accuracy and necessity of what he said.

From the very early days of the pandemic, Dr. Feeley spoke with a compassion and honesty that few public health figures dared to match. In an article written in October 2020 for The Irish Times, written as Ireland entered a second lockdown, he captured the human cost in a single, unforgettable sentence:

“Life is not a video game which we can freeze-frame and restart when a vaccine arrives. All living is being suspended, but unfortunately all lifetime is passing, even for those with six months or a year to live, with or without Covid-19.”

This line “Life is not a video game which we can freeze-frame and restart when a vaccine arrives” gets to the heart of the problem with lockdown thinking. Real life cannot be paused. Time moves forward inevitably, especially for those who are elderly, ill, or nearing the end of life.

And it’s not only the old people who lost something. For young people too, there are moments in life, rites of passage, milestones, celebrations, that happen once and cannot be relived or recreated. Birthdays, graduations, first jobs, leaving school, falling in love, saying goodbye. These are not things you can reschedule. That time was taken from our young people, and it can never be given back.

Dr. Feeley’s point was that by trying to preserve life at all costs, we ended up suspending the very things that made life worth living, human connection, care, life experiences and milestones. When he said “all life time is passing even for those with six months or a year to live”, it was a stark reminder that waiting for a vaccine wasn’t just a pause for some, it was a loss they would never get back. It challenged the technocratic idea that society could be put on hold without consequence, and called for a more humane, proportionate approach, one that saw people not as data points but as human beings living in real time.

And yet, for speaking so clearly and ethically, he was punished.

In September 2020, Dr. Feeley was forced to resign from his role as Clinical Director of the Dublin Midlands Hospital Group under pressure from the HSE following a series of media interviews. In that April 2023 article from The Irish Times, Dr. Feeley is quoted as saying that “within days” of airing his objections to the restrictions he was removed from his position. He specifically stated:

“I was forced to resign as opposed to just walking away.”

He attributed responsibility for his exit to the former HSE Chief Executive Paul Reid, although Reid denied involvement.

He was further quoted in that article of having said about his decision to speak publicly against the lockdowns from inside the HSE:

“The only stupid thing I did,” he said, “was to say what I thought. I should have kept my mouth shut.”

Those words should shame us. Because they don’t just reflect one man’s bitter experience, they reflect a sick and dishonest culture. A culture that punished integrity and rewarded compliance and where the cost of speaking truth was professional exile. In Dr. Feeley’s case, the silence of Irish medicine was not only deafening, it was shamefully complicit.

Following Dr. Feeley’s death in 2023, tributes poured in across social media. Colleagues, former patients, independent politicians, and members of the public remembered him not just as a brilliant surgeon, but as a man of deep principle and uncommon courage. Independent TD Michael McNamara called him “a doctor unafraid to question the consensus.” Another tribute read: “If only we had more men like him in this country. We lost a good one. RIP Dr Feeley.” One especially searing comment captured the public mood: “This poor man was shunned… by the HSE… for challenging the ‘science’ that caused untold damage… RIP.”

These aren’t just empty or generic eulogies, they’re heartfelt tributes from people who understood and valued what he stood for.

At this stage in the game, five years on from that bleak chapter, I shouldn’t be surprised by the Irish establishment’s failure to learn anything meaningful from all of this, and yet somehow I still am. Despite everything we’ve seen and lived through, I remain both astonished and disheartened by how little reflection or change seems to have taken place.

Not only has the Irish state failed to reckon with the silencing of Dr Martin Feeley and others like him, it now appears poised to reward the chief architect of the very policies they dared to question. Dr Tony Holohan, who served as chair of the National Public Health Emergency Team (NPHET) during the pandemic and was widely seen as the public face of Ireland’s Covid response, is now reportedly being considered for the highest office in the land, the Irish Presidency.

Often described as Ireland’s answer to Dr Anthony Fauci, Dr. Holohan became synonymous with the government’s lockdown policies. Under Dr. Holohan’s watch, Ireland implemented one of the strictest lockdown regimes in the EU, including the longest closure of public venues across Europe. On a global level, Ireland had the fourth most stringent lockdown in the world, behind only Cuba, Eritrea and Honduras.

