US and UK behind cyberattack on Aeroflot – Russian MP
RT | July 31, 2025
US and UK intelligence services were behind this week’s major cyberattack that disrupted operations at Aeroflot and other Russian companies earlier this week, a senior Russian lawmaker has claimed.
Andrey Svintsov, the deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy, has said the attack is part of a coordinated campaign by Western powers to damage the Russian economy after failing to achieve their objectives through military means and sanctions.
Aeroflot, Russia’s largest airline, was forced to cancel or delay dozens of flights on July 28 after pro-Ukrainian hacker groups claimed to have crippled the airline’s internal IT systems. The cyberattack also disrupted airport operations and affected other companies, including a nationwide pharmacy chain.
”These are not isolated hackers, but a planned action by American and British intelligence agencies,” Svintsov told Russian outlet Abzats. He described the campaign as a “systematic effort that is being carried out against Russia,” suggesting that it’s a sign of desperation by the country’s adversaries.
”This is a systematic approach by our Western enemies, who have failed to defeat Russia on the battlefield. They are moving to weaken the economic potential, since sanctions are not helping,” Svintsov said. He warned that cyber sabotage could continue until Russia achieves victory in the Ukraine conflict.
In May, Defense Secretary John Healey said the UK would significantly increase cyber operations against Russia and China. He confirmed the creation of a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command, adding that “the keyboard is now a weapon of war.”
The Kremlin has urged Russian businesses to replace foreign-made software and hardware to reduce exposure to cyber threats. Last month, President Vladimir Putin instructed the government to accelerate import substitution.
Hacker groups Silent Crow and Cyberpartisans BY have claimed responsibility for Monday’s attack on Aeroflot. They claim to have been inside the airline’s corporate network for over a year, stealing more than 20 terabytes of data and destroying around 7,000 servers.
Communications regulator Roskomnadzor said the data leaks have not been confirmed. Russia’s Prosecutor General’s Office has confirmed the cyberattack and opened a criminal case.
‘Compensation for war and security guarantees’: Iran sets conditions for US nuclear talks
The Cradle | July 31, 2025
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in an interview published on 31 July that Tehran is seeking financial compensation for Israel’s war, an explanation on why Iran was attacked during negotiations, and security guarantees for any resumption of nuclear talks with Washington.
Araghchi told the Financial Times that Iran will not accept going back to “business as usual” after Israel launched its unprovoked war on the country in mid-June.
“They should explain why they attacked us in the middle of … negotiations, and they have to ensure that they are not going to repeat that [during future talks]. And they have to compensate [Iran for] the damage that they have done,” Araghchi added.
He said he has exchanged messages with US envoy Steve Witkoff since the war ended, and that Witkoff has tried to convince him to return to negotiations.
“The road to negotiation is narrow but it’s not impossible. I need to convince my hierarchy that if we go for negotiation, the other side is coming with real determination for a win-win deal. We need real confidence-building measures from their side. My message [to Witkoff] is not that complicated. I said the recent aggression proved there is no military solution for Iran’s nuclear program, but a negotiated solution can be found,” the Iranian diplomat added.
Israel started its war on Iran on 13 June in the middle of nuclear talks between Tehran and Washington. Iran responded with successive barrages of ballistic missiles until the war came to an end on 24 June.
The US joined the war on 23 June with a bunker-buster attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, to which Tehran responded with a missile attack on its Al-Udeid base in Qatar.
Iranian nuclear facilities were heavily damaged, and western intelligence assessments have revealed that the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program has not been “obliterated” as Washington has claimed.
According to Araghchi, a new enrichment site that Tehran had revealed right before the war – in response to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board vote against it – was also struck.
This is the first acknowledgment of an attack on this particular site.
“As far as I know, the preparations were made [for enrichment], but it was not active when it was attacked,” Araghchi said.
Araghchi’s comments come after recent threats by Israel to restart the war against Iran. Defense Minister Israel Katz said late last month that attempts by Tehran to move forward with its nuclear program will be met with force.
The Iranian foreign minister has said that a deal with Washington is not possible if the US returns to its previous “zero enrichment” demand, and that Iran will not back down from enrichment.
He has also reiterated Iranian warnings of a harsher retaliation to any renewed attack.
“If aggression is repeated, we will not hesitate to react in a more decisive manner and in a way that will be IMPOSSIBLE to cover up,” Araghchi said earlier this week, referring to Israeli censorship of coverage on sites targeted by Iran.
