It remains unclear whether Iran’s effort to establish a new equation in the region has truly succeeded — an equation in which, for the first time, Iran would directly strike Israel if Israel attacks Lebanon.
What is clear is that recent events suggest the strategic landscape may be shifting. Israel chose to defy President Trump and carry out strikes against Iran. Yet according to both Iranian and American sources, those Israeli attacks appear to have been deliberately calibrated to inflict limited damage, perhaps reflecting U.S. pressure to avoid a broader escalation.
Iran, for its part, responded by striking Israel once more after the Israeli attacks. The full extent of the damage caused by Iran’s two rounds of attacks remains unknown, however, due to extensive Israeli military censorship. As a result, outside observers still lack a complete picture of the military and strategic consequences of these exchanges.
The real test of whether a new regional equation has emerged may not lie in what has already happened, but in what comes next. Specifically: Will Israel strike Beirut again?
Even if it does, Israeli decision-makers will now have to factor in a cost that did not previously exis — the likelihood of a direct Iranian response against Israel. For decades, Israel enjoyed near-complete freedom of maneuver in much of the region. It could bomb targets in Lebanon at will without facing meaningful costs imposed by third parties. That assumption may no longer hold.
At the same time, the United States has signaled clearly that it no longer intends to be an active participant in Israel’s confrontation with Iran. The White House has, for instance, stated that it did not partake in Israel’s defense this time around. This would be a first and a very alarming development for Israel, if true. Washington’s desire to avoid direct involvement has become increasingly evident, even as it continues to support Israel in other ways.
Taken together, these developments suggest that a new strategic reality may be in the making. The picture remains murky, and it is far too early to declare that a durable deterrence framework has been established. Much will depend on future Israeli actions, Iranian responses, and the degree to which both sides internalize the risks of escalation.
But if Israel now has to weigh the prospect of direct Iranian retaliation before striking Lebanon, then something important has changed. Whether that change proves temporary or enduring remains to be seen.
The next question is whether this emerging equation can be translated into renewed momentum for U.S.-Iran diplomacy.
The Iranians believe that their action demonstrated to the US that the value of the Memorandum is so low that Iran is willing to risk a complete collapse of diplomacy. The hope is that Trump yields on what appears to be the last sticking point in the talks, which is the release of $12 billion of Iranian frozen assets.
Trump, on the other hand, may calculate that the exchange of fire demonstrated both the cost to Iran if full-scale war were to break out again, as well as Trump’s ability to impose certain restraints on the Israelis. As a result, the Iranians should feel confident in Trump’s ability to deliver on his end of the bargain and not insist on the release of the assets at the outset of the MOU.
But neither side should be aware: If no movement is achieved in the next 72 hours, Netanyahu may once again feel emboldened to attempt another sabotage of the talks. How many flare-ups can this diplomatic process absorb before it collapses?
Trita Parsi is the co-founder and Executive Vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.
June 8, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | Iran, Israel, Lebanon, United States, Zionism |
Comments Off on Next 72 hrs will tell us whether Israel plans to kill Trump peace
For generations, the attack on the USS Liberty by the Israel Defense Forces (”IDF”) has served as a catalyst that shifted the paradigm of how the American public views the United States’ relationship with its supposed “greatest ally.” For the current generation of Americans, Kentucky representative Thomas Massie has been the catalyst that has opened their eyes to the reality of the lengths that Israel will go to in order to shape the governance of the U.S. toward pursuing the Jewish state’s interests instead of those of the American people. Massie’s defeat against Ed Gallrein in the Republican primary for the 4th Congressional District of Kentucky, like the attack on the USS Liberty, is a distillation of how Israel has subverted the American democratic process, virtually transforming the U.S. into its vassal state. The parallels between the attack on the USS Liberty and the pro-Israel lobby’s assault on Massie make it fitting that the outgoing congressman from Kentucky will be dedicating a speech on the floor of the House of Representatives on June 8th, 2026 to honor the memory of the American servicemen who lost their lives aboard the USS Liberty at the hands of IDF.
Massie’s speech before the House of Representatives will fall on the 59th anniversary of the June 8th, 1967, IDF attack on the US Navy technical research ship, which was stationed in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea near the Sinai Peninsula during the Six-Day War between Israel and Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon. The USS Liberty was attacked from air and sea by Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats during its active signals intelligence-gathering mission. The attack led to the deaths of 34 American servicemen, injuries to 171 others, and severe damage to the vessel, which led to it being decommissioned the following year. To date, the bombing of the USS Liberty is the lone instance in which the U.S. has not responded with military force against a nation that has attacked it in the country’s 250-year history.
IDF forces launched a two-wave, 23-minute assault on the vessel, first blasting it with gunfire and bombing the ship with napalm from four Mirage III and Super Mystères fighter jets. After the air raid, the Israeli navy started a second wave of the attack on the USS Liberty by sea, in which its naval vessels opened fire on the ship and launched torpedoes at it. One torpedo struck the USS Liberty, leading Israel to finally cease the attack when it believed that the ship was sinking.
In the fallout over the attack, Israeli officials declared the IDF’s assault had been executed in error, claiming it mistakenly identified the ship as a vessel belonging to the Egyptian Navy. Survivors have long disavowed Israel’s claim, as they contend that the ship had been flying an American flag from the start of the attack. Even after that American flag was destroyed during the first wave of the air assault on the USS Liberty, its crew raised an even larger American flag to make the ship’s allegiance unquestionable. Subsequent independent investigations of the attack led separately by the U.S. and Israel each determined that the USS Liberty had indeed flown an American flag from the beginning. However, the investigation commissioned by Israel maintained that the IDF did not identify the ship’s flag before unleashing its attack.
Although sitting U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson fully accepted the Israeli version of the events that unfolded, high-ranking members of his administration and the country’s military vehemently disagreed. Dean Rusk, the Secretary of State that Johnson inherited from his predecessor, President John F. Kennedy, unequivocally contended that the attack on the USS Liberty by the IDF was deliberate. Rusk remained outspoken against Israel over the attack throughout his life, writing in 1990 that, “I didn’t believe them then, and I don’t believe them to this day.” Conversely, Johnson only dedicated one small paragraph to addressing the attack in his autobiography. In that paragraph, Johnson even went as far as to distort the casualties of the attack, lowering the death toll from 34 to 10 and the injured from 171 to 100.