Whether or not this presidential bid ultimately materialises, the very suggestion that Dr. Holohan could be a contender for the most prestigious office in the state, is a striking example of the Irish establishment doubling down on steroids. Rather than reassess, Ireland appears intent on enshrining its mistakes.

To elevate Dr. Holohan now is to consecrate a version of history in which men like Dr. Feeley were cast as dangerous and disposable, and those who imposed sweeping harms on the Irish population are hailed as statesmen. It sends a chilling message that in Ireland, telling the truth as you see it, even from a place of expertise, ethics, and professional integrity is punishable. That the architect of Ireland’s extreme lockdowns, a man who dictated when we could hug our loved ones, is now being considered for the Irish presidency is not only shocking but morally obscene.

In fact, were he still with us today, Dr Martin Feely is exactly the sort of person the Irish people should have elected as their President, being someone who truly stood for the people of Ireland. He did his utmost, against all odds, to advocate for their rights and to stand firm against the harms he knew were being inflicted upon them.

Dr. Feeley’s voice may be silent now, but what he stood for must continue to be heard. He spoke with reason, compassion and integrity in a time of hysteria and institutional cowardice. He recognised the true human cost, not just in lives lost, but in lives unravelling, in relationships strained or severed, in connections broken, and in communities turning on themselves.

Dr Feely understood that this harm was not abstract but deeply personal and that it fell heaviest on those least equipped to bear it, those children and young people whose milestones were stolen, the elderly who were isolated and forgotten, and the already marginalised who were pushed further to the edges of society.

To honour him now is to face what we did, not in blame, but in truth. We must reject the whitewashing of history that elevates bureaucrats and silences decent and honest people. We have to ensure that in any future crisis, conscience will not be a sackable offence.

We lost Dr. Feely too soon, and with him, a voice the Irish people sorely needed. I would have loved the chance to meet him, shake his hand, and thank him for speaking up for all of us, for humanity, and for decency. I wish I could have told him that in person. Still, I write it now in the hope that someone, somewhere might read about this remarkable man and find courage and inspiration in his example.

Martin, may you rest in peace. You were one of the good ones. You stood for what was right when it mattered most. We remember you with gratitude, respect and love.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

How real is the U.S. rhetoric of a ‘Unified Syria’?

By Erkin Oncan | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 7, 2025

The recent statements by the U.S. Special Envoy for Syria, Thomas Barrack, may at first glance appear to reflect diplomatic commitment, but developments on the ground and the U.S.’s covert alliances reveal that this rhetoric is largely a propaganda maneuver.

Speaking to the Associated Press, Barrack emphasized that the “deaths and massacres” on both sides of the conflict in southern Syria are unacceptable, stating: “I believe the current Syrian government, which is a new government with very few resources to address the emerging issues, is doing the best it can.”

However, if we are to speak of “territorial integrity” in the context of a new Syria, it is clear that the U.S.’s de facto policy in Syria actually serves to strengthen structures that weaken the country’s territorial unity. On the ground, the U.S. has established a fragile balance between Syria’s new government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). While this balance may give the appearance of localized stability in the short term, it carries the potential to pave the way for Syria’s long-term fragmentation. These entities are ideologically, ethnically, and politically at odds, with starkly conflicting expectations for a new Syria.

Red Lines in the Damascus—SDF Talks

The Damascus administration’s plans to integrate the SDF into the New Syrian Army, dismantle its autonomous structure, and transfer control of northeastern resources (oil, borders, educational institutions) to the Syrian state are clear.

The SDF, meanwhile, although it continues its contacts with the new Syrian administration, maintains a series of “red lines”: preserving autonomous administration, integrating its forces into the army independently of the central command, receiving a share of resources, and maintaining control over the borders.

In this scenario, the U.S. — a power that has provided extensive military and political support to both sides over time — appears to be attempting to “gloss over” this deeply uncertain process with diplomatic statements and messages of goodwill.