Estonian defense chief reveals failure of Pentagon meeting
RT | July 31, 2025
The Baltic states have failed to secure any guarantees from Washington regarding the continued deployment of US forces in the region, Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur has said.
Pevkur and his respective Latvian and Lithuanian counterparts met with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last week in hope of convincing him to reinforce the US military presence in the Baltic region, which they claim is necessary to counter the threat allegedly posed by Russia.
Moscow has repeatedly denied having hostile intentions toward NATO states, dismissing such claims as fearmongering meant to justify increased military spending.
According to Pevkur, US officials declined to promise that even the current troop level of about 2,000 in the Baltic states would be maintained. Instead, the ministers were simply told that any future changes to the American force posture on the continent would be coordinated with NATO and would not come “as a surprise” to Europe.
Pevkur claimed that there have been no signs of an imminent drawdown of American forces in the Baltics since the meeting. He added, however, that Washington is preparing to review its European deployments in the fall.
Earlier this year, Politico reported that the US could withdraw around a third of its troops from Europe, equivalent to roughly 20,000 soldiers, according to unnamed NATO officials. The US currently has between 90,000 and 100,000 troops stationed across the continent.
Both President Donald Trump and Hegseth have previously indicated that the US may scale back its overseas presence. They have also called on European allies to increase their own defense spending instead of relying on American support.
NATO members have since agreed to raise their military spending target to 5% of GDP by 2035.
Moscow has criticized the bloc’s continued militarization and cited NATO’s policies as a key factor behind the Ukraine conflict. At the same time, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said the spending increases would pose no threat to Russia.
Irish High Court Rejects X’s Challenge to Online Censorship Law
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | July 31, 2025
The Irish High Court has thrown out a legal challenge by X, dealing a blow to the company’s pushback against Ireland’s new censorship rules for online video-sharing services.
X had taken aim at Coimisiún na Meán, the country’s media watchdog, accusing it of stepping beyond legal limits with its Online Safety Code.
The rules demand that platforms hosting user-generated videos take active steps to shield users from “harmful” material. The company had described the regulator’s actions as “regulatory overreach.”
Mr Justice Conleth Bradley, delivering judgment on Wednesday, found no merit in X’s application for judicial review. The court concluded that the regulator’s code was lawful and that its provisions fell within the scope of both the EU’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) and Ireland’s 2009 Broadcasting Act.
According to the ruling, the code does not clash with the Digital Services Act and can function in tandem with EU law.
Responding to the outcome, Coimisiún na Meán said it welcomed the decision and intended to examine the ruling closely before offering more detailed comment.
The case comes as X begins rolling out new age verification systems to meet obligations under the Irish code, alongside compliance efforts aimed at satisfying UK and wider EU digital censorship regulations.
The ruling marks a significant moment in the ongoing struggle over who decides the boundaries of online speech and content moderation.
While the court’s backing of the state regulator reinforces governments’ ability to impose strict platform controls, it raises deeper concerns about the growing normalization of surveillance-based compliance measures and centralized authority over digital expression.
How much is shoddy, pro-Israel journalism worth? Ask Bari Weiss.
As her Free Press is poised to seal a $200 million deal with the mainstream news giant CBS, let us reflect on why
By Branko Marcetic | Responsible Statecraft | July 29, 2025
A thought experiment: would anyone who referred to the killing of 50 Jewish people, many of them “entirely innocent non-combatants, including children,” as “one of the unavoidable burdens of political power, of Palestinian liberation’s dream turned into the reality of self-determination,” ever be hired by a major television news network?
Would their news outlet ever be potentially offered more than $200 million to merge with that major news network?
Of course not, and for good reason. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening, only with one small but major difference: the writer and her news outlet responsible for this statement, Bari Weiss and The Free Press, were not talking about Hamas’ murder of Israelis, but rather about Israel’s killing of 50 Palestinians — “Zionism’s dream turned into the reality of self-determination,” as Weiss described it in 2021.
Weiss is currently in talks to sell The Free Press to CBS News for between $200-$250 million, after reportedly winning over its new owner, David Ellison, “by taking a pro-Israel stance,” according to the Financial Times. Ellison “wants to position The Free Press alongside CBS News,” the paper reported, while another source told the New York Times that Ellison is weighing up giving Weiss “an influential role in shaping the editorial sensibilities of CBS News.”
If so, it would be a major new development in a pervasive double standard we’ve seen in the past nearly two years. Weiss and her outlet have engaged in rhetoric and professional behavior that would ordinarily never pass muster in a newsroom — but are considered acceptable because they are in support of Israel’s war against Palestinians.