Admiral Thomas Hinman Moorer, who served as the 18th Chief of Naval Operations during the attack on the USS Liberty and the 7th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1970 to 1974, went as far as to accuse President Johnson of ordering a cover-up of the attack to conceal the deliberate attack by Israel in an effort to hide the massive influence the country holds over the U.S. In a 1983 interview, Moorer stated:
“I’ve never seen a President — I don’t care who he is — stand up to them [Israel]. It just boggles your mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn’t writing anything down. If the American people understood what a grip those people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens don’t have any idea what goes on.”
Moorer was in attendance during the ceremony of the presentation of the Medal of Honor to the USS Liberty’s commanding officer, Captain William L. McGonagle. In an unprecedented event, the presentation of the Medal of Honor to Captain McGonagle was done by Secretary of the Navy Paul Ignatius off of the grounds of the White House. President Johnson elected to have the ceremony held off of White House grounds, with Secretary Ignatius awarding the medal instead of himself, in a maneuver to minimize the event’s publicity in the interest of prioritizing the U.S. relationship with Israel over honoring Captain McGonagle’s heroism, adding even further insult to injury against the American servicemen aboard the vessel who withstood the attack at the hands of the IDF. To this day, the Medal of Honor presentation to Captain McGonagle is the first and only ceremony to be held in such a manner.
Moorer spent the rest of his life fighting for the memory of the victims of the attack on the USS Liberty, leading an independent commission in 2003 that determined the attack by the IDF was deliberate. Although Moorer provided his commission’s findings in a formal request for a congressional investigation into the attack, Congress never acted upon his request. Moorer remained committed to revealing the truth behind the attack on the USS Liberty until he was on his deathbed, continuing to call upon Congress to open an investigation less than one month before he passed away in 2004.
Although Captain William McGonagle died in 1999, 5 years before Admiral Moorer, dozens of survivors of the attack on the USS Liberty are still alive today and continue to advocate for an investigation into what unfolded on that tragic day. According to Rep. Massie, some of those survivors of the attack will be in the gallery of the House of Representatives as guests of honor invited to attend his speech. In spite of his attempts to honor the memory of the victims who lost their lives and give a voice to survivors still fighting to bring the truth about what really happened to the USS Liberty to light, Massie’s decision to commemorate the anniversary of the attack has been met with disdain by a chorus of Zionist sycophants who show that the attitude of the U.S. government that put the interests of Israel ahead of its own servicemen in 1967 prevails to this day.
Outgoing Republican representative for the 2nd Congressional District of Texas Dan Crenshaw was one such voice who directed his ire at Massie for bringing the attack on the USS Liberty back into the spotlight. Crenshaw, who lost his own Republican primary in March, questioned Massie’s authenticity in a passive-aggressive post on his X account.
Crenshaw’s response to Massie’s decision to fight for the truth about what happened to the USS Liberty is typical of the rhetoric that American Zionists resort to when the subject is brought up. Pro-Israeli members of U.S. government and political commentators aligned with them alike have continuously oscillated between regurgitating platitudes about how the attack by the IDF on the USS Liberty was a tragic accident or treating the topic like the plague by either feigning ignorance or being too cowardly to address it head-on. The empty rhetoric behind their protestations in the face of calls for the truth to be revealed about what happened to the USS Liberty has only amplified the magnitude that discussing the attack has on opening the eyes of Americans to the true nature of their country’s relationship with Israel.
Although Israel maintains its official position that the IDF attack on the USS Liberty was not a deliberate act of war, the country has paid a total of nearly $13 million in compensation across several different settlement agreements. In 1968, the year following the attack, Israel paid $3.32 million to the U.S. government to be awarded to the families of the 34 servicemen killed in the attack. A year later in 1969, another $3.57 million payment was made as compensation to the 171 others aboard the vessel who were wounded. In 1980, a final payment of $6 million was paid by Israel to the U.S. government as restitution for the irreparable damage done to the ship, which led to it being decommissioned.
In the wake of those settlements, survivors of the attack on the USS Liberty who have continued to be ignored have made it clear that it isn’t financial restitution that they have been seeking. What they desire above all else is the truth. What has kept them from arriving at the truth is that the U.S. government has continued to stand by Israel instead of the servicemen who were aboard the USS Liberty on that day. While that decorum favoring Israel over Americans has become the standard in Washington, D.C., Thomas Massie continuing to prove that he is one of the few exceptions to that rule will give survivors of the attack on the USS Liberty perhaps what is the largest platform they have had to have their story told when he takes to the House floor to honor the legacy of the brave men whose memories have been cast aside since the U.S. Capital has become Israeli occupied territory.
blueapples on X
June 8, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | Israel, United States, USS Liberty, Zionism |
Comments Off on Massie Takes To House Floor To Call For The Truth About The USS Liberty
When the lights went out inside the Shahid Naimi Sports Complex, Helma, a fourth grader, and Elham, a fifth grader, were still on the volleyball court.
According to teammates and relatives, the two schoolgirls had been training with the Lamerd youth volleyball team on the evening of February 28, 2026, in Lamerd, a county in the southern Iranian province of Fars.
Only moments earlier, the sports hall had echoed with the sharp blasts of whistles, the rhythm of running drills, and the thud of volleyballs striking the floor.
Then, a US-Israeli missile strike outside the complex plunged the facility into darkness. In the confusion, players, coaches, and children began making their way toward the exits. But they never made it out.
According to residents, hospital personnel, and family members, a second US-Israeli missile detonated above the sports hall moments later, tearing through the roof and unleashing thousands of high-velocity fragments across the court below.
Doctors said Elham was already dead before she reached the hospital. Helma, however, managed to walk to the ambulance on her own.
Eyewitnesses say there was not even a visible bloodstain on her body. Helma told her coach, “It feels like something went into my body.”
