Four People Killed in Ukrainian Attack on Energodar – Rosatom CEO
Sputnik – 12.07.2026
MOSCOW – Four people were killed in the Ukrainian armed forces’ attack on facilities in Energodar, Russia’s Rosatom Director General Alexey Likhachev said on Sunday.
“Just two days after the meeting with the IAEA, we have had the bloodiest day in Energodar. And this is not a figure of speech, but a fact. Four people were killed – two women and two men – and four were wounded, one of whom was seriously injured. The routine nature of these murders never ceases to amaze,” Rosatom’s press service quoted Likhachev as saying.
He clarified that a bus stop was attacked in the morning. That afternoon, three people were killed when a drone struck a car, Likhachev added.
“What happened this morning is an ideal opportunity for the IAEA to demonstrate, through action and not just words, its commitment to the agreements reached just two days ago to maximally expedite informing the global community about all risks, incidents, and threats arising in the Energodar region,” Likhachev said.
Since April 27, the start of the large-scale escalation from Kiev, 11 civilians have been killed in Energodar, he added.
After US policy whiplash, Iran sets the rules in Strait of Hormuz
Press TV – July 12, 2026
The section of the 14-point memorandum that emphasizes the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz under “Iranian arrangements” has become the focal point of confrontation, driven primarily by hostile US actions and its repeated, explicit breaches of commitments.
The exchange of fire between Iran and the US early Sunday once again demonstrated that Washington is not only unwilling to honor its commitments but has effectively blocked any path toward a diplomatic resolution through hostile actions and repeated violations.
Under the 14-point memorandum signed between Iran and the US, Article Five explicitly assigns the management of the Strait of Hormuz to Iran, giving Tehran responsibility for its future administration and maritime services in consultation with Oman.
The inclusion of the phrase “under Iranian arrangements” in the memorandum reflects recognition of Tehran’s central role in governing this strategic waterway.
The text of the memorandum, which was also published by the White House, states that Iran “will guarantee the safe passage of commercial vessels, free of any tolls or charges, for a period of 60 days between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman”.
It says that the Islamic Republic “will consult with the Sultanate of Oman regarding the future administration and maritime services of the Strait of Hormuz.”
The wording, according to this interpretation, makes clear that responsibility for administering the strait initially rests with Iran, while Oman assumes a consultative and coordinating role.
Immediately after the memorandum was signed, the United States, in coordination with Oman, unveiled a southern shipping corridor designed as an alternative to the Iranian route through the strait.
In a statement, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) described the newly announced route as “unacceptable and extremely dangerous,” adding that it had been established “without prior notification or coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
As indicated, the actions of the United States and Oman constitute a clear violation of Article Five of the memorandum, which assigned management of the Strait to Iran.
According to unofficial reports, Oman has declined to fully align itself with Iran and continues to insist that maritime traffic should operate in both directions.
This suggests that Oman, under US pressure, has moved away from its neutral position and begun acting in ways that undermine Iranian interests.
Oman’s foreign minister told a meeting of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council that Muscat, as a littoral state, bears a special responsibility and stressed that any future arrangements for the strait should not include transit fees.
This position comes despite Article Five of the memorandum, which designates Iran as the principal authority responsible for administering the strait, while assigning Oman only a coordinating role.
The corridor violation is not the only breach by the US of the memorandum’s provisions. The list of America’s overt and repeated violations since the signing of the memorandum clearly shows that Washington has never been committed to its obligations:
1. Violation of Article One (Ending the war on all fronts): The United States had committed to ending hostilities across all fronts, including Lebanon, and to securing the withdrawal of Israeli forces from occupied territories.
However, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Israeli troops would remain in Lebanon for as long as necessary. According to this account, Washington neither enforced this provision nor acted to prevent the continued occupation.
2. Violation of Article Two (Respect for sovereignty and non-interference): The United States had pledged to respect the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran and refrain from interfering in its internal affairs.
However, the military attacks last night on Iranian cities, as well as the attacks of previous nights—all of which originated from or were facilitated by American bases in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the UAE, and Kuwait—constitute a gross violation of this clause.
3. Violation of Article Four (Lifting the maritime blockade): Washington had committed to ending the maritime blockade and restoring shipping traffic to full capacity within 30 days. Not only was the blockade maintained, but US officials also threatened to intensify it.
President Donald Trump reportedly told Axios that he would not lift the blockade on Iranian ports because doing so would deprive Washington of its principal source of leverage over Tehran.
4. Violation of Article Six (Economic reconstruction): The United States had committed to guaranteeing a comprehensive reconstruction program for Iran backed by at least $300 billion in financing. No meaningful steps were ever taken to fulfill that commitment.
5. Violation of Article Seven (Lifting sanctions): Washington had pledged to terminate all sanctions imposed on Iran. Instead, sanctions remained in place, while the US Treasury warned that if Oman assisted in establishing a toll collection system, it would face “aggressive” sanctions.
6. Violation of Articles Ten and Eleven (Oil export waivers and release of frozen assets): The United States had committed to immediately issuing waivers for Iranian crude oil exports, petrochemical products, and all related services, while also releasing Iran’s frozen assets.
Through pretext and hostile actions, the US refused to deliver Iran’s $24 billion in blocked assets and revoked Iran’s oil sales license, citing Iran’s actions against unauthorized vessel movements through the Strait of Hormuz—a justification that stemmed from Washington’s own breach of the memorandum.
7. Threats of regime change and assassination of Iranian officials: Despite its explicit commitment not to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs, US officials have continued to issue statements advocating regime change.
More importantly, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio openly rejected the prospect of Iranian administration of the Strait of Hormuz, stating: “We will not tolerate that.”
Before the US and Israeli terrorist attacks against Iran, the Strait of Hormuz remained open, and Iran had no interest in controlling it. Today, however, Tehran is determined to maintain control over the waterway in the future to ensure that the United States can never again use the Persian Gulf as a staging ground for attacks against Iran.
The strikes carried out last night and on previous nights were launched from or facilitated by US bases in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait. As long as the United States and Israel pose a threat to Iran’s national security, Tehran will maintain a heavy presence in the Strait of Hormuz.
A crucial legal point is that the Strait of Hormuz lies entirely within the territorial waters of Iran and Oman and under international law, no part of it constitutes international waters open to unrestricted passage.
Unlike certain international waterways, the Strait of Hormuz is not part of the high seas but a coastal passage where navigation is governed by the regulations of the littoral states. This legal reality strengthens Iran’s position in administering the strait and challenges US claims regarding freedom of navigation.
Iran, based on its defense doctrine, views control of the strait not as an economic instrument but as a vital requirement for its survival and national security.
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf summarized Tehran’s position: “The era of one-sided deals is OVER. We told you: keep your word or pay the price. Reality is knocking.”
It is Ground Hog Day in the Strait of Hormuz… Again!
By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | July 12, 2026
It has been a busy week with the US making a full-break with the MoU, and it centered on the language in paragraph five of the MoU:
Upon the signing of this MoU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels, with no charge for 60 days only, from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman, and vice versa.