For one, The Free Press has repeatedly spread misinformation. In May 2024, the outlet charged that the UN had “admit” the civilian death toll was 50 percent lower than what was being claimed, a quickly debunked and borderline willful misreading of a UN document, a misreading that the UN secretary-general’s office swiftly came forward to correct (a fact left out of The Free Press’ piece).
One year later, The Free Press declared the idea that Israel was engineering a man-made famine that was underway in Gaza a “myth,” even as Israel was in its third month of blocking all food, fuel, and medicine into the territory and at least 57 civilians had already starved to death, most of them children. As recently as this past Sunday, another Free Press article argued that “there isn’t mass starvation as claimed by pro-Hamas propaganda,” which flies in the face of not just basic reality, but testimony from doctors, major news organizations with journalists on the ground, and even the conclusion of President Donald Trump, a supporter of the war.
Just this past June, The Free Press charged simultaneously that there had both been no massacre of Palestinian aid seekers, and that, if there was, Hamas may have been responsible. Of course, since then, not only have Israeli soldiers admitted to shooting aid-seekers but U.S. contractors are coming forward to back up their gruesome stories. These accounts are becoming a near-daily occurrence, with over 1,000 Gazans killed at or close to aid distribution sites in the past two months.
In late May, The Free Press even published a puff piece on the group running these virtual slaughterhouses, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), painting it as an unsung success story, despite ample controversy at the time over its reliance on mercenaries and lack of independence. Two months of bloodshed later, condemnation and calls for GHF’s dismantling are widespread, with one former GHF staffer — a retired U.S. special forces officer — saying he had never witnessed such brutality and indiscriminate violence against “an unarmed, starving population” as at GHF’s distribution centers.
All of these pieces are still up, uncorrected on The Free Press website. And this is by no means an exhaustive list.
When it’s not spreading outright misinformation, The Free Press engages in more insidious propaganda. For instance, it has, depending on the public relations needs of the moment, shifted between ignoring, indignantly denying, and justifying Israel’s attacks on Gaza’s hospitals.
When a blast in the war’s first month that killed hundreds at al-Ahli Hospital ignited global outrage, The Free Press jumped on evidence that it may have been an errant Hamas rocket to charge again and again and again, even as recently as two days ago, that the media were rampantly defaming Israel through fake news of crimes it had never committed.
Since then, The Free Press has simply ignored the Israeli attacks on hospitals, often openly done and fully admitted to by the IDF, that have left 94 percent of hospitals in Gaza damaged or destroyed, including just this year attacking al-Ahli at least twice. In fact, both the outlet and Weiss personally pivoted quickly from denying Israel would do such a terrible thing to actively justifying its targeting of hospitals.
Of course, the vast majority of Israel’s war crimes in Gaza are simply never discussed by the outlet. The same goes for Palestinian suffering more generally and the massive and ever-mounting Palestinian death toll, which a group of experts last year concluded is likely undercounted by hundreds of thousands. Typically, the only time these topics are discussed by the outlet is to deny them and to lament their negative effect on Israel.
This is hardly surprising, considering new revelations that The Free Press has serially regurgitated content pushed by the Center for Peace Communications — an organization staffed by figures from pro-Israel think tanks and funded by money from pro-Israel donors.
Another largely absent topic: antisemitism, which is a charge The Free Press exclusively reserves for antiwar protesters, college campuses, teachers unions, Peter Beinart, Ireland, and anyone else who expresses pro-Palestinian sentiment, while it dutifully ignores accusations of antisemitism among Trump appointees and nominees and allies who also happen to be supporters of Israel’s war.
That brings us to the conduct of Weiss herself. She has a personal history of both playing fast and loose with the truth and what can only be described as a high degree of tolerance for anti-Arab and Islamophobic bigotry.
Weiss first rose to prominence due to her efforts to get Muslim and Arab professors at Columbia University fired by accusing them of racism, only for the resulting investigation to find “no evidence of any statements made by the faculty that could reasonably be construed as anti-Semitic.” She then later misleadingly claimed she had never tried to get them fired.
The supposedly rabid bigotry of ordinary Muslims is a favorite topic of Weiss, who has previously blamed rising antisemitism in Europe on the Muslim presence there, and warned that European Jews have “reason to worry” because of it. Soon after October 7, she approvingly shared a Free Press article whose central argument was that protests against Israel’s war — dishonestly characterized as hateful antisemitic rallies “celebrat[ing] mass murder in the streets” — were thanks to immigrants from Middle Eastern countries who could be either “80-year-old Armenian retirees or jihadi terrorists plotting another 9/11.” The Free Press later published an error-riddled article explicitly blaming a surge in Canadian antisemitism on Muslim immigration.