She lifted her shirt and showed what appeared to be a small, blade-like object. It did not appear to be a serious wound. Helma appeared to be the furthest from death. But according to her uncle, that small black fragment had penetrated her heart, and around 7:00 p.m. on the same day, the efforts of the medical staff failed to save her life.
Later, the hospital staff described cases in which external wounds appeared minor but internal damage was severe.
Iliya Khatami, a sixth-grade boy, and his coach, Mahmoud Najafi, who were playing football on a grass field nearby, were also killed by the same fragments released from the US missile.
Two-year-old Avina Barzegar has been the youngest casualty of this US-Israeli attack. According to her family, she was martyred in an operating room while still having a pacifier in her mouth.
However, the attacks did not end there. A third missile, launched by the United States and Israel, struck the Lamerd ring road, killing three workers.
Two were on duty at the time, one from Lamerd and another from Mamasani, a county in Iran’s Fars Province, while the third was an Afghan national.
The civilian death toll extended far beyond those workers. Among the dead was a homemaker who had been sitting outside her house when the missile struck.
Also killed were a grocery store clerk, a pedestrian visiting from Norway who happened to be inside a pharmacy, the deputy director of customs at the Lamerd Special Economic Zone, and several university students.
The head of the MRI department at Lamerd Hospital instinctively threw herself over her daughter after hearing the blast. Her daughter survived, but she did not.
The attack, carried out on the first day of the 40-day war of aggression against Iran, killed 24 innocent civilians and injured more than 130 others.
Among the injured was a female student who was left blind. One resident said the fragments entered his body “like blades” and, as in Helma’s case, shattered the bone in his leg even though the external wound appeared barely visible.
The tragedy continues to haunt surviving families. The brother of one of the university students killed in the attack suffered a spinal cord injury and has still not been informed of his sister’s death.
Based on the locations where the US-Israeli missiles detonated, it has been confirmed that they struck densely populated civilian areas with heavy daily foot traffic.
Did the US and Israel use new lethal weapon in these deadly strikes?
The walls, doors, and windows of the city are riddled with large and small pellet holes. Reports suggest that a new missile called the Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) was tested for the first time over the people of Lamerd by the US-Israeli war machine.
The PrSM is a surface-to-surface weapon system capable of striking targets from 60 to 500 kilometres away, far beyond the range of any artillery or conventional missile system.
The missiles are rocket-powered, guided by a GPS-supported inertial navigation system.
PrSM is produced by Lockheed Martin’s Missiles and Fire Control division, an American weapons manufacturer. The company describes PrSM as a “next-generation, long-range precision-strike missile.”
Sharing an image of text on X, Max Blumenthal, the editor and founder of The Grayzone website, wrote, “Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Taiclet tells investors the US-Israeli war on Iran and assaults across the region are a ‘golden opportunity’,” as “Lockheed tested its new Precision Strike Missile on a girl’s volleyball game in Lamerd, Iran, on Feb 28, killing and wounding dozens.”
Describing the lethal weapon, US Central Command (CENTCOM) chief Admiral Brad Cooper said that the PrSM provides the American military with “an unrivalled deep strike capability”.
Each PrSM missile carries 180,000 tungsten pellets. Four missiles mean 720,000 projectiles dispersed over just a small section of Lamerd, a city of only 30,000 people.
That’s the equivalent of 24 tungsten pellets for every man, woman, and child in the city, suggesting that a staggering concentration of firepower was unleashed by the US and Israel on a civilian area.
The first missile exploded over the residential neighbourhood of Isar, the second a little farther away in the residential area of Tolkhandaq, the third again over Isar, and the fourth above an elementary school and the Shahid Naeimi sports hall. The reported impact extended beyond the sheer volume of munitions used.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, stated that the “American forces fired PrSM at a residential neighbourhood in Lamerd, directly hitting a sports hall filled with civilians, including teenage volleyball players, women, men, and a helpless two-year-old girl.”
“There is no longer any doubt that this was not an accident, not ‘collateral damage,’ but a premeditated decision by the US regime to test its new weapon system on Iranian civilians in a residential area. Such a cold-blooded act constitutes a clear and despicable war crime,” he said in a social media post on May 25.
McKenzie Intelligence also said that Lamerd was “within the extended range” of the missile and “US Central Command has admitted to using PrSM in strikes from the desert of an unnamed Gulf country against Iran in the early phases of the conflict.”
Western media analysis of PrSM
Subsequent reporting and analyses, including by Western media outlets, have also identified the munition used in Lamerd as the PrSM. These findings have drawn further attention to the weapon’s deadly airburst design and its effects in populated civilian areas.
The Times, a British daily, ran an investigation stating that it verified videos of two strikes in Lamerd, as well as aftermath footage from the US-Israeli attacks.
The reporters of the daily and munitions experts found that the “weapon features, explosions and damage are consistent with a short-range PrSM ballistic missile, which is designed to detonate just above its target and blast small tungsten pellets outward.”
The New York Times reported that it examined video and satellite imagery from Lamerd and assessed the characteristics of the strikes.
The analysis concluded that a PrSM missile, an airburst capable weapon designed to detonate above its target and disperse tungsten fragments across a wide area, was “likely” used in Lamerd.
Post-strike imagery showed distributed pockmark patterns rather than large crater formation, a characteristic attributed in the analysis to fragmentation dispersal.
Separate video analysis by the Washington Post reviewed satellite imagery and ground-level footage, concluding that observed damage patterns were consistent with airburst detonation rather than direct-impact high-explosive warheads.
Mapping the targets of the US-Israeli attack
The Shahid Naimi Sports Complex was hosting routine evening training sessions on February 28, when multiple youth teams and school groups were present inside the facility.
According to residents, the indoor hall was being used by a girls’ volleyball team while a separate section of the complex and the adjacent open field were occupied by a boys’ football group.
At the time of the strike, the complex was hosting a girls’ volleyball practice session alongside a boys’ football training activity in adjacent areas of the facility.
Coaches and school staff were supervising regular pre-competition training activities for students preparing for provincial tournaments.
The facility, identified in local mapping platforms and municipal records as a civilian recreational and educational facility, was used regularly by school sports programs and youth training teams before the US-Israeli strike.