Did not say one thing about the US or Oman or any other country bordering the Persian Gulf… Only Iran. In accordance with this language Iran established the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) protocols, which delineated how ships could pass safely thru the Strait. Instead of accepting this, the US engaged in a series of provocations designed to challenge Iran’s authority. On July 6–7, Iran struck at least three commercial vessels in/near the Strait of Hormuz (e.g., Marshall Islands-flagged M/T Al Rekayyat, Saudi M/T Wedyan, Liberian M/T Cyprus Prosperity) who tried to circumvent the PGSA protocols. The United States claimed this was a violation of the ceasefire — it was not — and proceeded to launch attacks on Iranian positions along the Strait of Hormuz. Iran responded by launching attacks on US targets in Kuwait and Bahrain.
The tit-for-tat exchange continued through Thursday, following Iran interdicting additional wayward ships and the US hitting targets in and around Bandar Abbas and Qemsh Island. There was no activity on Friday, but Trump issued an ultimatum to Iran: i.e., Declare the Strait of Hormuz open and stop using force against ships that violate Iran’s PGSA protocol. When I heard that I predicted that the US would attack within 24 hours… And that is what happened. Some more ships connected to Western interests tried to breach the Strait and Iran hit them. The US responded, once again, with strikes that reportedly included ATACM and HIMARS missiles.
As I write this Iran has launched missiles at Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE, Qatar (i.e., Al Udeid AFB) and Jordan’s Muwaffaq al Salti airbase. So what will happen next? If the past is any guide Trump is likely to issue a statement on Sunday, or early Monday morning, designed to calm the financial markets and halt the spike in the price of oil. While I cannot rule out that this current exchange could escalate and continue for several days, let me remind you of what has happened since April 7, 2026.
Working through the post-April 7 timeline day by day, the strict pattern — US strikes on Iranian sites Friday/Saturday, followed by a Trump progress-in-talks statement Sunday or early Monday — shows up twice cleanly, with three more near-fits. In other words, this may be deja vu all over again — a quote attributed to Yogi Berra. Here are the details:
May 23–24 (Sat–Sun): Trump declared on Saturday May 23 that the agreement was “largely negotiated,” repeating it May 24 — explicitly “despite ongoing U.S. military strikes in the area”. Progress statement on the weekend amid active strikes.
May 30–31 → Monday, June 1. CENTCOM confirmed strikes on Iranian radar and drone sites at Goruk and on Qeshm Island carried out Saturday and Sunday, in response to the shootdown of a US MQ-1 over international waters. Then on Monday June 1, with Iranian state media saying talks were suspended, Trump contradicted this and said talks were continuing at a “rapid pace,” touting a “very productive call” that day.
June 13–14: The memorandum to end the war was announced on Sunday, June 14. The preceding days featured what mediators called a “tit-for-tat situation” with “volleys of strikes”, though Trump had announced Thursday June 11 that he was canceling scheduled strikes.
June 20–22: Iran declared Hormuz re-closed Saturday June 20, Trump threatened to “take over” the strait, then Sunday-overnight talks in Switzerland concluded “constructively” with a Monday joint statement praising the “positive and constructive atmosphere”. Here the weekend kinetics were mostly Iranian/Israeli.
June 26–28 → Monday, June 29. The US struck Iranian military targets over the weekend in response to Tehran’s attacks on shipping, with hostilities running a fourth consecutive day by Sunday, June 28 (Friday June 26 and Saturday June 27 both saw exchanges). On Sunday a senior US official said technical talks were “on track” and both sides would “stand down,” and on Monday, June 29, Trump posted “IRAN HAS REQUESTED A MEETING. IT WILL TAKE PLACE TOMORROW IN DOHA!” — with Rubio and Witkoff briefing Congress on an initial peace deal that same Monday. Notably, Trump had spent Saturday threatening that Iran “will no longer exist” before pivoting to the Monday talks announcement. The talks did not take place.
It is now early morning on the East coast and the Iranian response to the US attacks continues. The ball is now in Trump’s corner… once again. If he chooses to respond with force to the Iranian attacks, Iran will launch even more attacks. Despite Trump’s belligerent threats, the US cannot afford to return to a full-scale military operation. Stocks of key US weapons, which include Tomahawk and JASSM missiles, are running low and cannot be quickly replaced because the US lacks the industrial scale and is crippled by supply chain shortages of rare earth minerals.
Interview with Sulaiman Ahmed who is alive and well in Tehran.
Rahm Emanuel’s Critique of Israel: Signs of Change or a Desperate Plea?
By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | July 11, 2026
Former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s recent address at Tel Aviv University, delivering a sternly worded warning to the Israeli public, has captured a lot of attention. Although it has been interpreted otherwise, the speech was an appeal to strategic moderation and not a signal of fundamental change amongst an element of Washington’s establishment – the context behind his words will explain precisely why.
What Rahm Emanuel said to an audience in Tel Aviv has largely been consumed on social media in the form of short soundbites, thus triggering many to draw various conclusions about a decline in the Democratic Party establishment’s support for Israel. While it is undoubtedly true that the vast majority of Democratic voters do hold unfavorable views of the Israeli government, a trend that has clearly also taken hold amongst American Jews, this is not the conclusion that the likes of Emanuel have drawn.
The most viral clips from his 33-minute address feature the former White House official bluntly outlining just how isolated the Israelis are on the world stage, noting that Tel Aviv has become a global pariah and that as a result the US-Israel relationship itself is at a crossroads. Another key moment was a call for an end to US unconditional aid to Israel.
In its full context, it is blindingly obvious that Emanuel is not expressing his own negative views towards Israel, as he repeatedly makes the point of noting his Zionist credentials, including his own family’s involvement in building the Israeli State. Understanding where he is coming from and what he is getting at is the most important element of the speech, because it grants the viewer an insight into the mindset within the Democratic Party establishment.
A direct criticism of the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is offered, yet it is not one that you would most likely hear expressed from the average American democrat, but rather Israeli Labor Party old-timers. He builds upon a narrative that blames Hamas for causing division between Palestinians and Israelis, arguing that the movement’s goal has been to prevent a peaceful settlement. It then goes on to claim that Netanyahu has bolstered the arguments presented by Hamas and fallen into their trap by implementing a violent solution with no day-after plan in Gaza.
This argument is not new; in fact, it is quite outdated. So too is Emanuel’s proposed solution, which involves Israel simply expanding its normalisation agreements with the Arab World in exchange for halting the Greater Israel Project. He does not, however, even call for a viable Palestinian State, something that makes his position less rational than that of Biden administration officials like Antony Blinken.
For reference, former Secretary of State Blinken made a similar call for Israeli moderation during one of his final speeches in 2024, to the Atlantic Council. The Biden Administration official, like Rahm Emanuel, espoused the typical Zionist talking points during the beginning of his speech, later to assume a more sober line that urged the Israelis to pursue diplomacy and moderation, and warned that a refusal to pursue the path of reaching a two-State settlement would mean inevitable disaster.