Israel’s Proxy Strategy

Israel, which has effectively “entered” the Syrian arena through the Suwayda clashes, likely sees the criticisms voiced by its greatest ally’s special envoy as a mere formality. Israel’s main strategy here is to sever southern Syria from Damascus and create new zones of control via proxy forces under the pretext of border security.

In other words, while there is rhetorical emphasis on a “Unified Syria,” what is being built on the ground is an increasingly entrenched multi-structure reality. A possible agreement between the SDF and HTS (Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham), for example, is not just about two armed groups sitting at the negotiating table; it encapsulates the conflicting interests of regional and global actors.

The negotiations between the SDF and HTS do not only involve these two actors; the balance includes the intervention of the U.S., Israel, and Turkey. Turkey, operating on the assumption that these negotiations will proceed parallel to the PKK’s disarmament process, seeks to secure its “share” in the governance of the new Syria.

The SDF, which received the most comprehensive support from the U.S. during the Trump era, is aware that such direct military and political backing may not continue under the Democrats. Furthermore, Washington’s regional priorities have shifted. Therefore, the SDF is striving to secure a balanced but strong position against HTS, with the primary goal of ensuring its continued existence. It is among the claims reported in Israeli and regional media that the group has engaged in a series of meetings not only with the U.S. but also with Israel.

Israel, for its part, is determined to exploit the “power vacuum” emerging in the new Syria to the fullest extent. What began under the guise of border security has now merged with Israel’s structural expansionist policy. Should Israel decide to “accelerate” its operations in Syria, it is well aware that Damascus may not be able to mount a serious resistance.

Is the Damascus Government Falling Short?

The new government led by Shara has so far failed to demonstrate the capacity to bear the role of “new leadership.” It faces a governance crisis, ethnic massacres that have sparked international condemnation, ongoing clashes with Israel, and severe economic issues.

Thus, the Damascus government finds itself compelled to “find middle ground” with the SDF, the U.S., and even Israel in order to secure its hold on power.

Within this equation, the perception of Iran as the “primary threat” on a regional level offers significant clues about the future of current power struggles.

The “Iran Threat” Will Determine the Balance

Despite suffering a severe blow with the fall of the Assad regime, Iran remains one of the strongest actors in the region. The SDF’s potential to serve as an “independent balancing force” against Iran perfectly aligns with the interests of the Tel Aviv—Washington axis. Therefore, in negotiations between the SDF and Damascus, the scenario in which the SDF’s demands gain weight and the central government’s power is curtailed is highly probable.

Despite the U.S.’s diplomatic calls for “unity,” the SDF’s de facto autonomy, its capacity to continue negotiations with Damascus thanks to current power balances, and the U.S.—Israel strategy of positioning against Iran all stand in the way of any real unification of Syria. Under current circumstances, it is nearly impossible for the new Syrian government under Shara to evolve into a stable and functioning structure. Ongoing military, political, and economic crises, coupled with the overarching “main threat is Iran” strategy, necessitate the continuation of the existing fragmented structure.

In conclusion, Washington’s rhetoric of a “Unified Syria” is largely propagandistic when viewed in light of the multilayered web of interests and covert alliances on the ground. With the U.S. and Israel seeking to expand the anti-Iran front, the scenario in which the SDF continues to play a strong role outside the framework of the central government remains the most likely outcome.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

The US wants Lebanon, Gaza and Iraq to disarm and will fail

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | August 7, 2025

The US Trump administration not only believes it can disarm Hezbollah, the PMU, and Hamas, but that they will all do so voluntarily. To add to this delusional approach, they continue to demonstrate that by abandoning their weapons, the people of the region will be subjected to endless instability.

Washington based think-tanks are pushing for the dismantlement of the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance through disarmament, the policy being clearly designed to isolate the Islamic Republic in order to also force it into capitulation. However, the approach to achieving this goal is so incredibly out of touch that it may achieve the very opposite results.