It was located within a broader residential zone of Lamerd, with pedestrian access routes connecting nearby homes, small commercial units, and a ring road within a short distance of the complex.
According to accounts from survivor testimonies, the first US-Israeli strike occurred in proximity to a nearby installation or open area outside the immediate sports hall structure.
This initial blast was described by witnesses as causing a sudden power disruption inside the gymnasium, resulting in immediate darkness and confusion among those present. Training activities were abruptly halted as athletes and coaches attempted to locate exits.
The second US-Israeli strike, which occurred shortly thereafter, is reported to have detonated above or immediately adjacent to the sports hall structure.
Eyewitness descriptions suggest an airburst pattern, with fragments dispersing across the roof and interior space of the facility. Panic ensued inside the hall, with children attempting to evacuate through limited exits in low-visibility conditions.
The speed of the sequence of US-Israeli strikes, according to residents, left almost no time for evacuation.
A third impact was reported in the Lamerd ring road area, approximately a short distance from the sports complex, affecting a separate cluster of civilian movement and vehicles.
This third US-Israeli strike has been described by eyewitnesses as having caused widespread destruction over a populated roadside zone.
Medical and municipal sources said the fragmentation injuries were so widespread that they affected individuals inside vehicles, outside shops, and within nearby residential courtyards.
After more than three months, the fragments of the US PrSM remain visible in shattered homes, perforated walls, and lives permanently altered by loss.
For the families of Helma, Elham, Avina, and the other victims, the United States and Israel killed their children in places where they should have been the safest, sports halls, neighbourhoods, and family spaces where ordinary life was unfolding.
June 8, 2026
Posted by aletho |
War Crimes, Wars for Israel | Human rights, Iran, Israel, United States, Zionism |
Comments Off on Inside the Lamerd carnage: How new US PrSM missiles were tested on children during 40-day war
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei denied reports alleging that Iran targeted Saudi Arabia on 8 June, cautioning that such claims could be linked to potential “false-flag operations” conducted in Iran’s name.
Baghaei stressed that Tehran publicly takes responsibility for any military action it carries out and noted that no statement had been issued by Iran confirming the reported incident.
He further said Iran has repeatedly warned about the possibility of false-flag operations, claiming that Israel and other actors have previously carried out similar actions, including during the most recent US-Israeli war on the Islamic Republic.
His comments came after missile alert sirens were activated in the Saudi city of Al-Kharj, home to Prince Sultan Air Base, a facility long used by US forces, just hours after Israel launched renewed strikes against Iran on Monday morning.
Since the US-Israeli war on Iran began in late February, Tehran has frequently argued that many of the strikes blamed on its forces were actually “false-flag” operations staged by its enemies, designed to draw Gulf states further into the war.
On 4 June, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) dismissed reports that it targeted the terminal at Kuwait International Airport, saying the alleged visual evidence was a “crude fabrication.”
While acknowledging midnight strikes on regional US bases, Iranian officials noted that footage of the airport explosion was recorded in daylight.
In April, the IRGC accused Israel of being behind the strike on a Kuwaiti desalination plant to incite regional tensions further.
This followed a similar denial regarding a 30 March attack on a Kuwaiti power facility, which Tehran also blamed on Israel.
On 4 April, the IRGC further rejected claims that it struck the US Embassy in Riyadh in the opening days of the war, asserting the drone attack was “certainly carried out by Zionists.”
Iran’s Foreign Ministry said on 15 March that the US and Israel were using “Lucas” drones – modeled after the cheap and effective Iranian Shahed – to conduct false-flag operations and attribute them to Tehran.
The IRGC military headquarters, Khatam al-Anbiya, stated that such “deceptions” included attacks in Turkiye and Iraq.
Earlier in March, Iranian military sources described a drone strike on the Ras Tanura refinery in Saudi Arabia as an Israeli false flag designed to distract from strikes inside Iran and draw the Gulf states into further hostilities against the Islamic Republic.
Tucker Carlson also claimed in March that Saudi Arabia and Qatar had detained Israeli agents who were planning bombings in their countries.
June 8, 2026
Posted by aletho |
False Flag Terrorism | Iran, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United States, Zionism |
Comments Off on Iran denies attacking Saudi Arabia, warns of Israeli false-flag
Donald Trump’s attempt to tie an Iran peace settlement to a mandatory expansion of the Abraham Accords reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of how dramatically the Middle East has changed since the Gaza war and why old diplomatic formulas no longer work.
Donald Trump has a habit of mistaking the décor of diplomacy for its substance. His latest demand — that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, and others must “mandatorily” join the Abraham Accords as a condition for any Iran peace settlement — is not bold dealmaking. It is a category error dressed up as statecraft, one that conflates a 2020 diplomatic triumph with the profoundly different geopolitical realities of 2026. The silence that reportedly greeted Trump on his conference call with regional leaders was not awkward; it was diagnostic.
The Middle East Trump Remembers Does Not Exist
The original Abraham Accords of 2020 were a very significant development for several reasons. They emerged from a specific regional calculus: Gulf states, quietly terrified of Iranian expansionism, had come to view Israel as a strategic asset rather than an ideological liability. The Palestinian issue, while never abandoned rhetorically, had receded to the background of realpolitik. The formula worked precisely because it did not require Israel to make concessions and because the public cost of signing was, at the time, manageable. That calculus has been demolished by the Gaza war.
A Washington Institute for Near East Policy survey published in August 2025 found that 99% of Saudi respondents viewed normalization with Israel as a negative step. For context, in 2020, 41% had considered the Abraham Accords a positive development for the region. By 2025, that figure had collapsed to 13%. This is not marginal drift; it is a tectonic shift in public sentiment that no Arab leader, not even an absolute monarch, can afford to ignore. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman reportedly told US lawmakers in 2024 that his efforts to advance normalization had put his life at risk. That is not a man about to sign anything without ironclad political cover.