Emanuel’s solution is to do precisely what the Biden administration did prior to October 7, 2023, in prioritizing Israeli regional integration, while refusing to respect or hear out the calls for Palestinian sovereignty.
Some would then argue that he has assumed a more radical posture through his call for ending the unconditional military aid and not treating Israel as an interdependent, to which the answer is simple: calling for the end of foreign aid to Israel is no longer a radical position; it is simply a tactic.
The Heritage Foundation – regarded as the most influential think tank over the Trump administration – published a policy blueprint for phasing out aid to Israel over a 19-year period in order to make it fully independent. Netanyahu’s own Likud Party has even advocated this policy themselves. It has been recognized by the Israel Lobby in Washington that the dramatic shift in American public support for the Israelis will eventually make it difficult for pro-Israel bills, especially those approving billions in military aid, to pass through Congress in the future.
A solution to this problem has been a proactive push by the Israel Lobby to use its current support in Congress and the Senate to forward a merger of the US and Israeli defense industries. This, therefore, bypasses the issue of requiring favorable votes on foreign aid handouts. The House version of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), under the title “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative”, aims to do just this.
One way to interpret Rahm Emanuel’s speech is that the pro-Israel Democratic Party establishment is beginning to sober up to the reality facing Tel Aviv. He himself has clearly identified the issue with Israel’s aggressive pursuit of the Greater Israel Project and is arguing for strategic moderation. It is clear desperation. But even in his pursuit to save the Zionist project from itself, his deeply ingrained hatred of Palestinians blinds him from the fact that going back to the pre-October 7 status quo is not going to be Israel’s saving grace.
In other words, he is communicating a failure to recognize that the root of the problem is not Hamas, Netanyahu, or the corruption of the Palestinian Authority, as he claims; it is that the Palestinian people remain Stateless and have now been subjected to a full-scale genocide. If Emanuel was capable of seeing past his own biases, in order to truly pursue a path that could indeed ensure the Zionist project’s longevity, he would be calling for a Palestinian State in the pre-June 1967 borders. That is actually the pro-Israeli solution that could potentially take them off their current trajectory.
At the root of all of this is the US establishment’s inability to see Palestinians as equal human beings. This lies at the core of the Zionist belief system – the idea that it is never Israel’s fault; at best, the Israelis can make mistakes and, in some instances, be equally as liable as the people they are actively annihilating.
There are two competing sides of the pro-Israel Lobby in the United States: one that supports the Greater Israel Project and the other that clings to the ideas espoused by the Israeli Labor Party in the 1990s. The Democratic Party is aligned primarily with the latter, while the former has the most sway with the Republican Party establishment.
Times are changing and what the Israelis have done cannot be undone, so this requires a change. But Rahm Emanuel’s fairytale vision of Israel solving all its problems by halting further settlement expansion in the West Bank in exchange for expanding the circle of normalization is a non-starter.
He blames the Arab nations for refusing to hold the Palestinian leadership to account during the Oslo years, claiming that the solution to Israel’s problems is getting a declaration of normalisation from the Arab League. This indicates that he, and many others around him, are simply stuck in the past. Israel has committed genocide; it has failed to defeat its adversaries and must concede defeat by signing a comprehensive deal/s or keep fighting until its inevitable disintegration. We have long passed the point of no return.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.
Here’s JD: The Unbearable Lightness of VP Vance: A VERY Short Primer
By Ilana Mercer • Unz Review • July 11, 2026
DEVOUTLY AND LOUDLY do various media organs of the establishment—CNN, The War Street Journal, The Hill, Politico or Israel’s Axios—dazzle you with flattering depictions of JD Vance’s foreign-policy stance, almost always based on unnamed sources, which have conveniently slithered out of dank corners, at this point of the election cycle. Experts in untruths, these media tell you that Vance, vice president in the Trump regime, has all-along roared about foreign-policy restraint.
If he has, it’s the least leonine roar ever heard in this neck of the woods.
Or, the most “private” political protest ever, as Politico would counter. “Private” is how this particular Deep-State tool dubs VP Vance’s foreign policy bent.
In short, Vance confines his “subversive” murmurs to carefully leaked and curated after-the-fact comments, credited mostly to unnamed sources.
The following facts need to be stated, too:
Juvenile quips from craven politicians like Vance notwithstanding, the United States of America continues to play planet to Israel’s sun. Israel’s genocides in the Levant are Made-in-America. Not once in the course of Israel’s carnage in Gaza, in the West Bank and in Lebanon, all ongoing, have two genocidal administrations, Democrat and Republican, budged in materially directing resources to the missions of mass murder currently conducted by Israel.
America underwrites Israeli evil financially and diplomatically, running diplomatic cover for the Israeli executioners. To that end, the US even sanctions and persecutes countries and individuals who dare disagree with its Israeli deity’s mass murder; dare agitate for justice, or demand that the laws of the land be levied against the Serial Killer State.
The US has even sanctioned judicial and UN officials tasked with investigating the crimes of U.S. or Israeli nationals. “Sanction” is a weasel way to frame America’s theft of their assets, banning of their travel, and restriction of their rights to trade with American business.
In all, Israel remains the holy of holies for American politicians.
With the reverence reserved for that country, VP Vance’s administration has never stopped the Jewish State from en masse execution of civilians and from the eradication of entire communities who refuse to submit to American and Israeli hegemony.
The next fact probably also bears repeating: Not once has JD Vance ever personally conveyed to his constituents a principled objection to the crimes of his administration and for those of Israel. No revulsion or reservations from VP Vance. His most coruscating critique of genocide has amounted to strategically intoning about “Israel’s right to defend itself,” a synonym for the practice of state-sponsored terrorism. From this stupid line, Vance has not strayed.
To hear VP Vance tell it, Israel has a bad hand to play. You know—nudge-nudge, wink-wink—it must deal with the caprices of the People of the region. “A ceasefire in that region of the world just means they’re shooting a little bit less at each other than they were before,” the jocular, pompous Vance told the presstitutes present at a June 18 presser. There, Vance also boasted about sending the Iranian economy into “a freefall,” and causing “a trillion dollars of damage to their industrial base over the last three months.”
Again, I have never heard JD Vance utter a meaningful, principled word in opposition to any depravity, much less Israeli depravity. I have, however, heard Vance echo Trump, the genocidaire. Without demarcation, Vance has blended into an administration that is terrorizing the world financially, economically and militarily. From Greenland, to Latin America to West Asia to Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.
Vance should repulse you, down to the garish eyeliner, which only enhances the “degeneracy of manners and morals” he and his administration represent.
With respect to the criminal, collaborative assault on Iran, Vance has been a “servile cheerleader for the war his boss … launched alongside Israel,” as more honest comment has characterized the Vance stance. Throughout Trump’s many ceasefire farces—all a fig leaf for US-Israel resolve to slowly dissolve Iran, and with it the Axis of Resistance—Vance has eagerly played his part, seconding Trump’s venomous genocidal threats against the Islamic Republic, as well as aping Trump’s idiotic atavistic aggression against other countries.