Using its Arab Regime allies, particularly the Gulf States, to apply pressure, US envoy Steve Witkoff has attempted to demand of Hamas that it fully disarm. This has been combined with calls from the Pentagon and Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, for Iraq to dismantle the Popular Mobilization Forces and prevent them from integrating fully within the fold of Baghdad’s security apparatus. Then we have the attempt to disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon, an effort led by US envoy Tom Barrack.

Starting with Gaza, the request in and of itself is simply not serious. The al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas would never simply disarm without any guarantees or processes to ensure the protection of the people of the Gaza Strip.

In fact, if we look at the resistance in its entirety in Gaza, they fight as one unit that is inseparable from the people’s popular will. Hamas is no longer just a political party, the al-Qassam Brigades armed wing of Hamas is now the resistance of a people suffering through a genocide.

Also, the Palestinian people have the example of the West Bank and what the situation looks like when the resistance is disarmed and abandons the struggle. When Israeli settlements expand, annexation orders are imposed, and ethnic cleansing begins, there will be nobody to even fight back.

The lessons taught to the Palestinian factions in Gaza were learnt in 1982. When the Israelis invaded Lebanon, killing around 20,000 Lebanese and Palestinians, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) eventually decided to hand over its weapons and its leadership to flee to Tunisia.

Almost immediately afterwards, a series of bloody civilian massacres took place against Palestinian refugees and the Shia Lebanese, killing thousands at a time when no considerable resistance force existed to fight back. Then, the Israelis occupied southern Lebanon.

Hezbollah was born in 1985 out of this experience, as an organic southern resistance which would eventually expel the occupiers in 2000. After the 2006 defeat inflicted on the Zionist regime, the Israelis dared not launch any major aggression against Lebanon for the best part of 17 years.

In the case of Iraq, the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) were formed in order to put down the Daesh insurgency and liberate the country from a wave of Takfiri death squads. It is a massive force today which exists as a protective mechanism that deters the return of such groups from the country.

Attempting to disband the PMU in Iraq is impossible by force and would lead to a civil war style situation, which could end up resulting in Iraqi groups securing even greater power and popular support inside of the country.

In the case of Lebanon, the fall of Syria’s former government and the way the US has so far handled the situation, has taught the diverse population valuable lessons. Even if the Lebanese leadership will work alongside the US in an attempt to seize Hezbollah’s weapons, it is clear to the populace that disarmament leaves Lebanon open to invasion from Syria and places the country at the will of the Zionist Entity.

If we look over to neighboring Syria, immediately upon the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, the Zionists invaded and have been attacking at will inside Syria ever since, with no resistance whatsoever. The new regime in Damascus even works alongside the Israelis as they steal more of its land, instead choosing to allow their allied militias to butcher minority communities throughout Syrian lands.

Everything we have seen occur across the region over the past 22 months, with the full support of the United States, teaches the Arab public that capitulation spells the end of their nations and leaves them vulnerable to endless abuses.

It appears, however, that officials and pro-war think-tanks in Washington are not capable of grasping what the reality on the ground truly looks like and how this could very quickly spiral out of control; and not in the US’ favor. None of these groups which form the Axis of Resistance are going to abandon their own people by simply handing over their weapons, especially given the overtly stated intentions of their enemies.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

John Fetterman, a hawkish US senator who represents Americans but speaks for Israel

By Musa Iqbal | Press TV | August 7, 2025

It is no secret that the political apparatus of the United States is teeming with Zionists.

While some politicians are sleek in their support for the Zionist Occupation (with politically convenient cries for ‘civility’ in Palestine and the rest of the region), others are completely devoted to a maximalist Zionist agenda – advocating for Zionist expansion, aggression, and total servitude to Israeli interests – no matter their maximalist goals.

Among the latter is US Senator John Fetterman, a hawkish politician who once campaigned as a “progressive,” but has now turned into the Israeli occupation’s most darling Democratic cheerleader and an unofficial mouthpiece and apologist of the genocidal child-murdering regime.

Fetterman’s unwavering support for Israel, which comes with belligerent calls for war against Iran, betrays the very principles he once claimed to champion.

During the election cycle that put him into power, progressive groups had rallied around Fetterman as a “working man” that most Americans could relate to. They could not have been more wrong.