Saudi Arabia’s position is now unambiguous and unyielding: there will be no normalization without “an irreversible pathway” to Palestinian statehood. That pathway cannot be a vague promise or a roadmap but a concrete and verifiable process. Thus, Saudi Israeli normalization is not merely paused; it is contingent on developments in the Palestinian arena and shifts in how Israel is perceived regionally. Given the vastly changed regional scenario, Saudi efforts are geared less towards normalization with Israel than towards shaping a new regional agenda in which distancing from Israel serves both the Crown’s domestic legitimacy and its aspirations for broader Islamic leadership.
Pakistan’s refusal is even more visceral. Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif flatly stated that joining the Abraham Accords “clashes with our fundamental ideologies,” and pointedly noted that Pakistani passports do not even carry Israel’s name as a valid travel destination. This position stretches back to Pakistan’s founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s explicit rejection of the UN partition of Palestine in 1947. The question of recognizing Israel, therefore, is not a negotiating posture; it is a constitutional identity. Qatar, meanwhile, which absorbed an Israeli airstrike as recently as last September, was never a realistic candidate.
Bundling Two Crises into One Catastrophe
There is a second, more immediate danger in Trump’s gambit: it actively threatens the Iran negotiations themselves. As even reports in the mainstream US media noted, the idea of a massive expansion of the Abraham Accords at a moment when the US has not yet secured the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — let alone resolved Iran’s nuclear program — “seems almost absurd.” The Iran talks are already burdened with sticking points: Washington insists Iran must surrender its enriched uranium stockpile, while Tehran has insisted nuclear negotiations be deferred to later discussions and continues to demand sanctions relief and the release of frozen assets. Threading that needle is already the diplomatic equivalent of defusing a bomb blindfolded. Attaching an Israel-normalization condition to it hands Iran a ready-made argument for walking away or highlighting why the US cannot be trusted with any deal.
Not just Tehran, Iran’s neighbors — having watched Tehran survive American and Israeli airstrikes, endure a maritime blockade, and still inflict damage on global energy markets — are unlikely to respond positively to Trump’s appeal. There is a grudging, regionally shared respect for Iran’s resilience, and any demand that frames joining the Abraham Accords as a precondition will be read across the Islamic world not as American leverage but as American tone-deafness.
That said, Trump’s push might placate Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been deeply critical of US attempts to reach a peace agreement with Iran. If true, it means Trump is risking the entire Iran settlement — a genuinely consequential achievement — to manage Netanyahu’s domestic politics. That is a trade-off of staggering irresponsibility. And in a telling sign of how reality eventually wins, by Thursday this week, US sources confirmed that a tentative framework agreement with Iran was pending Trump’s approval, with the Abraham Accords entirely absent from it.
Where This Leads
Trump’s retreat from his “mandatory” demand has already begun. What comes next will reveal the structural fragility of his approach. A ceasefire framework with Iran, if finalized, will be celebrated as historic, and rightly so. But the moment that diplomatic high fades, the region it leaves behind will be considerably more resistant to the kind of top-down normalization that the Abraham Accords represented.
Instead, the explicit rejection of Trump’s demand shows that Israel now risks a form of diplomatic isolation it has not faced since before the Oslo era, as the binary division between a “moderate axis” including Israel and Gulf states gives way to more fluid alignments that no longer treat Iran as the primary regional threat and in which public identification with Israel is seen as illegitimate and potentially regime-threatening.
The harder question is whether the United States can build a durable Middle East architecture on the foundation of a deal that most of the region’s population views as illegitimate. Normalization imposed by American diktat, without justice for Palestinians and for the Iranians, will not hold. Agreements signed under duress — economic, diplomatic, or military — have a long history of unraveling, often at the worst possible moment. What the post-Gaza Middle East demands is not a grander version of the Abraham Accords. It demands a reckoning with why those accords, for all their genuine diplomatic ingenuity, failed to prevent the conditions that produced October 7 in the first place. Until Washington grasps that, its deal-making — however theatrical — will keep colliding with a region that has moved on.
Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of international relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
June 8, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Iran, Israel, Middle East, Pakistan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia |
Comments Off on Abraham Accords: Why Trump’s “mandatory” deal collapsed
Nine days after Iran warned the West, Israel in particular, that any further attacks on Beirut would result in Iran retaliating against Israel, Israel hit the Beirut suburb of Dahiyeh. The attack on Sunday afternoon sent plumes of smoke rising over the suburb, with strikes targeting two apartments in two buildings. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office announced the attack in the Dahiyeh district, saying it was in retaliation for an earlier Hezbollah strike on Israel. At least two people were killed and 11 wounded in the strike on the densely populated civilian neighborhood, according to Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency.
Iran, as promised, wasted little time in responding and launched 20 missiles in five waves at Israel. Donald Trump called Bibi Netanyahu, telling him to hold off in retaliating against Iran because he anticipated signing a peace deal with Iran. Trump also reportedly told Netanyahu that if Israel decided to retaliate the Israelis would not have US support. What did Netanyahu do? He launched a retaliatory strike using 11 missiles against Iran.
As I write this, Iran is responding with a larger missile launch against Israel and there are visible impacts in Israel despite Israeli claims that the IDF intercepted the missiles. Not to be left on the sidelines, the Houthis joined in by launching a missile at Israel. Media reports blamed the Houthis for also striking the Prince Saud Airbase in Saudi Arabia, but there is no independent confirmation to substantiate that claim. In addition, the Houthis announced they are closing the Bab al-Mandab Strait, which is certain to roil the financial markets. Finally,Hezbollah stepped up its engagement of Israeli targets and launched more missiles and drones into northern Israel.
The IRGC has officially announced the beginning of the ‘Nasr‘ military operation against two major Israeli airbases: Tel Nof and Nevatim. This is retaliation for Israel’s strike on radar facilities in Iran. If successful, these Iranian strikes will do significant damage to two critical air fields and could hamper Israel’s ability to carry out further strikes on Iran.
I believe that the Israeli decision to attack Beirut had one objective… force the Iranian hand in launching an attack on Israel in hopes of bringing the US back into the war and sabotaging any chance for Trump to sign a Pakistani peace deal with Iran. So far, the Israelis have failed. Donald Trump is staying on the sidelines for now, which has sparked mass hysteria among the neo-cons and Zionist fanatics.
Trump appears genuinely sincere in wanting to sign on to the Pakistani deal. It is possible he could do so while letting Israel and Iran fight it out. Alternatively, Trump will come under intense pressure from the Zionist crowd to re-enter the war. It is a fluid situation and I hope to have an update by noon Monday about Pakistan’s view of the situation.
If Trump stands firm and refuses to re-enter the war to assist Israel, the situation could evolve along the lines of the 12-day war last June… i.e., when Israel begged the US to convince Iran to stop bombarding Israel with missiles. Times have changed, however, and I do not think Iran will agree to another orchestrated end to the conflict. Instead, Iran will hold out and demand that Israel withdraw from Lebanon and withdraw from Gaza… otherwise, Iran will continue hitting Israel with missiles until it is forced to surrender. We are in new territory and Iran is in a better position to carry out a war of attrition with Israel.
Videos
June 8, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Israel, Lebanon, Middle East, United States, Yemen, Zionism |
Comments Off on Israel Crosses Iran’s Redline in a Mission to Prevent Trump from Signing a Peace Deal with Iran
Iran’s Foreign Ministry has declared that the Islamic Republic’s defensive strikes against military targets in the northern occupied territories were carried out within the framework of inherent self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, following repeated ceasefire violations by the Zionist regime.
In a statement released on Monday, the ministry said the strikes came in response to Israel’s persistent breaches of the April 8 ceasefire, including its collaboration with the US military in attacks on Iranian ships and targets in southern Iran over the past two weeks, as well as US‑backed maritime piracy against the Iranian nation.
Iran emphasized that the ceasefire in Lebanon is an inseparable part of the April 8 truce agreement, and that the United States bears direct responsibility for Israeli violations and any resulting escalation in the region.
The ministry warned that any malicious adventure by the Zionist regime against Lebanon or Iran will be met with a crushing and comprehensive response from Iran’s brave armed forces.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates its nation’s serious determination to decisively defend its security and national interests wherever it deems necessary,” the statement read.
The April 8 ceasefire was brokered by Pakistan after 40 days of intense US‑Israeli war on Iran.
Despite the truce, Israel has continued its aggression against Lebanon and Gaza, while the US has maintained a naval blockade of Iranian ports.
Iran has consistently insisted that any final agreement must include a comprehensive halt to hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon.
The latest Iranian strikes came after the Israeli regime committed a gross violation of the ceasefire by launching deadly attacks on the southern suburbs of Beirut on Sunday.
Iran had warned last week that it will target the occupied territories in case of an attack on Beirut and its sorroundings.
June 7, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Zionism |
Comments Off on Iran says defensive strikes on Israeli targets were legitimate self-defense under UN Charter
The magnitude of what just happened may take some time to sink in.
This is the first time Iran has struck Israel after Israel struck another country’s territory (that is, not Iran).
This means that the battle lines have been moved.
Iran’s deterrence had already been restored in the sense that Israel knew that any strike on it would be responded to.
But now, Iran has proven that it will also respond to Israeli strikes on Lebanon.
This is the first time in decades that a regional power has the means, capacity, and willingness to put hard power against Israeli military maneuvers or aggression against a third party.
This will be particularly significant since Trump has signalled that he seeks to restrain Israel from continuing the escalation.
Trump reportedly told Israeli journalist Barak Ravid that “Hopefully Israel is not going to retaliate. If Bibi strikes them back it’s just gonna keep going like the last 47 years, or the last 3000 years.” Trump also added: “We are very close to a final deal with Iran. It is going to be a good deal. I don’t want it to blow up because of what is happening now.”
Whether this would extend to Palestine is uncertain, but if it does, it may prove a game-changer.
Israel has been able to annex territory, commit genocide and war crimes without any real consequences because the West has refused to, and no regional power has had the hard power to impose costs on Israel.
If this equation changes, the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will likely take a significant turn.
Which is why Israel will do everything it can to disallow any shift.
From a US perspective, supporting Israel at this point recommits the US to its decades-long policy of seeking to sustain a balance in the region that allows for near-complete Israeli dominance.
That policy has been extremely costly to US interests, has destabilized the region, and enabled the Israelis to get increasingly aggressive and reckless (since they face no consequences for it).
However problematic it has been, it will become far more challenging and destabilizing going forward since sustaining Israel’s dominance will necessitate continued war with Iran. This clearly contradicts US interests.
If US interests were at the center of US policy, getting out of the Middle East and its regional rivalries would be a no-brainer.
June 7, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Iran, Israel, Lebanon, United States, Zionism |
Comments Off on The profound geopolitical implications of Iran’s strikes on Israel
A story broadcast and posted by WPLN, Louisville Public Media, claims Tennessee’s black bear population is being threatened by climate change. Data show this is false. Bear populations are growing along with improved conditions for black bears to flourish. The biggest threat to black bears is conflict with humans, which is being driven by population growth, both bears and humans, urban expansion into bear habitat, and poor garbage storage.
WPLN reporter Caroline Eggers begins the story headlined, “Black bears are threatened by climate change. How can we help?,” by writing, “Black bear encounters are on the rise in Tennessee, and climate change is often a hidden culprit[.]”
The problem with Eggers story is that its headline and lead sentence are woefully misleading. Most of the story’s details are pretty accurate. She notes that before large-scale European occupation and widespread forest clearing, black bears were common across Tennessee. After a sharp decline, bears populations have made a big comeback with an estimated 6,000 bears across the state.
Bear populations are doing so well, they are increasingly being seen in edge communities being developed in formerly wild areas and even in urban areas.
Black bear encounters with people are on the rise in Tennessee, and they are not always […] idyllic […]” writes Eggers. “Bears scrounge through trash, cars and sometimes even homes for an easy source of calories.
“The furry creatures arguably have the best noses in the animal kingdom, 300 times better than people,” Eggers continued. “The trend is, in part, driven by convenience for the bears. They are opportunistic feeders.”
So far, so good, but then the story begins to go off the rails. Eggers notes that rainfall from Hurricane Helene in 2024 caused flooding, knocking down a lot of trees, and then leapt to discuss a current drought in the Great Smoky Mountain national park. Yet neither of these events are historically unique or historically unusual. Flooding and drought, while never the norm, have been common throughout Tennessee’s history, and there is no evidence in the data that hurricanes, droughts, and floods have become more common or severe over time in Tennessee, or in general elsewhere in the United States, as detailed in various Climate at a Glance posts, here, here, and here, for example.
For Tennessee specifically, while rainfall amounts vary regionally across the state, data show no increasing trend in drought numbers or severity since 1895, but rather a modest increase in precipitation. (see the figure, below)
Temperatures in Tennessee have increased very modestly, about 0.5℉ over the past century. This is significantly below the national average rise in temperature and is likely due in large part to the Urban Heat Island effect from the growth of Tennessee’s large and midsized cities. In fact, Tennessee’s maximum high temperature was set and matched on two dates in 1930, more than 90 years of climate change ago.
Concerning forests, the data are clear that urban development and agriculture have replaced forests in some areas. But overall, the amount of forested lands has increased from lows set after initial European settlement, when many forests were cleared for small scale farming and grazing. In fact, forests cover approximately 52 percent of Tennessee, with rebounding coverage over the past 100 years. Natural forest coverage has doubled over the last century from 25 percent.
What’s more, connected forest cover and better precipitation has produced improved ecosystem conditions for bears, including increased animal and plant food sources, which largely explain Tennessee’s growing bear population.
Since modest warming over the past hasn’t made habitat and ecological conditions worse for bears in Tennessee, but rather has improved such conditions, contributing to a growing population, climate change can’t be “threatening” bear survival, as Eggers claims in her WPLN story.
Had Eggers not tried to drag climate change into her WPLN story about problems some Tennesseans are having with bears, she might have written a valuable and interesting story. She could have explained the dangers bears face due to urban expansion, some people’s propensity to think of bears as cute and feeding them, and poor garbage storage – all of which have led to problem bears and human/bear conflicts. Instead, she opened with a misleading, but perhaps attention-grabbing headline, and then wandered off the trail in an effort to feed the narrative popular with the media that “climate change causes everything bad.” In this case, that climate change is harming bears—despite clear evidence the black bear population is flourishing amid climate change. There is no trend or evidence, none at all, suggesting this will change in the foreseeable future.
June 7, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | United States |
Comments Off on Quit Lying WPLN, Evidence Proves Black Bears Are Thriving, Not Threatened by Climate Change
Iran has fired a missile barrage at Israel in retaliation for its continuing campaign in Lebanon against the Hezbollah militant group.
The attack occurred late on Sunday, following days of bombing and ground operations in southern Lebanon by the IDF, including intensive aerial bombardment of the capital, Beirut. The Israeli onslaught has continued despite the truce declared more than six weeks ago, with the attacks intensifying over the past week. Tehran has repeatedly demanded that West Jerusalem stop, making its own negotiations with the US conditional on a working ceasefire in Lebanon.
The IDF said that it identified multiple incoming projectiles and activated anti-aircraft defenses at multiple locations. Footage circulating online purports to show Iranian missiles soaring over eastern Lebanon, while some projectiles were observed from the Lebanese capital.
Iran stated that the attack was merely a “warning” to Israel and more “crushing blows” would follow should it continue with the attacks on Lebanon.
“If it expands its attacks in that region or responds to Iran’s action, it will be met with even more crushing and regrettable blows, and devastating attacks will be launched against the regime and its supporters,” Iran’s Khatim Al-Anbiya operational headquarters said in a statement circulated by local media.
Multiple media reports indicated Israel scrambled to retaliate for the attack, with some outlets suggesting it has sought greenlight from the US to strike Iran’s energy facilities. While no official reaction to the development has been provided, multiple senior Israeli officials have vowed revenge for the strikes.
“Tonight Tehran must burn!” Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir wrote on X.
US President Donald Trump has called on both sides to show restraint, telling Fox News that the Israeli attacks on Beirut were not coordinated with Washington. At the same time, he urged Tehran to stop and get back to negotiations and to strike a “deal.”
Axios reporter Barak Ravid said on X that Trump told him he was calling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “right now and telling him not to attack Iran in response.”
Earlier in the day, Israel struck Beirut’s southern suburbs without the warning usually issued by the IDF prior to attacking densely populated areas. At least two people were killed and 20 wounded in the strike on a residential building, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry.
June 7, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Iran, Lebanon, Middle East, United States, Zionism |
Comments Off on Iran fires missiles at Israel, Trump pleads for restraint
A fragile arrangement had been reached in Lebanon. Iran had made clear that if Israel continued to strike Lebanon, it would strike at Israel.
The US/Israeli side says that overnight, Hezbollah killed 15 Israeli soldiers. A violation of the arrangement in their view, and a sign that Iran either didn’t or couldn’t control Hezbollah.
At the same time, Israel knew that renewed attacks on Beirut, particularly Dahieh, would either force Tehran to attack or back down, while having the added benefit of further weakening US-Iran diplomacy.
Iran did not back down. An attack on Dahieh, according to the Iranians, is designed to kill as many senior Hezbollah and Iranian officials as possible. So a response was inevitable, in their view.
By now, four waves of missiles have been fired at northern Israel, Haifa, and other areas. Some of the missiles are of higher quality than the ones Iran used during the war.
Israel will strike Iran within the next few hours, and the Iranians don’t have any other expectation.
Whether the US enters the fighting actively as well, or only provides support for Israel, is the big question mark right now.
The US side is deeply frustrated that the MOU has not been signed yet and accuses the Iranians of either playing for time, overnegotiating, or being incapable of getting to yes.
The Iranians, in turn, accuse the US of constantly changing the parameters while being unwilling to release a portion of Iran’s frozen assets at the outset of the MOU as a way to prove their seriousness.
If Trump doesn’t enter the war, he will be accused of abandoning Israel. If he enters the war, he will validate that Israel has an effective veto on the negotiations and on whether the US is at war or not.
A true America First policy would have worked to extricate the US from the Israeli-Iranian rivalry.
Now more than ever, it should be clear why such an exit serves US interest.
June 7, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Hezbollah, Iran, Israel, Lebanon, United States, Zionism |
Comments Off on After Israel strikes Beirut, Iran strikes Israel. What’s Trump’s next move?
A primary loss to the Israel Lobby seems to have only emboldened the Kentucky congressman
Thomas Massie isn’t acting like a defeated man.
After losing the most expensive primary race in American history last month, largely thanks to pro-Israel figures and groups spending millions to defeat him (according to the Federal Election Commission, Massie received donations from 1,119 individuals actually living in Kentucky, compared to only 98 for his opponent Ed Gallrein), Massie announced just days later, “I filed with FEC for the 2028 House race.”
He explained, “This allows me to raise funds to continue my political operations supporting my position as a current office holder and as a potential candidate for federal office.”
A run for the White House isn’t out of the question. “I haven’t made a final decision about which office to seek, if I run,” Massie teased.
As one of the most antiwar congressional Republicans in history this side of Ron Paul, Massie has offered consistent and vocal opposition to foreign aid including to Israel. His opposition to U.S. backing and participation in Israel’s wars in Gaza and Iran was seen as a significant factor in why he lost his primary, angering President Donald Trump and, of course, one of the country’s most powerful foreign lobbying groups.
Rather than backing down, Massie is calling these people out more than ever.
On Sunday, after the head of the Republican Jewish Coalition boasted of the $5 million his group had spent to unseat Massie, the Kentucky congressman replied, “Matt Brooks bragging that the Republican Jewish Coalition spent millions to buy a congressional seat in Kentucky… but if you observe the same thing, you’re antisemitic.”
Massie was noting that any opposition to—or mere acknowledgement of—Israel’s outsized influence in American politics is almost always labeled as antisemitism by pro-Israel advocates. Yet here was Brooks openly touting it. Neoconservative veteran John Podhoretz even celebrated the role of “Jewish money” in defeating Massie.
When Axios reported this week that Trump had reportedly unloaded on Netanyahu in an expletive-laden call, Massie weighed in with his own reality check, writing,
It’s all talk. Just withhold foreign aid to Israel for a month and they’ll stop bombing their neighbors—instant peace, the Strait of Hormuz can be opened, and gas drops $2 a gallon. Israel has been, and continues to be, the biggest welfare recipient from American tax payers.
The libertarian-leaning Kentuckian added on Tuesday, “The more Netanyahu prevents the war with Iran from ending, the more obvious it becomes that he convinced Trump to start it.”
Massie isn’t the only prominent conservative who has stuck his neck out by vocally opposing the Iran War. The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh launched a tirade against it this week, writing on Monday, “This whole sh—show has been an enormous waste of time and resources and our country has not benefited from it at all.”
Of course, the Daily Wire is home to Ben Shapiro, one of the most pro-Israel voices on the American right. Replying to Walsh, Massie chimed in, “I hope you get to keep your job after this post.”
When talk host and rabid Zionist Mark Levin insisted on Sunday, “I make NO apologies for my support of Israel, the Persian people, Ukraine, and Taiwan! Period!”, America First Massie had this response: “Great! Write a personal check. Americans are tired of sending them tax dollars while our own infrastructure crumbles and prices soar.”
This kind of banter with neocons is nothing new for Massie, but there does seem to be something extra in his standard fearlessness now, including with regard to his efforts to declassify the controversial files of the late disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, files which the administration would strongly prefer to bury. The president, under intense pressure, signed off on their release in November.
After the podcaster and former Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked podcaster Shawn Ryan what “core MAGA” was now, Ryan replied, “I have no idea. Pedophiles Supporting Israeli Lobby?”
Massie shared that clip, asking “What’s MAGA now?”
He’s not just striking a new pose online. After Responsible Statecraft last Friday revealed a shocking plan to integrate the U.S. and Israeli militaries, Massie and his frequent Democratic ally Rep. Ro Khanna of California pounced. Massie posted, “If the provision in the NDAA to integrate/synchronize the U.S. and Israeli militaries (section 224) makes it out of committee, I’ll offer an amendment to strip it from the bill on the floor.”
“We are a sovereign country,” Massie insisted.
Khanna shared Massie’s post, writing, “And I will be offering an amendment in the committee itself to strip section 224 out.” The California congressman added, “Trump can’t kill the Massie/Khanna partnership no matter how much he posts on Truth Social.”
Two weeks since a Trump-endorsed and AIPAC-backed candidate defeated Massie, the president still seems obsessed with him—and with former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), Tucker Carlson, and other America Firsters—something that could get even more interesting given that Massie still has seven more months in office. Greene was pressured out of her Georgia House seat by the president, but in retirement has remained a force in politics, arguably even a greater one than she was in office.
Massie, for his part, is using his remaining time in Congress to advance an America First agenda. He even introduced legislation to block U.S. bombs from being sent to Israel. “Israel has used American-supplied munitions to kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians,” Massie observed. “America is morally obligated to end support of Israel’s devastation of Gaza and its people. I’m cosponsoring the Block the Bombs Act to limit the transfer of offensive weapons to Israel.”
As if that wasn’t enough, on Wednesday Massie again broke party ranks, along with three other Republicans, by joining Democrats to pass the Iran War Powers Resolution, which he cosponsored. “The People’s House is sending a message: end this war,” he wrote.
The hits keep coming. On Thursday, Massie announced that he will address a controversial attack by Israeli forces on an American ship on the event’s 59th anniversary. Massie wrote, “On June 8, 2026, I’ll speak on the floor of the House to honor and memorialize the brave crew of the USS Liberty who died and were wounded in an unprovoked attack by Israel on June 8, 1967.”
He’s obviously not cowering or giving an inch to the figures and groups that worked so hard and spent so much to beat him.
Megyn Kelly has reported that an estimated $30 million was spent by pro-Israel forces to defeat Massie. What dollar amount would that lobby be willing to cough up should Massie decide to run for president?
Again, Thomas Massie doesn’t look or talk like someone who just lost. He acts more like someone who’s just getting started.
He just might be.
June 7, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Israel, United States, Zionism |
Comments Off on Thomas Massie Won’t Back Down
Aletho News 