The insubstantial JD Vance might direct stale, totem words of warning toward those Israelis who speak ill of the Butcher of DC, Trump. But, for the Butcher of Tel Aviv Vance reserves the velvet glove: He took care to exempt Bibi from this particular wrongdoing, during the same June 18 presser, where Vance assured the presstitutes present that he speaks regularly with Bibi and has good rapport with him.
Essentially, Vance and Bibi are solid partners in vice.
Nonchalantly, VP Vance might opine, as he has, that Israel “can’t kill its way to security.” But that’s the extent of it. The carefully choreographed dance that American and Israeli “leaders” do for the benefit of the perfect American fools who vote for them continues uninterrupted.
A plurality of Israelis, on the other hand, are tickled pink by Bibi’s genocides in Lebanon and Palestine. As the brilliant Diana Buttu gloomily reported, Israeli political candidates are running on a plank of who can inflict more pain on their barely surviving Palestinian victims.
So don’t be swept to sea again, this time by Vance whom the irremediable corporate media (as well as some in the alternative media, regrettably) is portraying as a strident opponent of the war on Iran and wars for Israel. It’s nonsense on stilts.
What the VP is doing now is what he has done since the auspicious start of his political career:
Vance launched his career with a smug, self-aggrandizing book, in which he slimed his hillbilly relatives, even naming names. The book was very badly received by authentic “hillbillies.” The Establishment, however lapped it up and loved its author. Still does.
During the 2024 campaign, and before he was tapped by Trump, Vance did the same. He made the right noises, ones the voters wanted to hear, against “costly and unsuccessful interventions,” as he put it.
Stoutly strategic, in suiting-up for the 2028 race, Vance has dropped a book about his Catholicism. Nothing if not theologically inventive, the triangulating candidate has coopted his Catholic faith as a reason for his fealty to … Israel.
Israel is another exigency of the moment. Vance is reading the room again. America is just not that keen on Israel any longer—although, sadly for their souls, Americans have yet to turn on the Jewish State completely and altogether.
While opinion of Israel has undeniably plummeted in the US, the “bottom line,” sums Gallup soberly, is that “Americans retain a more positive view of Israel, with 46% viewing it favorably, than of the Palestinian Territories, at 37%”:
‘… Americans still have a more favorable view of Israel, as a country, than of the Palestinian Territories, though views of Israel are among the least favorable Gallup has measured historically. Meanwhile, views of the Palestinian Territories are the most positive to date, albeit still negative overall.’ (Gallup, February 26, 2026)
In all, don’t let your imagination run fevered with respect to Vance. Don’t get played again (and again, and again). When the powers that be, their sub-par publications and their strategists, pool their power to portray JD Vance as something other than what (as opposed to who) he is—one would hope your psychological-warfare antennae begin to transmit robust signals.
The reason I say that Vance is a “what”, not a “who”—that “what” is the better syntactic determiner to attach to VP Vance—is because the VP is a political production, not a real person. A production of the worst pedigree.
Vance is a creation of a tech billionaire PAC, a “tech-aligned super political action committee.”
Vance is the personal creation of Peter Thiel, founder of PayPal. Thiel was/is his mentor. Together, the wild-eyed Thiel and the ugly in-and-out Alex Karp founded, still manage, Palantir Technologies. How intimate are the Israel Genocidal Forces and the “CIA-backed” Palantir?
Conjugally intimate.
If the gateway to the internet is Google, and it is; not even Google—algorithmically set to defend Israel at all costs—can conceal the bonds that bind Palantir to the Serial Killer State’s crimes. Put it this way, Google (an aggregator for Zionism) and pro-Palestine sources are in agreement over the Palantir-IDF connection.
Palantir works closely with the IDF’s notorious Unit 8200, which is comprised of a select group of mama’s boys and girls, who snoop, hack, and assassinate in code and in practice. Unit 8200’s killer AI algorithms both calibrate and codify mass murder into the SS IDF’s military’s legal code. They have given themselves imprimatur to Press Kill on locating a single resistance fighter, amid up to 100 non-combatant family members, friends and neighbor. It’s not in violation of Israeli law. The individual is impugned by the flimsiest evidence.
Instead of in the dock, in the Hague, these computer killers, you should know, are also found in Silicon Valley, Boston’s high-tech corridor, and, presumably, in Washington State’s techno-town. These characters will certainly be coming to a community near you, near me, when JD’s friends and sponsors facilitate the assimilation of this human detritus into our communities, as they flee future International Criminal Court subpoenas.
Israel and Unit 8200 are the face of this global death industry. The SS IDF’s Artificial Intelligence products, out of Unit 8200, have, in particular, perfected the auto-kill computer systems known as “Lavender,” Daddy’s Home, and The Gospel, whose killer code has been applied to Gaza and Lebanon.
Palantir works with Unit 8200, on “war-related missions.” Coward Karp, Thiel’s partner, has proudly spoken of his company as being involved in “crucial operations in Israel.”
In backing Vance, co-founder Thiel and CEO Karp are joined by former tech executive and podcaster David Sacks, an influencer in the Vance orbit. Sacks is close, too, to censor-for-Zionism Elon Musk. Both backed Vance. AI-traders Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz hobnob too in the Vance hood.
Speaking of Google, Vance’s venture capitalism company, Narya Capital, was sponsored by both Thiel and Google’s Eric Schmidt. So, it’s pointless asking Vance to ease up the Google algorithms.
Vance’s Deep Tech billionaire backers are anathema to human flourishing. Theirs is a system of plunder. They are princes who pauper the universe by their deadly fiat pursuits, financial, technocratic, environmental, military. These people and their necro-industries move humanity further away from community, from the locality; from honest industry, from real knowledge and production and into a consumer, bubble-driven technocracy, anchored in illiteracy, gambling, speculation, buying and selling intangible derivative products.
As if American communities are not already distressed; the infrastructure for AI promises to suck the life out of their natural environment, leaving bereft the communities in whose midst these hideous “data centers” are planted. AI Data centers are an assault-on-the-eye and on ethics. Their stratospheric costs as always are socialized; their profits privatized.
As I say, VP Vance is a slick production. The man is a particularly oleaginous political product, astroturf down to the (alleged) rug on his head.
Lest I forget, in his new book Vance cites Charlie Kirk, a mention that was probably focus-group tested. Metaphorically speaking, Vance is boiling the bones of poor murdered Mr. Kirk to make soup. Mr. Kirk is being exploited posthumously to shape discourse in politically advantageous ways.
**********
https://ilanamercersfpvresistance.substack.com
Ilana Mercer, paleolibertarian author, essayist and theorist, has been writing up an anti-war, anti-woke storm since 1998, starting in Canada. On arriving in the US, in 2002, her weekly column was right away syndicated. Mercer’s national syndication fell through shortly after due to writing in strident opposition to the war in Iraq. ILANA is described as “a system-builder. Distilled, her modus operandi has been to methodically apply first principles to the day’s events.” She’s Jewish, grew up in Israel ages five to nineteen, and left, at 19, never to return. She had refused to serve in the IDF, Israel’s compulsory military. Ilana’s focus since October of 2023 has been the genocide. A war against civilians is a war on civilization.