At the same time, Weiss has often promoted, often through The Free Press, her “friend” Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Hirsi Ali believes that “we are at war with Islam,” which she has called “a destructive, nihilistic cult of death,” that “there is no moderate Islam,” and that it must be “defeated” and “crush[ed],” including by closing all Muslim schools.
Ali has been a favorite of Islamphobic think tanks and neoconservative activists since the Global War on Terror. She has written that “every devout Muslim” at the very least “approved” of Al Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks and wrote a book that argued that Muslim immigration threatens the rights of Western women, partly because of Muslim men’s supposedly rapacious appetite for sexual violence.
Weiss eagerly promoted that book, spending an hour teeing Hirsi Ali up in a question and answer session to hold forth unchallenged about the dangers of ordinary Muslim men. Elsewhere, Weiss has waxed lyrical about her pride in associating with Hirsi Ali, and that she regards someone’s support for her as a “litmus test.”
If Weiss expressed or promoted any of these same views about Jewish immigrants and Judaism, she would likely be blacklisted in U.S. media, and for good reason. Instead, because they are aimed at Muslims, she is now being richly rewarded.
That a major network like CBS is seriously considering giving Weiss and The Free Press an even bigger platform and the imprimatur of mainstream legitimacy — given not just its promotion of anti-Muslim views, but its history of spreading outright, uncorrected falsehoods — is a sad reflection of the degradation of press standards.
And it seems to only be happening because a top media executive regards Weiss’ history of shoddy journalism less important than her support for Israel’s wars.
Canada continues arms transfers to Israel despite official denials: Report
Press TV – July 30, 2025
Canada has continued to supply weapons to the Israeli regime during its genocide in Gaza, contradicting official claims that such exports had stopped, a new investigation reveals.
Published by Arms Embargo Now Campaign (AEN) on Tuesday, newly uncovered shipping records and Israeli regime data show 47 documented shipments of military components from Canadian manufacturers to Israeli weapons firms between October 2023 and July 2025.
This includes over 421,000 bullets, with one shipment of 175,000 in April 2025.
Three cartridge shipments from a Quebec-based General Dynamics facility were also sent just nine days after Canada pledged to block munitions exports. These exports primarily supplied Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer.
This comes as former Foreign Minister Melanie Joly and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, as well as current Prime Minister Mark Carney, have repeatedly insisted that Canada has restricted arms exports to Israel, this report uncovers.
In March 2024, Canada’s parliament passed a non-binding motion urging the government to suspend further arms sales to Israel.
As pressure continued to mount, in September of last year, Joly announced that the government had not approved any new export permits for Israel since January 8, 2024.
This report, however, unveils the hidden reality behind Canada’s public statements on arms exports to Israel, revealing a systematic deception that has enabled the flow of Canadian-made weapons directly into one of the deadliest military aggressions in modern history.
Canada is currently breaching its own domestic legislation and international legal obligations by continuing to supply arms to Israel amid the ongoing ethnic cleansing and widespread starvation of Palestinians in Gaza.
Several Western countries have continued to supply lethal weapons to the Israeli regime despite the enormous human toll caused by its genocide in the Palestinian territory.
At least 60,034 Palestinians have been killed, mostly women and children, and another 148,870 individuals injured in the brutal Israeli onslaught on Gaza since October 7, 2023.
In protest over Gaza, Brazil withdraws from International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance
By Eman Abusidu | MEMO | July 30, 2025
The government of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has formally withdrawn Brazil from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), intensifying diplomatic tensions with Israel and reigniting global debate over the boundaries between antisemitism and criticism of Israeli policies. The decision, made on 18 July but only confirmed publicly on 24 July by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has drawn both praise and criticism at home and abroad, particularly in the context of Brazil’s recent support for genocide accusations against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
Brazil had joined the IHRA in 2021 during the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro, holding observer status within the organisation. According to sources within Brazil’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Itamaraty), the accession was “hasty” and lacked sufficient public or institutional debate. These officials cited unmet obligations, such as financial contributions and participation in plenary sessions, as contributing factors in the decision to leave.
Brazil’s withdrawal from the IHRA comes on the heels of its decision to join South Africa in accusing Israel of genocide at the ICJ. Despite the timing, Brazilian officials insist the move is not directly linked to its formal entry into the ICJ lawsuit filed by South Africa against Israel on 23 July. However, the diplomatic and symbolic overlap is hard to ignore.
In its official statement, the Brazilian government condemned Israel’s conduct, citing a lack of accountability and accusing it of violating international norms.
“There is no longer room for moral ambiguity or political omission,” the Itamaraty statement read. “Impunity undermines international legality and compromises the credibility of the multilateral system.”
The government emphasised that its participation in international alliances must reflect Brazil’s constitutional values, particularly the defence of human rights and the self-determination of peoples.
Israel swiftly condemned Brazil’s withdrawal from the IHRA. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs labeled the move a “profound moral failure” and accused Brazil of abandoning the global consensus on fighting antisemitism. Fernando Lottenberg, the Commissioner for Monitoring and Combating Anti-Semitism at the Organization of American States (OAS), also criticised the decision, calling it a “mistake.”
Domestically, the reaction was polarised. Senator Sergio Moro (União Brasil–PR) described the move as “yet another international embarrassment” by the Lula administration, accusing it of adopting a hostile stance toward the Jewish community.
The Palestinian Arab Federation of Brazil (Fepal) celebrated Brazil’s withdrawal from the IHRA. In a public statement released on July 25, Fepal described the move as a “necessary break” from what it characterised as the misuse of historical memory to justify “crimes against the Palestinian people.”
Fepal further urged the Brazilian government to take what it called a “final civilizing step”: the complete severance of diplomatic relations with Israel. According to the federation, Brazil’s IHRA membership served to “legitimise colonial, racist, and apartheid policies.” Its exit, they argue, symbolises a rejection of efforts to “criminalise anti-Zionism and silence reports of the genocide in Gaza.”
The organisation also criticized Bill 472/2025, authored by Representative Eduardo Pazuello (PL-RJ), which proposes adopting the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism. Fepal called it the “Zionist gag bill” and cited a legal opinion from the National Human Rights Council deeming the bill unconstitutional and a threat to free expression. According to Fepal, the IHRA definition conflates criticism of Israel with hate speech and has been weaponised internationally to suppress students, activists, intellectuals, and even dissenting Jewish voices.
“Rejecting this definition is protecting democracy and political freedom,” the federation wrote.
Brazil’s withdrawal sends a strong signal that historical memory and contemporary international policy are now more intertwined—and more contested—than ever.
That signal became even clearer on Monday (28 July), when the Brazilian government announced a series of retaliatory diplomatic, commercial, and military measures against Israel in response to what it described as “genocide” in Gaza. The announcement came from Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira during a speech at the United Nations headquarters in New York.
Among the steps, Brazil will ban the export of defence equipment to Israel and launch investigations into imports from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. The government framed these actions as part of its commitment to upholding international law and rejecting impunity.
“These are the legal measures that countries can take now,” Vieira said at the conference. “The credibility of the international system depends on this non-selective enforcement. What we need now is political will and effective action to monitor this conference.”
These developments occur against the backdrop of worsening diplomatic tensions between Brazil and Israel, which have been escalating since February 2024, when President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva compared Israel’s military actions in Gaza to the Holocaust. The controversial remark prompted Israel to declare Lula persona non grata. In May, Brazil recalled its ambassador from Tel Aviv, and the position has remained vacant since. Furthermore, the Brazilian government has refused to approve the appointment of Israel’s proposed ambassador to Brasília, deepening the diplomatic standoff.
Egypt training hundreds of Palestinians for ‘Gaza security roles’
The Cradle | July 30, 2025
Egypt is training hundreds of Palestinians to assume security responsibilities in Gaza after the war ends, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty told Al Arabiya in an interview yet to be aired.
“Egypt is training hundreds of Palestinians to take on security responsibilities in Gaza,” Abdelatty said, adding that Cairo has a clear plan for governance and security in the strip following the end of hostilities.
He said the plan is already being implemented. In April, he told the Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Turkiye that Egypt had begun recruiting and training Palestinian police who would “take care of the law, order, and security in Gaza.”
At the time, he also stated that Egypt was prepared to support the deployment of an international force “to provide security and protection for the Palestinians.”
Abdelatty confirmed that Egypt continues to work toward a ceasefire and holds daily talks with Qatar and the US. He accused Israel of weaponizing hunger, saying starvation in Gaza is “beyond imagination.”
Cairo’s initiative was first unveiled in March as part of a $53 billion reconstruction and governance proposal endorsed by the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
It came in response to US President Donald Trump’s announcement that Washington would “take over” Gaza and relocate its population.
According to a source cited by Ultra Palestine in April, around 300 Palestinian Authority (PA) officers were selected for training in Egypt, with personnel instructed not to refuse the assignment “under penalty of liability.”
The source said the training would last two months and declined to elaborate on the assigned tasks.
The Egyptian plan envisions a phased reconstruction process and transfer of authority from Hamas to the PA. The Palestinian resistance has agreed to a previous Egyptian proposal for a Community Support Committee to govern Gaza, but rejected Cairo’s demand that it hand over its weapons.
The demand to disarm has been renewed and endorsed by the Arab League and Turkiye in the latest UN session in New York that took place on 29 July.
Israel has been continuously escalating military operations across Gaza and has made disarmament a condition for any ceasefire.
On Tuesday, Israeli ministers reportedly discussed formally occupying and annexing parts of Gaza.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich recently led a far-right conference promoting Israeli resettlement in the strip as a “Gaza Riviera.”
Germany blocks EU effort to impose sanctions on Israel over Gaza
MEMO | July 30, 2025
Germany and several other European countries are blocking a proposal to impose sanctions on Israel over its role in worsening the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip, according to diplomats.
EU member states’ permanent representatives convened in Brussels but failed to reach a consensus to initiate the formal decision-making process.
Diplomats said countries, including Germany, called for more time and further analysis of the situation on the ground.
Some delegations also raised concerns that sanctions might harm essential dialogue with the Israeli authorities.
Under EU rules, any proposal must be backed by at least 15 of the 27-member states, representing at least 65 per cent of the EU population, to proceed.
Germany and Italy are considered key players in the talks, while all other major European countries, along with several smaller ones, have shown openness to the idea of imposing sanctions.
Kicking the peace can down the road
In discussion with Glenn Diesen
Ian Proud | July 28, 2025
Nice to catch up with Glenn Diesen to discuss recent developments, including my article on Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Putin, which has now been reduced to 10-12 days, whatever that means. I continue to judge that the threat of secondary sanctions against Russia’s trading partners will have a greater impact on the US than on China, India or any other country that does business with Russia.
Meanwhile, Zelensky’s short-lived attempt to shut down anti-corruption organisations closing in on his cronies has been a big wake up call, not just for European political leaders and journalists, but more importantly, citizens.
Faced with admitting defeat in Ukraine and throwing Zelensky under the bus and continuing with an ineffective foreign policy towards Russia, I judge that Starmer, VdL and others will keep kicking the peace can down the road.
Yet every day the war continues, Ukraine loses more ground and more lives on the battlefield, and slides further towards the status of a failed state. My optimism remains low that the war will end in 2025.
US media owe Putin an apology – Fox News host
RT | July 29, 2025
The US media need to make “serious” amends to many people, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, for their active role in spreading the Russiagate hoax following the 2016 presidential election, according to popular Fox News host Greg Gutfeld.
The political commentator, comedian, and author was responding to recent revelations made by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who released a trove of documents she described as “overwhelming evidence” of a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials – allegedly led by Barack Obama himself – to politicize intelligence and falsely accuse Donald Trump of colluding with Russia to win the election.
“We cannot let this go. They need to make serious amends because we are still living with the aftermath,” Gutfeld said on his latest show, aired last weekend. “People lost jobs, careers, friends. There need to be consequences.”
“They owe a lot of people an apology. Hell, they even include Putin.”
According to Gutfeld, major American news media outlets “played the starring role in amplifying the subversive plot against the president of the United States.” He dismissed recent claims by the press accusing the Trump administration of trying to “rewrite history,” calling them an “attempt to shift culpability away from themselves and hide the lie they perpetuated for almost a decade.”
Earlier this month, a similar assessment was made by former CIA Director John Ratcliffe. In an interview with the New York Post, he cited an internal review suggesting that American public opinion had been manipulated through repeated media leaks and anonymous sources quoted by The Washington Post, The New York Times, and other major outlets.
Allegations of “Russian collusion” persisted in mainstream media coverage even after Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation found no evidence to support the claims. Moscow has repeatedly denied interfering in the US election.
Gabbard described the Trump-Russia probe, widely referred to as Russiagate, as “a years-long coup” against Trump. The US president himself, who has consistently dismissed accusations of ties to Russia as fabricated, praised Gabbard for “exposing” the alleged plot and urged her to “keep it coming.”