Fetterman, often skulking the halls of the US Capitol in a hoodie and gym shorts, has become the poster child for the US political establishment’s subservience to the Zionist project and its reckless drive toward regional hegemony in Western Asia.

Fetterman has shown total support with each new act of Zionist terror, something his constituents are increasingly condemning.

His rhetoric, particularly his enthusiastic endorsement of Israel’s military actions and his calls for US involvement in illegal and unprovoked strikes on Iran, is not only a betrayal of his constituents but a dangerous escalation that threatens to give more support to an increasingly belligerent Israeli occupation entity as it faces an existential crisis.

He has draped himself in the Israeli flag on several occasions—literally and figuratively—while dismissing calls for a ceasefire and championing Israel’s so-called “right to defend itself” against a besieged, starving population.

Perhaps as a hat-tip to his pro-Israeli donors, his office walls are covered with posters of Israeli captives held by the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, further serving as a shrine to a one-sided narrative that erases the decades-long suffering of Palestinians under occupation.

To compare, there are tens of thousands of Palestinian hostages in Zionist prisons, a sizeable amount of them being Palestinian youth.

Speaking of donors, Fetterman has unapologetically collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Zionist lobby. Based on the data organized by Track AIPAC, Fetterman has received over $370,000 in donations from Israeli-associated PACs and donors, with one of his top donors being JStreetPAC, which donated $175k in 2024 alone.

Donations of this caliber suggest extreme levels of loyalty to furthering Israeli settler-colonial interests in the power corridors of Washington – from domestic policy fighting against Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) efforts to foreign policy warmongering on behalf of the American-Israeli axis of evil.

It also aligns with Fetterman’s refusal to acknowledge the Palestinian death toll—over 150,000 by some estimates, including thousands of children—while fixating on Israeli victims reveals a moral bankruptcy that aligns him with the most hawkish elements of the US political spectrum.

Fetterman ghoulishly refuses to acknowledge the catastrophic loss of life, insisting that “now is not the time to talk about a ceasefire.”

Clearly, Fetterman’s loyalty to the Zionist cause goes as far as deliberate endorsement of collective punishment of innocent Palestinians, including children and women, a policy that violates international law.

Of course, being in line with the Zionist occupation’s expansionist interests, Fetterman’s zeal for Israel does not stop at Gaza. He has cheered on for US military aggression against Iran, celebrating the bombings against Iran’s peaceful nuclear program and threatening that Israel can continue to assassinate its nuclear scientists with his and other US politicians’ approval.

In his March 2025 visit to the occupied territories, Fetterman told journalists in Jerusalem al-Quds that he supports “partnering with Israel to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities,” urging the US to “blow it up.”

His rhetoric continued to escalate, including in June 2025, when he called for Israel to assassinate the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei. Such statements are not the musings of a principled senator but the ravings of a warmonger eager to appease the Zionist war machine and its patrons in Washington.

Fetterman’s rhetoric must be seen in the context of the broader US-Israel agenda to neutralize Iran as a regional power, especially as the latter secures critical economic alliances such as a place in BRICS and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization).

For decades, the US and its Zionist ally have sought to undermine Iran’s sovereignty, from crippling, high-pressure sanctions to covert sabotage operations and outright military threats.

Fetterman’s calls for illegal and unjustified strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, which Iran maintains are for peaceful energy purposes, echo the same discredited playbook used to justify the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the bombing of Libya, the destruction of Yugoslavia, etc.

The threat of a nuclear bomb armed Iran is a propaganda campaign orchestrated by Washington and Tel Aviv to justify aggression while ignoring Israel’s undeclared nuclear arsenal, a violation of international norms, and a total means to destabilize the region.

The hypocrisy of Fetterman’s position declares the official US policy for the area: Israel’s nuclear capabilities are strategic and protect American interests, but Iran’s pursuit of energy independence is an intolerable existential threat.

Fetterman, in his blind allegiance to Israel, seems unperturbed by the realities of what the execution of this US-led policy would look like, choosing to ignore the total rupture of the region, plunging the US into a war it would not understand or be prepared for – Iran is not Iraq, Libya, or Afghanistan.