IRGC Navy: Strait of Hormuz closed until US ends regional intervention
Press TV – July 11, 2026
The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy has announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz “until further notice,” saying the waterway will remain closed until the United States ends its intervention in the region.
In a statement on Saturday, the IRGC Navy said the measure had been taken “in light of the security situation resulting from the unlawful intervention of foreign powers.”
“The Strait of Hormuz has been closed until further notice and will remain closed until the United States ends its intervention in the region. No vessel will be permitted to transit the strait,” the statement said.
Warning against further enemy aggression
The IRGC Navy warned against any additional military aggression against the Islamic Republic under the pretext of the closure of the waterway, for which the enemy, itself, has been responsible.
“Should the aggressor enemy exploit this development, which it, itself, has caused, as a pretext for committing another act of aggression against us, it will be met with a forceful response, and additional enemy bases in the region will be targeted,” the statement added.
It added that responsibility for the consequences would lie with the United States, the Israeli regime, and countries hosting military facilities used for violations against Iran.
Earlier, the IRGC Navy reported having been forced to fire a warning shot at a vessel after several ships ignored its instructions regarding navigation through the strait.
Describing the incident involving the trespassing vessel, the force said the ship had switched off its onboard systems, therefore, posing a threat to maritime safety.
The force, meanwhile, reminded how it had previously warned that “foreign interference and unlawful designation of shipping routes in the Strait of Hormuz would prompt a decisive response from us and disrupt the increasing volume of maritime traffic through the strait.”
Iran shut down the chokepoint to enemies and their allies after February 28, when the US and the Israeli regime began their latest bout of wholesale unprovoked aggression against the Islamic Republic.
It began exercising far stricter controls after Donald Trump announced continuation of an illegal naval blockade of Iranian vessels and ports in spite of a ceasefire that the US president, himself, had declared on April 7.
In May, Iran officially launched a new mechanism for governing maritime traffic through the strategic strait, with the Islamic Republic warning vessels against refusing to coordinate their pending transits with Iranian authorities and using routes other than the supervisory management zone defined by Tehran.
In June, Iran and the United States reached an understanding aimed at ending the cycle arising from the unprovoked aggression. Washington then alleged to have lifted the blockade, but would still continue military interference in the waterway.
Ro Khanna says Israeli settlers held US delegation in West Bank
Al Mayadeen | July 11, 2026
US Democratic Representative Ro Khanna said armed Israeli settlers prevented his delegation from leaving a Palestinian area in the occupied West Bank, an incident he said exposed the realities of Israeli occupation and settler violence.
Khanna, who is considering seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, told Reuters that settlers carrying US-manufactured M4 rifles surrounded the group’s vehicle on Wednesday near Khirbet Zanuta in the southern West Bank.
The California congressman had been touring the remains of a Palestinian community whose residents were driven out following repeated attacks by Israeli settlers.
“We were at a village that Israeli settlers had destroyed, they had destroyed the school, they had destroyed that village, and we were just looking at it,” Khanna said.
“And these hoodlums come in with machine guns – M4, an American-made machine gun – and they detain us. They block off the road. And then they call the IDF and the IDF is on their side, not on the side of the Americans,” he added.
Cameron Kasky, an aide traveling with Khanna, said the delegation remained blocked for more than an hour and contacted the US Embassy in al-Quds seeking assistance. Police officers later arrived and cleared the way for the group to leave, according to Kasky.
The Israeli military acknowledged that settlers had obstructed vehicles near Khirbet Zanuta, saying troops and police were dispatched after receiving a report from the area.
“Upon their arrival, the troops dispersed the Israeli civilians and allowed the vehicles to continue on their way,” the military said.
West Bank trip shapes possible 2028 bid
Khanna’s visit comes as divisions over US support for “Israel” deepen inside the Democratic Party, particularly amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza and escalating settler attacks across the occupied West Bank.
He is the second possible Democratic presidential contender to visit the region this week. Former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said during a visit to Tel Aviv that Israeli policies toward Palestinians were weakening public support for the US-Israeli alliance.
Asked whether he intended to seek the presidency in 2028, Khanna said, “I’m strongly considering it and I’m more resolved to consider it after this trip.”
The lawmaker chose not to visit Israeli officials during the trip, instead taking part in a Palestinian-led program focused solely on the occupied West Bank.
Khanna said the decision was intended to provide a direct view of the consequences of the occupation without the tightly managed itinerary often arranged for visiting US politicians.
“If you’re unwilling to speak up for Palestinian human rights, if you’re unwilling to speak up against the genocide in Gaza, the apartheid in the West Bank, then you are morally compromised,” Khanna said.
From the outskirts of Turmus Ayya, a Palestinian town where many residents hold US citizenship, Khanna also criticized senior figures within his party for failing to understand the political significance of Palestine among Democratic voters.
He said the Democratic establishment was “clueless about how much of a moral test Palestine, Gaza and Israel have become.”
Democratic support for ‘Israel’ declines
Public backing for “Israel” among Democratic voters has fallen considerably in recent years. A Reuters/Ipsos poll cited in the report found that its favorability rating among Democrats dropped from 59% in 2018 to 22% in May.
The shift has begun influencing Democratic primary races, with several lawmakers facing challenges over their support for the Israeli regime and Washington’s continued military assistance.
A growing number of Democratic members of Congress have called for restrictions or an end to US weapons transfers to “Israel,” which receives approximately $3.8 billion in annual American military aid.
That support includes funding for firearms such as M4 rifles, as well as missile interception systems used by the Israeli occupation during its war on Iran.
US-supplied weaponry involved in armed settler violence
Khanna’s comments drew a direct connection between US-supplied weaponry and armed settler violence in the West Bank, where Palestinians are subjected to attacks, forced displacement, land seizures and restrictions on movement.
Approximately three million Palestinians live in the occupied West Bank alongside around 500,000 Israeli settlers.
The United Nations and most governments consider Israeli settlements illegal under international law, particularly under provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibiting an occupying power from transferring its civilian population into occupied territory.
The Israeli government rejects that position and describes the West Bank as disputed land, while Palestinians regard the territory, together with the Gaza Strip and occupied eastern al-Quds, as part of their future state.
Khanna’s trip signals that opposition to Washington’s unconditional support for “Israel” could become a central issue in the Democratic presidential contest ahead of 2028.
NATO’s ‘Missile Summit’: The arms race Europe just signed up for
The alliance is building a European production network for Tomahawks, ATACMS, Patriot interceptors, and Ukrainian strike drones
By Dmitry Kornev | RT | July 11, 2026
The NATO summit in Ankara hasn’t been dubbed a “missile summit” by anyone – yet it probably should be. More than anything else, the meeting marked the launch of several major missile programs that could fundamentally reshape Europe’s military landscape over the coming decade.
Germany is getting Tomahawks
Chancellor Friedrich Merz got what he had been pushing for – and not just him. The United States has effectively given Berlin the green light to acquire American Tomahawk cruise missiles.
”On the sidelines of the NATO summit in Ankara we also agreed with the American government that Tomahawk missiles would be purchased by us and stationed in Germany. With this we are closing an important strategic gap in our defense. And at the same time we will work on developing our own European systems and deploying them in Europe,” Merz announced.
The details remain unclear. Berlin has yet to specify exactly which Tomahawk variant it intends to buy. Most likely, however, these will be the ground-launched versions, meaning either the Typhon missile system or a new launcher built around the same family of cruise missiles.
What does this actually mean?
In practical terms, Germany would gain the ability to strike virtually any target in the western part of Central Russia. If similar systems were eventually deployed in the Baltic states, their range would extend as far as the Urals.
One can assume that the German leadership will sleep a little easier knowing it has such capabilities at its disposal. A few billion dollars may seem like a reasonable price for that kind of reassurance.
And what do the Americans get?
They no longer have to deploy their own Tomahawks across Europe to reassure NATO allies. Europe gets to strengthen its own defenses – and pay for them itself. From Washington’s perspective, that’s a remarkably efficient arrangement.
Patriot missiles – Made in Ukraine?
Arguably the biggest missile-related announcement for Ukraine came from President Donald Trump, who revealed plans to grant Kiev a license to manufacture missiles for the Patriot air defense system.
No European country currently possesses such a license. Japan is the only nation outside the United States that produces Patriot interceptors.
Trump said American and Ukrainian technical teams would now begin working on the practical details – drafting agreements and preparing production. For the moment, however, this remains a political declaration rather than an industrial reality.
Ukraine certainly retains significant missile expertise. But launching serial production of one of the world’s most technologically sophisticated interceptor missiles under current wartime conditions would be an extraordinarily difficult task.
Modern PAC-3 interceptors are produced only in the United States and Japan, while manufacturing many of their critical components remains tightly controlled.
Technology, however, isn’t the biggest obstacle. The war is.
Building a facility capable of producing Patriot missiles while Russian aerospace forces retain the ability to strike targets across Ukraine borders on fantasy.
Which means that “Ukrainian production” would likely end up being Ukrainian mostly on paper, while the actual factories would operate somewhere else in Europe.
And there is already no shortage of volunteers.
Everyone wants in
Polish Defense Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz has already announced that Warsaw is prepared to help Ukraine establish serial Patriot missile production.
That statement wasn’t accidental.
At the same NATO summit, Poland joined a four-country European consortium that will create a regional competence center responsible for servicing Patriot missiles.
For a country that currently lacks a production license, cooperating with Ukraine could offer a path into one of the West’s most important missile supply chains. Historical grievances and nationalist rhetoric suddenly become far less significant when industrial opportunities emerge. Apparently, this is different.
Germany has even stronger incentives.
Defense giant Rheinmetall is already deeply involved in multiple joint programs with Ukraine and would almost certainly welcome the opportunity to manufacture Patriot missiles as well.
The company already possesses the technological expertise, industrial infrastructure, financial resources, and long-established partnerships needed to launch production quickly.
And once the assembly lines exist, there would be little reason to produce missiles solely for Ukraine. Rheinmetall could eventually supply customers throughout Europe – and beyond.
Nothing personal. Just business.
Germany will also build Ukraine’s ‘Bars’ cruise drones
The Patriot project isn’t the only new German-Ukrainian missile initiative.
As part of the Build with Ukraine program, Berlin and Kiev agreed to organize production of Ukrainian-designed Bars jet-powered cruise drones in Germany.
The agreement was signed in Ankara by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga and German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius.
The Bars is a lightweight high-speed strike drone carrying a warhead weighing between 30 and 100 kilograms, with a range of up to 800 kilometers and a cruising speed of roughly 500 km/h.
Germany currently produces no weapons of this type.
For the German defense industry, the project offers an opportunity to gain experience with an entirely new class of weapon systems. The Bundeswehr likewise gains familiarity with technology it does not yet field.
The primary customer, however, will be Ukraine itself.
At least initially, every drone produced under the program is expected to be delivered to the Ukrainian military, while Germany finances the entire project.
A fairly convenient arrangement.
A European Patriot ecosystem
The summit also produced another notable agreement.
The United States, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Sweden signed a memorandum launching preparations for a European maintenance network for PAC-3 Patriot missiles.
The facilities will inspect, repair, and service missiles without sending them back to the United States.
Eventually there will likely be several such centers, one in each participating country.
Officially, these facilities are intended only for maintenance. Unofficially, virtually everyone understands where this is heading. Today’s repair center can become tomorrow’s production line.
For now, Washington appears reluctant to hand Europe full-scale manufacturing rights, preferring to preserve control over its most advanced technologies.
But that position may not last forever.
From an American perspective, collecting licensing royalties from European production could ultimately prove far more profitable than trying to supply an ever-growing European demand from shrinking US stockpiles.
From a business standpoint, that logic is difficult to ignore.
Germany again: ATACMS goes European
One more agreement attracted less attention than it probably deserved.
Lockheed Martin and Rheinmetall signed a memorandum to manufacture ATACMS ballistic missiles at Rheinmetall’s facility in Unterlüß, Germany.
It will be the first production of ATACMS missiles outside the United States.
The choice of location is hardly accidental.
The Unterlüß complex has operated for more than 125 years and now employs roughly 4,000 workers while continuing to expand.
Last year the site opened a new artillery ammunition production line.
A rocket motor factory is currently under construction and is scheduled to begin producing engines and missile components in 2027.
Rheinmetall expects full-scale ATACMS production to begin that same year, with output expanding significantly through 2028 and 2029.
Current European demand alone is estimated at between 600 and 800 missiles annually.
The bottom line
Given everything announced in Ankara, it’s difficult not to view this as NATO’s “missile summit.”
If even a significant portion of these plans materializes, Europe’s missile industry will look radically different within just a few years – and European taxpayers will foot nearly the entire bill.
Operational-tactical missiles? Yes.
Patriot interceptors? Yes.
Cruise missiles? Yes.
And this may only be the beginning.
Ukraine’s Fire Point company is already promoting its proposed FP-7 and FP-9 ballistic missiles, systems that currently have no direct European equivalent. Add to that the Freya missile defense program, which envisions combining European components with Ukrainian interceptor technology, and the picture becomes even more ambitious.
As one famous fictional character of the twentieth century put it: “What a celebration this is!”
Europe certainly has reasons to be optimistic. It may well become a true missile power.
Or all of these announcements may ultimately end up where countless ambitious defense initiatives have before them – in a pile of press releases and billions of dollars spent without delivering the promised results.
That happens too.
FM Denies Trump’s Claim That Iran Requested Talks with US
Al-Manar | July 11, 2026
Iran has firmly rejected speculation that it initiated negotiations with the United States, while doubling down on its pledge to meet any American violation of commitments with immediate and reciprocal countermeasures.
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei categorically dismissed claims of a unilateral Iranian request for dialogue with Washington during a televised interview on Friday. However, he acknowledged that Tehran did engage with a Qatari delegation in the northeastern city of Mashhad—but clarified that the meeting occurred solely at the behest of a regional mediator seeking to facilitate discussions on recent developments, not as a US-directed overture.
Reaffirming the Islamic Republic’s steadfast doctrine of “commitment for commitment,” Baqaei stressed that Iran will not implement any obligation without corresponding action from the American side. He accused Washington of serial infractions, noting that the United States has breached the recently signed memorandum of understanding multiple times within just 22 days of its endorsement.
Specifically, Baqaei cited newly announced US restrictions on Iranian oil sales and the imposition of additional sanctions as flagrant violations of the agreement’s core articles. “Iran has already activated the necessary reciprocal responses, and this approach will continue with full force,” he declared.
Turning to multilateral forums, the spokesman dismissed the recent United Nations Security Council session on Iran’s nuclear file—convened at the request of the United States, Britain, and France—as entirely inconsequential. He argued that UN Security Council Resolution 2231 expired on October 18, 2025, rendering any subsequent reports on its implementation legally invalid and devoid of merit.
Baqaei also condemned persistent Western calls for inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities that were damaged in attacks by the Israeli regime and the United States. He criticized the international community for its failure to condemn those strikes, asserting that the silence constitutes a blatant disregard for clear violations of international law.
In a separate development, Baqaei confirmed that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is set to travel to Oman on Saturday for high-level consultations focused on the Strait of Hormuz and regional maritime safety. The visit follows several rounds of technical discussions between Tehran and Muscat aimed at facilitating secure navigation and finalizing arrangements for maritime services in the strategic waterway.
US Strategy and the shift to NATO 3.0
A shorter declaration masks deeper tensions, as Washington pushes to reshape NATO’s role from Europe to West Asia and Asia-Pacific.
By Mehmet Ali Guller | The Cradle | July 11, 2026
The six-point final declaration of the NATO Ankara Summit is among the shortest in recent years, similar to last year’s five-point declaration from The Hague. In contrast, the 2021 Brussels Summit declaration contained 79 points, Madrid in 2022 had 22, Vilnius in 2023 included 90, and Washington in 2024 featured 38.
The sharp reduction reflects ongoing tensions between the US and Europe. The declaration is brief because areas of agreement remain limited. The debate over NATO as a “paper tiger” has not been resolved, only set aside.
In the declaration, this issue is temporarily addressed through the slogan “a stronger Europe in a stronger NATO.”
Ankara Declaration targets Russia and Iran
The first article of the six-point Ankara declaration reaffirms commitment to Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, while the final article offers thanks to the host country.
The remaining four articles center on Russia, outline a $70 billion support package for Ukraine, expand defense spending, reference $50 billion in arms deals, and briefly touch on Iran.
The Donroe Doctrine and NATO 3.0
Washington is seeking to adapt NATO to what it frames as a new strategic phase, described here as NATO 3.0. The so-called Donroe Doctrine centers on consolidating dominance in the Western Hemisphere, shifting more responsibility onto allies in Europe and elsewhere, and encircling China in the Asia-Pacific through partnerships.
In practice, this takes three forms:
- Europe assumes primary responsibility for its own security, including taking the lead in supporting Ukraine against Russia.
- A new order is established in West Asia under Israeli hegemony, requiring normalization between NATO member Turkiye and Israel, as well as between Israel and Syria and the Gulf states, while weakening Iran as the principal obstacle.
- NATO deepens cooperation with its Asia-Pacific partners—the IP4 countries: Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand—integrating them into its arms supply chain and gradually extending NATO’s reach into Asia.
The political economy of NATO 3.0
Washington views militarization as the lever for the transformation of NATO 3.0. It has two key objectives: raising NATO members’ defense spending to 5 percent of GDP and building a new arms production chain. The first step was initiated in The Hague last year, and the second advanced in Ankara.
Pushing defense spending to 5 percent would generate a vast financial pool within a few years. Including NATO partners such as Japan would further expand the scale, creating a market that draws broad interest. The US aims to distribute this pool in a way that sustains the NATO 3.0 framework.
Alongside this sits the effort to construct a new arms supply chain. The approach is to retain control over core components while distributing subcomponent production across allies, linking them to one another and ultimately to Washington.
The $50 billion arms deals referenced in the declaration mark an initial step. The $10 billion NATO–South Korea agreement, which grants Seoul access to NATO’s joint defense procurement market, fits within this model.
A new military-industrial economy
For the Erdogan government, securing a share of expanding defense spending has become a priority. Ankara sees this as an opening for its defense sector, particularly through the state firm ASELSAN and the private company BAYKAR.
The Defense Industry Forum, long held as a side event at NATO summits, was included in the official program in Ankara for the first time, reflecting that shift.
Countries seeking a share of this expanding market and Washington’s effort to allocate that share in line with its strategy have converged.
The idea of a NATO Defense Bank is also on the agenda. Nine countries laid its groundwork during the Ankara summit. If realized, it would tie a military-industrial model more closely to financial capital.
Turkiye 3.0: NATO’s central frontline state
For Turkiye, NATO 3.0 also signals a new phase.
NATO 1.0 covers the period from the alliance’s founding to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In that time, Turkiye was integrated into US strategy, diluting its founding emphasis on independence and anti-imperialism, eroding aspects of its secular character through the Green Belt project, and absorbing its human capital within anti-communist programs.
NATO 2.0 spans the period from 1991 to 2026. In these years, NATO expanded toward Russia, dismantled Yugoslavia, and intervened across West Asia. Turkiye’s role was again shaped within US strategy, this time through “moderate Islamism.”
NATO 3.0 is defined by Europe taking on security responsibility against Russia, the pursuit of a West Asian order under Israeli dominance, and a strategic shift toward the Asia-Pacific.
Within this framework, Turkiye is positioned as a security enforcer for Europe, encouraged to normalize relations with Tel Aviv to secure a place in the regional order, and drawn into efforts aimed at countering Iran.
In effect, Turkiye is being placed at the center of NATO’s frontline. The naval command under construction in the Bosphorus is directed toward Russia, while the new NATO Corps headquarters in Adana is oriented toward West Asia and Iran.
Washington’s ‘Asian NATO’ objective
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte effectively represents US leadership within the alliance. His statements reflect Washington’s position rather than Europe’s.
His remarks before and during the summit pointed to a longer-term objective. Rutte argued that Russia was working closely with North Korea, China and Iran, adding that NATO “cannot be naive” and had to remain united.
At its core, NATO 3.0 reflects an effort to use the alliance first against Beijing’s partners—Russia and Iran—and, over time, against China itself. The push to reorient NATO toward Asia follows from this.
For the past four years, leaders of the IP4 countries have been invited to NATO summits. In Ankara, discussions with these states focused on expanding cooperation in defense industries and advanced technologies.
Washington is pressing these partners toward closer military alignment, at times resembling a sub-alliance—an “Asian NATO.” Proposals to open a NATO liaison office in Tokyo—though contested, notably by France—form part of this effort.
Washington, however, has continued to push for a broader NATO role in Asia. As Rutte put it, “The security of the Euro-Atlantic and the Indo-Pacific are closely interconnected,” reinforcing efforts to extend the alliance’s focus beyond its original geographic remit.
Expectations from NATO 3.0
Following the Ankara Summit, NATO 3.0 is expected to serve different priorities:
- For the US: aligning NATO with its Asia-Pacific strategy.
- For Europe: maintaining US involvement in European security even as direct support shifts.
- For Turkiye: expanding a military-industrial growth model.
For countries across the Global South, NATO is widely viewed as an outdated military alliance whose role has run its course.
Somaliland jails musician without trial over al-Quds song
Al Mayadeen| July 11, 2026
Security forces in the breakaway region of Somaliland have detained young musician Khalid Mohamud Abdillahi, widely known as Khalid Kamil, after he recorded a song about occupied al-Quds, Hiiraan Online reported, citing his family.
Kamil has been held without trial for the past two weeks, his brother, Abdimajid Mohamud Abdillahi, said Thursday.
Abdimajid said intelligence officers arrested the musician at his home in Hargeisa before transferring him to the Criminal Investigation Department. He said Kamil was later moved to the central prison.
“They arrested Khalid at his home,” Abdimajid said. “The intelligence accused him of singing a song about Jerusalem that he had not yet released.”
Family questions basis for arrest
Abdimajid said authorities informed the family that Kamil was being detained because of the song but maintained that its content was unrelated to Somaliland.
“The security services told us that Khalid was being held for a song, but since the song was not about Somaliland, but about Jerusalem, we saw that someone was pushing or behind the arrest,” Abdimajid stressed.
Opposition party condemns detention
Somaliland’s opposition KAAH party denounced the arrest on Thursday, describing it as an infringement on fundamental freedoms and part of a broader campaign to suppress criticism of the breakaway government’s policy toward “Israel”.
“The arrest of artists, journalists and citizens for expressing their views and creativity undermines the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the constitution,” the party said.
KAAH urged the government to release Kamil immediately and halt intimidation targeting artists and members of the creative community.
The party added that democratic governance should be grounded in respect for the rule of law and freedom of expression rather than arrests and repression.
Previous arrests linked to ‘Israel’ recognition debate
Somaliland has previously detained religious leaders, traditional elders, journalists, and youth activists who opposed the prospect of Israeli recognition of Somaliland. Several of those detained were later released without trial.
The song, which has not been officially released but has circulated on social media, praises occupied al-Quds and highlights the city’s religious importance.
According to Kamil’s brother, the lyrics include lines stating that al-Quds “has been stolen” and criticizing those who remain silent about this crime.
Arrest follows opening of ‘Somaliland mission’ in al-Quds
The detention comes after Somaliland opened a diplomatic mission in occupied al-Quds in June, six months after “Israel” reportedly recognized Somaliland as an “independent state”.
The mission, located in a technology hub in the western part of occupied al-Quds, was inaugurated during an official visit by the regional president of the breakaway region of Somaliland, Abdirahman Mohamed Abdillahi, to “Israel”.
During the visit, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there was a “deep spiritual connection” between the two sides.
Somalia’s federal government, which regards Somaliland as part of its territory, condemned the engagement with “Israel” and said any contact with the separatist administration violated Somalia’s sovereignty.
Somaliland declared independence from Somalia in 1991 but has not secured broad international recognition. Somalia continues to maintain that Somaliland remains part of the Federal Republic of Somalia.
Featured Video
Midazolam and morphine deaths
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Evidence for the German Euthanasia Program Compared to the Holocaust
NS Euthanasia Propaganda Poster, around 1938. Credit: Wikimedia Commons
By John Wear | Inconvenient History | August 31, 2017
I have been asked the question: Why do you think the German euthanasia program happened during World War II, but not the Holocaust? This article will show that the evidence for the German euthanasia program is overwhelming, while the evidence to support the Holocaust story is severely lacking. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- IRGC finishes off Amazon data center, says US fatalities in hundreds
- Col Douglas Macgregor: Iran May Seize Kuwait ON THE GROUND
- US Army turns to older PAC-2 Patriot missiles as war against Iran drains stockpiles
- James Woolsey, influential neocon and Iraq War booster, dies at 84
- Midazolam and morphine deaths
- US Benefits From Oil Supply Disruptions in Strait of Hormuz – Ex-UK Ambassador
- Iran: UK decision to aid US strikes amounts to ‘act of aggression’
- Number of US casualties in war with Iran higher than officially disclosed
- Ian Proud: Anti-Russian Sanctions Do Not Work – How the Ukraine War Ends
- Italian newspaper forced to pay for smearing ‘Putinists’
- If Americans Knew
- ISRAELI MEDIA: ‘An Inferno’: Gazans Face Sweltering Conditions in Tent Camps for Third Summer in a Row
- Israel’s Coordinated Campaign to Propagandize Conservatives in America
- The Israeli Spy Behind PragerU’s Plan to Rewrite American Education To Indoctrinate Children
- The President of the World Jewish Congress just sent a warning to every Potential AMERICA FIRST Candidate wishing to run for U.S. Congress
- Life in displacement tents under Gaza’s summer sun is “an inferno” – Daily Update
- Israel targets X users, right-wing media with $2 million ad push
- ‘Our role is to hold on’: Palestinian artists in Israel after October 7
- ‘My Father Is a Hero’: Detained Palestinian Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya’s Son Speaks to Zeteo
- Israel threatens to seize ancient water reservoirs near Bethlehem
- Series of Reports Ignored by Media Show Jeffrey Epstein’s Extensive Work With Israeli Intelligence
- No Tricks Zone
- Greenland’s Ice Sheet Was Supposed To Be Rapidly Melting Away. It Hasn’t Been.
- Global Temperature Trend Has Cooled Over The Past 6500 Years, Scientists Have Found
- Wind Energy Means Going Back To The Middle Ages, Says German Professor Horst-Joachim Lüdecke
- New Study: A 40-Fold Increase In Earth’s Main Greenhouse Gas Contributes To Cooling The Ocean
- New Study Highlights The ‘Dominant Role’ Of Aerosol/Cloud Interactions In Shaping Climate
- Munich’s First-Ever Green Party Mayor Declares First Ever City Water Use Restrictions… Fines Up to 50,000 €!
- Experimental Lab Research: The Climate Sensitivity To A 400-Fold Increase In CO2 Is 0.1°C
- Fatal Snobbery: In France, It’s Better To Die From A Heatwave Than To Do As Americans
- New Study: NASA’s Models Wildly Underestimate The Capacity Of Clouds To Alter Solar Radiation
- Polar Freezeover: Western Arctic Early July Sea Ice Exceeds 1980s Average
Aletho News 