It is a regional power with a sophisticated military and an alliance with resistance groups that would be eager to defend their ally against American aggression.

By endorsing Israel’s strikes on Iran and advocating for US aggression, Fetterman is perpetuating a cycle of violence that benefits only the US ruling class and its Zionist beneficiaries.

The US has spent trillions on wars in the West Asia region, leaving behind shattered societies that will take decades to redevelop.

Fetterman’s call to “take out” Iran’s leadership and nuclear program is a recipe for more of the same- a reckless gamble with lives and resources that the US can ill afford, and would further plant the seeds of disdain for US policy both at home and abroad.

The American people, weary of endless wars and economic hardship, deserve a senator who prioritizes their interests over those of a foreign power tied to genocidal crimes and occupation.

Fetterman’s betrayal of his “progressive” voter base that elected him into power is not just a personal failing but a symptom of a deeper, more sinister alignment in US politics, where loyalty to Israel and the war machine comes before anything else, if anything else at all.

It is incumbent on the global community to reject the likes of Fetterman and their imperialist agendas, as there are war mongers like  Fetterman, or worse,  spread throughout different Western governments.

While they are considering replacements, they can also add someone who knows how to dress themselves as a requirement. Indeed, the bar has never been lower.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Exiled Moldovan opposition head decries police crackdown

RT | August 7, 2025

Moldova’s police action targeting alleged electoral corruption amounts to political persecution of the opponents of the government, according to exiled opposition politician Ilan Shor.

The authorities in Moldova said on Thursday they are conducting 78 search warrants across the country targeting individuals described as “members and sympathizers of a criminal organization.”

Ilan Shor, who leads the opposition Victory political bloc from abroad, claimed that the actions are directed at silencing his movement. The bloc is trying to overturn its ban from taking part in the upcoming parliamentary election against the ruling Party of Action and Solidarity.

“Law enforcement is turning offices and homes upside down solely under this demented suspicion of interference in the 2025 election, which hasn’t even taken place,” Shor said. “These searches are just more political repression and intimidation of anyone who refuses to support those scoundrels.”

Last week, President Maia Sandu, who Shor branded a “microdictator,” accused the Russian government of planning to covertly funnel more than €100 million ($115 million) to her political opponents ahead of Moldova’s parliamentary vote scheduled for September. The Kremlin rejected the claim, calling it another attempt by Chisinau to deflect attention from what it described as the government’s erosion of democratic norms.

Sandu has defended her administration’s crackdown on what she claims are pro-Russian criminal networks, saying these actions are critical to keeping Moldova on the path to EU membership.

Shor, who now resides in Russia, is the founder of the SOR party, which was outlawed by the Moldovan authorities in 2023 after its candidate, Evgenia Gutsul, won a regional election in the autonomous Gagauzia region.

Gutsul, now a leading figure in the Victory bloc, which was formed in 2024 by Euroskeptic politicians, including former SOR members, was sentenced this week to seven years in prison over alleged financial crimes. She denied any wrongdoing and called the verdict an attempt at political assassination.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

US has made ‘acceptable offer’ – Kremlin aide

RT | August 7, 2025

Russia has received an “acceptable” offer from the US on settling the Ukraine conflict, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said, following a visit by US special envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Ushakov commented on the talks between Witkoff and Russian President Vladimir Putin, noting that Moscow had received a “proposal from the Americans” which it is ready to consider, without providing further details.

Ushakov also noted that Russia and the US have topics to discuss, while agreeing with the view of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who earlier described the talks as “a good day.” Rubio had added that “we still have a ways to go, but we’re certainly closer [to peace] today than we were yesterday – when we weren’t close at all.”

The Kremlin aide earlier called the Putin-Witkoff meeting “business-like and constructive,” adding that “Russian-American ties could develop according to a completely different, mutually beneficial scenario,” as compared to the long-running tensions over Ukraine.

He also revealed that Putin could meet Trump as soon as next week. The Russian president later suggested that the United Arab Emirates could potentially host the summit.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment