Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

How CIA secretly triggered Sino-Indian war

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | November 26, 2025

From October 20 – November 21, 1962, a little-remembered conflict raged between China and India. The skirmish damaged India’s Non-Aligned Movement affiliation, firmly placing the country in the West’s orbit, while fomenting decades of hostility between the neighbouring countries. Only now are Beijing and New Delhi forging constructive relations, based on shared economic and political interests. A detailed academic investigation, ignored by the mainstream media, exposes how the war was a deliberate product of clandestine CIA meddling, specifically intended to further Anglo-American interests regionally.

In the years preceding the Sino-Indian War, tensions steadily brewed between China and India, in large part due to CIA machinations supporting Tibetan separatist forces. For example, in 1957, Tibetan rebels secretly trained on US soil were parachuted into the territory and inflicted major losses on Beijing’s People’s Liberation Army forces. The next year, these cloak-and-dagger efforts ratcheted significantly, with the agency airdropping weapons and supplies in Tibet to foment violent insurrection. By some estimates, up to 80,000 PLA soldiers were killed.

Mao Zedong was convinced that Tibetan revolutionaries, while ultimately US-sponsored, enjoyed a significant degree of support from India and used the country’s territory as a base of operations. These suspicions were significantly heightened by Tibet’s March 1959 uprising, which saw a vast outflow of refugees from the region to India, and the granting of asylum to the Dalai Lama, their CIA-supported leader, by New Delhi. Weeks later, at a Chinese Communist Party politburo meeting, Mao declared a “counteroffensive against India’s anti-China activities.”

He called for official CPC communications to “sharply criticise” India’s premier Jawaharlal Nehru, stating Beijing “should not be afraid of making him feel agitated or of provoking a break with him,” and “we should carry the struggle through to the end.” For example, it was suggested that “Indian expansionists” be formally accused of acting “in collusion” with “British imperialists” to “intervene openly in China’s internal affairs, in the hope of taking over Tibet.” Mao implored, “we… should not avoid or circumvent this issue.”

Ironically, Nehru was then viewed with intense suspicion by the West due to his Non-Aligned commitment and broadly socialist economic policies. Thus, he could not be trusted to support covert Anglo-American initiatives targeting China. Meanwhile, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev considered Nehru an important prospective ally and was keen to maintain positive relations. Simultaneously, the Sino-Soviet Split, which commenced in February 1956 with Khrushchev’s notorious secret speech denouncing the rule of Joseph Stalin, was ever-deepening. Disagreements over India and Tibet only hastened the pair’s acrimonious divorce.

‘A weapon’

After months of official denunciations of Nehru’s policies toward Tibet, Beijing’s information war against India became physical in August 1959, with a series of violent clashes along the countries’ borders. Nehru immediately reached out to Moscow, pleading that they rein in their closest ally. This prompted a tense meeting in October 1959 between Khrushchev, his chief aides, and the CPC’s top leadership, at Mao’s official residence. Khrushchev belligerently asserted to his Chinese counterparts that their confrontations with New Delhi and unrest in Tibet were “your fault”.

The Soviet leader went on to caution about the importance of “preserving good relations” with Nehru and “[helping] him stay in power,” for if he was replaced, “who would be better than him?” Mao countered that India had “acted in Tibet as if it belonged to them,” and while Beijing also supported Nehru, “in the question of Tibet, we should crush him.” Assorted CPC officials then, one by one, forcefully asserted the recent border clashes were initiated by New Delhi. However, Khrushchev was highly dismissive.

“Yes, they began to shoot and they themselves fell dead,” he derisively retorted. A Soviet declaration of neutrality in the Sino-Indian dispute a month prior also provoked anger among the CPC contingent. Mao complained, “[the] announcement made all imperialists happy,” by publicly exposing rifts between Communist countries. Khrushchev et al were again unmoved by the suggestion. Yet, unbeknownst to attendees, they had all unwittingly stepped into a trap laid by the CIA, many years earlier.

In September 1951, a State Department memo declared, “The US should endeavor to use Tibet as a weapon for alerting” India “to the danger of attempting to appease any Communist government and, specially, for maneuvering [India] into a position where it will voluntarily adopt a policy of firmly resisting Chinese Communist pressure in south and east Asia.” In other words, it was believed that supporting Tibetan independence could force a Sino-Indian split. In turn, the Soviets might be compelled to take sides, deepening ruptures with Beijing.

This strategy informed CIA covert action in Tibet over the subsequent decade, which grew turbocharged when Allen Dulles became CIA chief in 1953. A dedicated, top-secret base was constructed for the separatists at Camp Hale, the US military’s World War II-era training facility in the Rocky Mountains. Local terrain – vertiginous, replete with dense forests – was reminiscent of Tibet, providing ample opportunity for insurgency practice. Untold numbers of militants were tutored there over many years.

At any given time, the CIA maintained a secret army of up to 14,000 Tibetan separatists in China. While the guerrillas believed Washington sincerely supported their secessionist crusade, in reality, the agency was solely concerned with creating security problems for Beijing, and resultantly inflicting economic and military costs on their adversary. As the Dalai Lama later lamented, the agency’s assistance was purely “a reflection of their anti-Communist policies rather than genuine support for the restoration of Tibetan independence.”

‘More susceptible’

Come October 1962, the CIA’s Tibetan operations had become such an irritant to China that PLA forces invaded India. Washington was well aware in advance that military action was imminent. A telegram dispatched to Secretary of State Dean Rusk five days prior to the war’s eruption forecast a “serious conflict” and laid out a detailed “line” to take for when the time came. First and foremost, the US would publicly make clear its “sympathy for the Indians and the problems posed by the Chinese intervention.”

However, it was considered vital to “be restrained in our expressions in the matter so as to give the Chinese no pretext for alleging any American involvement.” While New Delhi was already secretly receiving “certain limited purchases” of US military equipment, Washington would not actively “offer assistance” when war broke out. “It is the business of the Indians to ask,” the telegram noted. If such requests were forthcoming, “we will listen sympathetically to requests… [and] move with all promptness and efficiency to supply the items”:

“The US is giving assistance… designed to ease Indian military transport and communications problems. Additionally, the Departments of State and Defense are studying the availability on short notice and on terms acceptable to India of transport, communications and other military equipment in order to be prepared should the government of India request such US equipment.”

As predicted, the Sino-Indian conflict prompted Nehru to urgently reach out to Washington for military aid, a significant policy shift. Much of New Delhi’s political class duly adopted a pro-Western line, with calls for a review of the country’s Non-Aligned stance reverberating widely throughout parliament. Even Communist and Socialist parties that hitherto rejected any alliance with the US eagerly accepted the assistance. The CIA’s Tibetan operations had triumphed.

As a May 1960 Agency National Intelligence Estimate noted, “Chinese aggressiveness” toward New Delhi over Tibet had fostered “a more sympathetic view of US opposition to Communist China” among India’s leaders. This included “greater appreciation of the value of a strong Western – particularly US – position in Asia to counterbalance” Beijing’s influence regionally. However, the CIA noted how, as of writing, “Nehru has no intention of altering India’s basic policy of nonalignment, and the bulk of Indian opinion apparently still shares his attachment to this policy.”

The Sino-Indian War changed all that. A December 1962 Agency analysis of the conflict’s “outlook and implications” hailed New Delhi’s “metamorphosis”, which the CIA forecast would “almost certainly continue to open up new opportunities for the West.” The country was judged “more susceptible than ever before to influence by the US and the UK, particularly in the military field.” Conversely, the War had “seriously complicated the Soviet Union’s relations with India and aggravated its difficulties with China”:

“The USSR will place a high value on a continued close relationship with India. While its opportunity to build up lasting influence in the Indian military has virtually disappeared, it will probably continue to supply some military equipment and to maintain its economic ties with India.”

Subsequently, New Delhi began assisting Anglo-American intelligence gathering on China and became actively involved in CIA wrecking activities in Tibet. The Sino-Indian War’s spectre hung over relations between the two nations for many years thereafter, and border clashes occurred intermittently throughout. Now, though, as Donald Trump bemoaned in September, India appears enduringly “lost” to Beijing and its close partner Russia. Decades of determined US efforts to foment antagonism between the vast neighbours have come spectacularly undone, due to the sheer weight of geopolitical reality.

November 26, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kremlin aide sees Washington infighting behind leak

RT | November 26, 2025

Someone in Washington could be trying to undermine US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov has suggested, commenting on the recent leaks of his conversations with the envoy. At least some of the purported leaks are fake, he added.

Speaking to Kommersant newspaper on Wednesday, Ushakov defended continued contacts between Moscow and Washington, including by phone, and maintained they are needed to build trust between the two nations. He also said that neither side was interested in leaking the contents of the conversations.

According to the presidential aide, the incident might point to infighting in Washington. “Do you remember the case of [former National Security Adviser] Michael Flynn? This case could be the same,” the official said.

Flynn was forced to resign in 2017 after being accused of misleading officials about a phone conversation with then Russian ambassador to the US, Sergey Kislyak. Trump, who was serving his first term as president, stated that the conversation was “illegally leaked” by US intelligence.

Flynn initially pleaded guilty to the false statement charges before reversing his position and calling the case politically motivated. Trump pardoned him in late 2020, bringing the case to a close.

Speaking to journalists on Monday, Ushakov warned that such leaks risk undermining the whole process of normalization of relations between Moscow and Washington. “This is unacceptable… in such relations, when most serious issues are discussed,” he said.

“There can be no cooperation with a partner when information about what was discussed is revealed. Otherwise, there will be no trust.”

On Tuesday, Bloomberg published what it described as a transcript of Witkoff’s conversation with Ushakov from October 14. The US special envoy was then accused of “coaching” the Russians on how to deal with Washington. Trump dismissed the allegations by saying that Witkoff was using a “standard” approach.

Ushakov noted that some of the leaks are fake, adding that he would not comment on the others. “My conversations with Witkoff are confidential. No one should make them public. No one.”

November 26, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Bosnian war propaganda resurgence: the last hurrah

By Stephen Karganovic | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 26, 2025

Most were under the impression that the war in Bosnia was behind us. The conflict in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s was characterised by the use of the crudest kind of propaganda, but it was undoubtedly in the Bosnian theatre that the crassness was the most pronounced.

It turns out however that for those who had politically benefitted from that war, or who think that they might still benefit a little more with an improvised replay of the propaganda techniques that were successful thirty years ago, the war in Bosnia remains the gift that keeps on giving.

Evidence of that is the intense media barrage, reminiscent of the 1990s, about alleged “Safari tourism” in the hills overlooking besieged Sarajevo. The story goes that wealthy psychopaths from Italy and other Western countries were paying enormous fees, running up to 100,000 euros in today’s money, eagerly collected by the Bosnian Serbs who held the hillside positions, for permission to shoot and kill defenceless civilians in the besieged city below.

The macabre “spirit cooking” dinners organised for the perverse pleasure and entertainment of the crème de la crème of Western elite circles, not to mention numerous other similar examples of depravity, make the Sarajevo allegation seem plausible, in principle at least. There are no moral factors on the side of this scenario’s Western perpetrators that would have prevented it from happening, assuming that the conditions were propitious.

That having been said, agreement that something could have happened is not an automatic confirmation that it actually did. Evidence is still needed to bridge the gap between a theoretical possibility and a demonstrated fact. For purveyors of propaganda, however, bridging that gap is not a major concern because their craft operates on emotional manipulation, not empirical proof. Their task is accomplished once they have successfully embedded in the public’s mind the subconscious impression they desired to implant there.

How does the Sarajevo “safari tourism” allegation stack up when examined with a reasonable degree of scepticism and the application of rigorous standards of proof? Like most propaganda constructions, it falls apart.

The first thing one notices that calls for extreme caution is that the alleged events occurred in the mid-1990s but are being brought to light and, it is claimed, investigated by the Milan Public Prosecutor’s Office only now, in 2025, more than thirty years later. The Bosnian war ended after the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement in December of 1995 and soon thereafter conditions were sufficiently normalised in Bosnia and Herzegovina. There were no serious impediments to conducting war crimes investigations and numerous agencies and institutions did precisely that. Shooting safaris where the targets were human beings would be a crime against humanity of extraordinary gravity. A reasonable explanation is required why no police or judicial organs investigated these heinous allegations soon after those events are said to have happened, whilst witnesses could still be found with relative ease and, just as importantly, forensic evidence might still have been intact. That first and most obvious question is not even asked, let alone answered by anyone.

The other key unasked (and therefore also unanswered) question is about the source for these belated allegations. It is a documentary film “Sarajevo Safari,” released in 2022. We now come to the interesting part. The film was financed by Hasan Čengić, one of the founders of the Democratic Action Party of Bosnia’s war-time President Alija Izetbegović. Mr. Čengić therefore is by no means an impartial source. During the war he was one of the principal funds and arms procurers for Izetbegović. The film’s producer is the Slovenian film director Franci Zajc who during the conflict created numerous documentaries which uniformly presented only the Serbian side in an unfavourable light. Zajc also happens to be one of the only two supposedly percipient witnesses of this safari tale. The other alleged witness is Mr. Čengić himself who, however, is unavailable for cross examination because he passed away in 2021.

Some would argue that Zajc is a shady witness because of his extravagant claims that during the conflict in Bosnia he was an agent of Western intelligence agencies but that nevertheless the Serbs allowed, and in some versions even invited, him to observe these morbid proceedings. Why the Serbs would allow a hostile witness like Zajc to observe them in such a compromising situation is unexplained. Be that as it may, these are the only two ocular witnesses of the Sarajevo “tourist safari” events known so far. One of them claims and the other, Čengić, almost certainly did have intelligence connections. These are the exclusive sources for a sensational story that is making headlines in the collective West media and has even attracted the attention of one of the frequent contributors to this portal.

Yet even these scant sources for an event of major significance, if it is authentic, are not in complete harmony about an important detail of their story. Zajc has claimed that wealthy foreigners paid huge amounts of money to the besieging Serbs to shoot civilians and that they were provided with sniper weapons for that purpose by their Serbian hosts. Čengić on the other hand claimed before his death that foreigners were paying trifling fees for the morbid privilege and brought their own weapons.

But there are more problems with this affair. It is said that the Milan Public Prosecutor’s Office is conducting an investigation. That may well be the case. But the important question that anyone with legal training will immediately ask is what is the statute of limitations for murder in Italy? It happens to be 21 years. That means that if the imputed crime was committed more than twenty-one years before apprehension, even if the perpetrator were to be identified and linked to the crime he could not be prosecuted. The alleged offences date back to the mid-1990s, which means that the Italian statute of limitations has expired and nobody any longer can be brought to court to answer charges of sniping at civilians from the hills that surround Sarajevo. If the Prosecutor in Milan is indeed investigating, would he not be wasting his time?

If the motive were purely judicial, he certainly would be. But if the motive is predominantly political, not necessarily so.

Furthermore, even if statutory obstacles could be overcome, for instance by reclassifying the offence as a crime against humanity for which there is no statute of limitations instead of treating it as a simple murder under Italian law, there would still be a problem. For a conviction to be achieved under either indictment, beyond the necessity of personally identifying the shooters, which is the sine qua non, to actually convict them they would have to be directly linked to a lethal outcome on the ground. For an indictment to be viable, victims would have to be identified as well, almost thirty years after the fact. Shooting with a sniper weapon is not a crime unless it results in someone’s death. For culpability to be established, a forensic investigation would have to be conducted to determine for each imputed victim the cause and manner of death, and bullets which struck the victims would have to be provably traced to the weapons that were in the hands of the perpetrators at the time of shooting, almost thirty years ago. Does that seem like a feasible undertaking for the Milan Prosecutor, no matter how competent he may be? That is doubtful.

The media frenzy that has erupted around allegations of war-time tourist safaris on civilians in Sarajevo recalls the worst propaganda excesses of that conflict. Their most notable feature was that critical questions were not being asked and that few and largely unverified facts were force-fitted into a Procrustean propaganda matrix. When subjected to close scrutiny most of these claims almost always are found to be uncorroborated and spurious.

That certainly seems to be the case with the Sarajevo Safari story, regardless of the fact that the collective West media are having a field day expanding on it in endless and strikingly imaginary detail.

The Safari story will soon die a natural death once it is concluded that its political purpose has been achieved. The purpose is not to convict anyone because given the complete unavailability of any evidence, even under the most rigged trial conditions that would be nearly impossible. It is, rather, to create a sinister impression that would further discredit the Serbian entity in Bosnia, the Republika Srpska, for colluding with depraved individuals and facilitating their heinous behaviour in return for money. The successful dissemination of such an impression will serve as an additional argument for the liquidation of Republika Srpska and will indirectly validate other heinous allegations made at the expense of the Serbian side during the Bosnian conflict. That explains the timing.

As for the Milan Prosecutor’s Office, it will quietly drop its investigation for some specious bureaucratic reason that no one will ever question. And there on the legal level the matter will end. There will be no facts, only emotionally charged impressions.

November 26, 2025 Posted by | Film Review, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

US warns Ukraine of ‘imminent defeat’ – NBC

RT | November 26, 2025

A senior US military official has warned that Ukraine faces “imminent defeat” on the battlefield and urged Kiev to accept a US-drafted peace deal before its position deteriorates further, NBC News reported on Tuesday, citing people briefed on the talks.

The initial version of the 28-point draft plan would reportedly require Ukraine to relinquish the parts of the new Russian regions in Donbass still under its control, freeze the front lines in Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, and cap the size of its army.

In a meeting with Ukrainian officials in Kiev last week, US Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told his counterparts that their troops “faced a dire situation on the battlefield and would suffer an imminent defeat against Russian forces,” NBC reported, citing two sources.

The Russian military has been on the offensive in recent months in Donbass and elsewhere, with Ukrainian officials complaining of a lack of manpower.

Driscoll went on to say that Russia is increasing the scale and pace of its air attacks and can “fight on indefinitely,” and warned that US industry cannot keep supplying weapons and air defenses at the required rate, NBC said.

“The message was basically – you are losing, and you need to accept the deal,” the network’s source said.

According to NBC, Kiev refused to sign the deal, which has since been amended. Several media reports also suggest that Driscoll held “secret talks” with the Russian delegation in Abu Dhabi on Monday and Tuesday.

NBC described the talks between Driscoll and Ukrainian officials as a sign of a long-running rift in the Trump administration between Vice President J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

While Vance’s camp is seeking to push Kiev to compromise and see it “as the primary obstacle to peace,” supporters of Rubio believe that the Ukraine conflict could be settled by pressuring Russia, the network said. Vance and Rubio have denied being at odds over Ukraine.

Russia has said it remains in contact with Washington and has received the broad outlines of the plan, but said it will not “engage in megaphone diplomacy,” which could jeopardize the peace efforts.

November 26, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

EU scrambling to steal Russian funds

RT | November 26, 2025

The EU remains intent on funneling frozen Russian assets into Ukraine’s war effort, despite internal opposition from Belgium, the bloc’s top executive has said.

EU leaders want to issue a ‘reparation loan’ to Kiev by using Russian funds frozen in the West as collateral. However, Belgium, where the bulk of the holdings are kept, has refused to greenlight the plan unless other EU nations share the legal and financial risks of what Moscow has denounced as blatant theft.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen reaffirmed the policy on Tuesday while pledging continued EU support for Kiev, even as Washington promotes a new peace initiative that reportedly demands major concessions from Ukraine.

Europe, von der Leyen said, will “stand firmly by Ukraine” throughout any future discussions, adding that “a central point is the question of financing for Ukraine, including the use of the immobilized Russian sovereign assets.”

“Ukraine’s interests are our interests,” she said. “They are inseparable.”

Politico previously reported that pro-Kiev officials in the bloc have floated a temporary “bridge loan,” taken out collectively by EU member states, which would keep Ukraine solvent for several months. Supporters hope that once Belgium is persuaded, the larger reparation loan could later be approved and used to repay this interim debt.

“We hope to be able to solve their hesitation,” one EU diplomat told the outlet. “We really do not see any other possible option than the reparations loan.” Another official said, “if we don’t move, others will move before us.” Both spoke on condition of anonymity.

Russian officials have accused Brussels of trying to prolong the conflict for domestic political gain and to justify soaring defense budgets that benefit European arms makers.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested that critics of the US peace proposal are either misinformed or “pushing their own agenda,” adding that some “don’t want to see this war come to an end” and may be “profiting off of it.”

November 26, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Some Western Nations Trying to Sabotage Russian-US Efforts on Ukraine – Deputy FM Ryabkov

Sputnik – 26.11.2025

MOSCOW – Several Western European countries are frantically trying to prevent Russia and the United States from reaching an agreement on Ukraine, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told Sputnik on Wednesday.

“We find ourselves in a situation where, especially in a number of Western European countries, a phenomenon already well-known from previous periods is occurring: frantic activity aimed at preventing agreements. They have completely exposed themselves as the main opponents of any agreements,” Ryabkov stated.

Moscow has seen numerous attempts to hinder progress between Russia and the US on negotiations regarding Ukraine, Ryabkov highlighted.

In the talks with the United States on Ukraine, Russia deems it crucial not to deviate from the understandings reached at the Putin-Trump summit in Anchorage, the senior Russian diplomat added.

“We are ready to continue the dialogue. When the American side officially declares its readiness, we will naturally reciprocally engage in the dialogue,” Ryabkov said.

There can be no talk of concessions on key issues for Russia in relation to the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, Sergey Ryabkov said.

“There can be no talk of any concessions or surrender of our approaches to the key aspects of resolving the challenges we are facing, including in the context of the special military operation. I emphasize that the various elements of Anchorage in themselves represent compromise solutions,” Ryabkov told reporters.

Russia is ready to act within the framework of the Anchorage agreements, in accordance with the guidelines laid out at the meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, Ryabkov said, commenting on the US plan for Ukraine.

“We are committed to the results of Anchorage and will continue to act within this framework, correlating what is happening now with the fundamental guidelines formulated there by the two presidents,” Ryabkov told reporters.

Russia is not ready to publicly discuss the details of US President Donald Trump’s plan for a Ukrainian settlement, Sergey Ryabkov said.

“We are not prepared to publicly discuss certain details of what is happening, including the various versions of this peace plan. Ultimately, time and attention are needed for the dialogue process to continue,” Ryabkov told reporters.

At the same time, Russia is ready to work with the material it has, the senior diplomat said.

The Russian side is ready to continue dialogue with the United States on the entire bilateral agenda, but only taking into account Moscow’s interests, Sergey Ryabkov said.

“There are plenty of unresolved issues in our interaction and dialogue with Washington, but we are prepared to continue it across the entire bilateral agenda, with the understanding that it will be built strictly on the basis of taking into account Russian interests,” Ryabkov told reporters.

At the same time, Ryabkov noted that there has been no progress in dialogue with the US on priority issues for Russia, such as air travel and the return of diplomatic property.
The situation in the strategic arms sphere will worsen if the United States rejects Russia’s New START proposal, Ryabkov said.

“I would like to emphasize once again the timeliness and validity of our initiative in the post-New START sphere. If the American side, for whatever reason, rejects it and begins to build up its capabilities in this area, the strategic situation will worsen, tensions will increase, predictability will decline sharply, or even be lost entirely,” Ryabkov told reporters.

Relations between Russia and the United States are in the early stages of normalization, Ryabkov noted.

“Our relations with the United States are still in the early stages of the normalization process, and the overall success of this process is not guaranteed,” Ryabkov told reporters.

US businesses are demonstrating a desire to return to Russia, but Moscow will consider each case individually, taking into account the interests of Russian entrepreneurs,Sergey Ryabkov said.

There are currently no agreements regarding contacts between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Deputy FM Ryabkov told Sputnik on Wednesday.

“They [contacts between Lavrov and Rubio] can be arranged as quickly as necessary. As of now, there are no specific agreements,” Ryabkov said.

November 26, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

ICAN FIGHTS GATES-BACKED GEOENGINEERING EXPERIMENTS

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | November 20, 2025

Del and Jefferey expose the accelerated push for solar geoengineering—from Bill Gates–backed sun-dimming plans, to the UK’s secretive ARIA agency now running outdoor experiments hidden from public scrutiny and FOIA oversight. With academics promoting population cuts and private firms already spraying particles into the sky, ICAN is pushing governments and regulators to stop these dangerous atmospheric experiments before they escalate.

November 25, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Video | | Leave a comment

Israeli universities face growing academic isolation despite Gaza ceasefire, report says

Press TV – November 25, 2025

The academic boycott of Israeli universities in Europe has roughly doubled even after the Gaza ceasefire aimed at ending the occupying regime’s genocidal war against the besieged Gaza Strip, a move that further isolates Tel Aviv in global higher education, a new report says.

The Academic Boycott of Israel Monitoring Team, created by the Committee of University Presidents in Tel Aviv, said in a report on Monday that academic boycotts targeting the regime have surged, with around 1,000 cases reported in Europe by November.

It stressed that Israel’s negative image, which has persisted even after the ceasefire over the genocidal war against Gaza, is “so deeply entrenched that political moves alone are not enough to shift public perception.”

Contrary to expectations that the boycott would ease following the ceasefire, the report notes that “the opposite occurred,” with institutions and individual academics more frequently filing boycott cases.

The monitoring team, whose report was published by The Marker, the economic version of the Hebrew newspaper Haaretz, also warned that this expanding boycott could isolate Israeli higher education significantly and pose a long-term strategic threat to its international standing.

The report further identified concrete consequences for the move, including a drop in EU Horizon Europe research grants for Israeli scholars, exclusion from international cooperation projects, and a breakdown in collaborative programs.

According to the report, 57 percent of cases involve individual researchers (mainly being excluded from research groups), 22 percent are institutional severances, seven percent are from professional associations, and 14 percent relate to halted student exchanges or postdoctoral partnerships.

It also said that this crippling boycott trend is unlikely to reverse soon without “major regional and geopolitical changes,” warning that sustained isolation of Israeli academia may continue.

The boycott movement “will accompany Israeli academia for a long time and will not ease without major regional and geopolitical changes,” the report noted.

Israel has killed nearly 70,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children, and injured over 170,900 others in Gaza since October 7, 2023, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, when it launched a brutal war against the Palestinian territory.

Despite a ceasefire announced in October, Israel continues to target Gaza in violation of the agreement.

Hamas has urged the guarantors of the ceasefire, namely Qatar, Turkey, Egypt, and the United States, to press Israel to abide by the deal and stop its attacks on Gaza.

November 25, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

‘Israel’ has no coherent plan for Gaza, Trump’s plan proves It

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | November 25, 2025

Gaza’s hastily assembled ceasefire agreement was designed less to bring genuine relief than to test new strategies aimed at dismantling the Palestinian Resistance while granting the Israeli military a much-needed pause. The vagueness of the plan put forward by US President Donald Trump only underscores this reality, and yet the so-called international community is, shamefully, choosing to go along with it.

The UNSC’s recent resolution 2803 is nothing short of a green light for a US-led international regime change operation, which seeks to implicate a multi-national military force in the Gaza genocide as a desperate attempt to finish off the Palestinian Resistance for the Israelis. The only reason such a solution is being attempted is that the Zionist entity failed.

From the outset, following the Hamas-led operation on October 7, 2023, the Israelis made it clear that their intention was genocide. Their reputation and pillars on which the regime was built have been shaken. It suddenly appeared as if a military solution to the occupying entity was within reach. So, desperately, they accelerated their goals and reached the natural conclusion of what such a settler-colonial project seeks to achieve: the total annihilation of the indigenous population.

The ethno-supremacist mindset of the Zionist regime came out in its most extreme form because the project itself appeared to be under threat. Their solution was annihilation, a Gaza Final Solution. In their thinking, the mass slaughter of civilians and total destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure would eliminate not only the Palestinian cause but also dismantle the entire regional notion of resistance.

In short, they failed. What instead happened is that the people of Gaza never gave up, and neither did their willingness to resist at all costs. Suddenly, the Israelis found themself entangled in a Vietnam War scenario.

The Palestinian Resistance is a force that, according to its own estimates, consisted of no more than around 50,000 fighters, armed with domestically made weapons, most of which were crafted out of the explosives the Israelis themselves dropped on the besieged territory. Gaza is a territory of the displaced, the downtrodden, the starved, the dreamers who strived to break free.

When the genocide began, this guerrilla fighting force stood no chance of fighting a conventional war and so depended on ambushes. The side they were at war with consisted of hundreds of thousands of Israeli soldiers, equipped with the most high-tech killing machines on earth and backed by the entire Western world’s governments, including the planet’s top military superpower, the United States.

Yet, with all their equipment, technology, intelligence agencies, and superiority on the battlefield, they were incapable of defeating the Resistance that fought from tunnels and amongst the rubble of their destroyed neighbourhoods. Instead of targeting the fighters and going after them directly, the Zionist regime targeted the civilian population, believing that if the people were defeated, then the Resistance would follow.

The world watched this live-streamed genocide and naturally identified with the underdogs, many seeing a reflection of their own humanity in the people of Gaza. Although it took years for this to fully unfold, even the population of the most powerful superpower on earth was captivated by this small group of people, so much so that the domestic politics of the average American was fundamentally altered by it.

While their governments continued to back the Israelis and bend to the commands of lobbyists and billionaires, the populations of these nations began to identify with the cause of the Palestinians, the Palestinian cause, the cause of the people of Gaza…

Over time, the Israeli regime attempted to implement countless strategies to finish off the Palestinians of Gaza. They pushed them from north to south, then to the center of the besieged coastal enclave. They flattened everything in sight, took out prominent leaders, assassinated the truth-telling journalists, and destroyed the hospitals and shelters. They starved Gaza; they employed collaborators both inside and outside of the strip.

The Zionists peddled lie after lie; they took thousands of captives, mocked dead Palestinian women by parading around in their underwear. They committed mass rape, sexual humiliation, and created torture centers. All of the so-called Muslim leaders, with the exception of very few, betrayed them and aided the Israelis in committing their genocide.

The Israelis attempted to implement the “General’s Plan” in late 2024, but they failed. They tried “Operation Gideon’s Chariots” and then “Operation Gideon’s Chariots 2”, or the plan to occupy Gaza City. They failed.

Meanwhile, their own society decayed from within and was driven to even greater extremist ideology, their economy sank, and major investments were cleared up. The northern settlements were partially destroyed, and the domestic tourism industry in the north and south collapsed. Amid this chaos and failure, the Israeli leadership has turned to fighting on front after front.

Despite managing to pull off tactical victories against Hezbollah in Lebanon and even Iran, through intelligence operations and assassinations, they were unable to secure any strategic victory. Their attempt to degrade Iran failed, and they were forced into a ceasefire, sent back to study how to advance their agenda through a new round of attacks.

Out of total desperation, the Israelis launched a new propaganda campaign targeting conservatives in the United States and across the Western World, but are incapable of stopping the rapid loss of support for them. They are now trying to stir tensions between right-wing Westerners and Muslims, fearmongering about so-called “Islamic terrorism” using the “War on Terror” playbook, all to divert attention from their crimes in Gaza and the fact that their lobby groups are working toward imposing mass censorship.

All of this considered, the Europeans and Arab regimes began searching for an answer to save the Israelis from themselves, to reward them for their genocide. Then came the United States, which offered its even more pro-Israeli slant on the Saudi-French “New York Declaration” that was voted on unanimously at the United Nations General Assembly.

The leaderships of the world were exposed, and the Gaza genocide was transformed into a major strategic debacle. These unrepresentative rulers were not willing to end their support and relationships with the genocidal entity, so they devised a plot to help it eliminate what had become their own enemy. Regular people around the world identify with the Palestinians, while their leaders are enablers and supporters of genocide, even if they don’t say it out loud and even if they offer weak statements condemning their Israeli allies.

This is where UNSC 2803 comes in. It allows these nations to help the Israelis finish their genocidal project and eliminate the Palestinian cause once and for all. Yet, they face a major problem: there are only three options for ending this struggle: Either the Israelis totally destroy the Palestinian people along with the regional Resistance, sentencing the survivors to permanent occupation and exile; they agree to a so-called “two-state solution”; or they are themselves defeated.

Almost all of the Israeli regime’s allies seek the “two-state solution”, an option that the Zionist entity will not accept. Therefore, all of these vague schemes as to how to conduct a successful multi-national regime change operation in the Gaza Strip are bound to fail, which is why Phase 2 of the ceasefire is nearly impossible to implement fully. It will be a total disaster and only create further issues for those nations involved in the so-called “International Stabilization Force,” or what should be accurately dubbed the International Invasion Force.

Failing the implementation of Donald Trump’s regime change plan, the Israelis will eventually return to the only thing they know how to do: conducting genocide from a distance. This period is being used to experiment with different plans, while giving the Israeli military time to recover. It is very likely that this will enormously backfire.

November 25, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russian UN envoy says Israel’s fortifications in Gaza suggest long-term occupation plans

MEMO | November 25, 2025

The Russian permanent representative to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzya, said that Israel’s construction of fortifications and barriers in Gaza signals plans for a long-term occupation, urging a clear timetable for withdrawal and the transfer of governance to the Palestinian Authority (PA).

He told a UN Security Council session that Israel is imposing restrictions on humanitarian aid in Gaza, stating: “There still remain significant restrictions on the delivery and distribution of humanitarian aid in the strip.”

Warning about Israel’s construction of barriers and fortifications in Gaza, Nebenzya said: “The construction of barriers and fortifications on the Israeli-controlled side indicates that the occupation of the sector is long-term in nature,” stressing that “it is also important to define as soon as possible a clear timeline for transferring authority in the enclave to the PA, as well as for the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) units from the strip.”

He added that reports claiming Israel is supporting armed groups fighting Hamas in Gaza were worrying.

November 25, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

A Gaza Plan that Sidelines the Palestinian State

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – November 25, 2025

The UN may have blessed Washington’s new Gaza plan, but it reads less like a peace blueprint and more like a manual for managing occupation. Behind the diplomatic fanfare lies a resolution so riddled with contradictions that it could bury — not revive — the prospect of Palestinian statehood.

The “Peace” Plan

The US-backed “peace” plan may bring a halt to active fighting, but it does not — and cannot — deliver peace for Palestinians. At best, it promises a managed quiet under continued Israeli domination. The Trump administration has framed the initiative as a “pathway” to a political resolution, yet the plan carefully avoids the one political reality that matters: Israel’s entrenched refusal to permit Palestinian statehood in any meaningful sense. Within Israel, the backlash to any hint of Palestinian sovereignty has been immediate and ferocious. Last week, far-right ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich publicly demanded that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repudiate all references to statehood, with Ben-Gvir threatening to collapse the governing coalition if Netanyahu failed to comply. Netanyahu has since reassured them — and Washington — that no Palestinian state will be created under his watch. That political reality is already shaping Israel’s conduct on the ground: despite the nominal ceasefire embedded in the plan, Israel continues to bomb Gaza, implying that “security operations” are exempt. Yet the UN Security Council resolution endorsing the US plan offers no enforcement mechanism, no timetable, and no conditions to bind Israel to any political endgame. In practice, it hands Israel full discretion to shape the conflict’s trajectory and its eventual outcome in real time.

The plan’s proposed International Stabilisation Force (ISF) is presented as the key instrument for “restoring order” in Gaza, but the details reveal a deeply asymmetric security architecture. The force will operate under Israel’s operational umbrella — not under an independent UN peacekeeping mandate, and certainly not as a neutral guarantor of civilian protection. Israel has already narrowed the mission to a single objective: disarming Hamas, a demand Hamas has categorically rejected. For states such as Pakistan, which have signalled support for the ISF, the mission is framed in broader terms — the demilitarization of Gaza as a whole. Yet demilitarization, under this plan, is a one-way street. Israel retains full military freedom: ground deployments, aerial strikes, and intelligence operations can continue without restriction. Palestinians, by contrast, are expected to surrender not only armed resistance but any organised capacity to resist Israel’s occupation, settlement expansion, or annexation — even peacefully. This is not a roadmap to stability; it is a security regime designed to institutionalise Palestinian political paralysis. By stripping Palestinians of all coercive or collective leverage while preserving Israel’s overwhelming military advantage, the plan guarantees an imbalance so severe that no political process can emerge from it. Supporters of the ISF may hope the force will facilitate reconstruction or governance, but the structure of the mandate ensures the opposite: it entrenches Israeli control while outsourcing its enforcement to international actors. Far from opening the door to statehood, the plan cements the very conditions that have made such a state impossible. Under these terms, the prospects that the plan will deliver anything of value to Palestinians — let alone genuine sovereignty — are virtually nil.

The Plan and the Arab world

The plan’s swift acceptance across much of the Arab world is not a reflection of regional confidence in its substance. Rather, it reflects geopolitical fatigue and shifting priorities. After a year of devastating images from Gaza, Arab governments face intense domestic pressure to do something, yet lack either the leverage or the appetite to meaningfully confront the US or Israel. Endorsing the plan allows them to claim diplomatic engagement without assuming responsibility for achieving what the plan itself refuses to deliver. For many Arab capitals, particularly those already normalizing ties with Israel or dependent on US security guarantees, the plan functions less as a political blueprint than as a diplomatic escape hatch.

Nowhere is this contradiction clearer than in Saudi Arabia’s position. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) travelled to the United States this month for high-level meetings, including with President Trump. Publicly, MBS restated Riyadh’s long-held line: Saudi Arabia is willing to join the Abraham Accords, but only if there is a clear and irreversible roadmap to a Palestinian state. Yet Riyadh has conspicuously refrained from criticizing a plan that contains no such roadmap. This silence is not accidental; it is strategic. Saudi Arabia’s overriding objective is to secure a sweeping defence pact with Washington, one that would formally guarantee US protection and enable the kingdom to acquire advanced weapons systems. During his visit, a sweeping defense package was signed, which elevated Saudi Arabia to the status of a “major non-NATO ally,” a move that opens the gates to easier arms transfers and logistical cooperation. On the same trip, Trump confirmed a sale of F-35 jets to Riyadh, marking the first time such fifth-generation fighters would be sold to an Arab country.

That deal, however, is politically impossible for Washington unless Saudi Arabia’s relations with Israel are moving toward normalisation. The Trump administration, unlike the Biden administration before it, sees Saudi–Israeli normalisation as the centrepiece of its regional architecture. Trump called both Israel and Saudi Arabia great allies. MBS understands this and is carefully calibrating his moves, signalling rhetorical support for Palestinian statehood to maintain credibility within the Arab and Muslim worlds while avoiding any criticism that could jeopardize US willingness to finalize the defence agreement. Riyadh’s acceptance of a plan that objectively undermines Palestinian aspirations is therefore not a policy contradiction; it is a diplomatic performance. The kingdom is balancing between two audiences — one domestic, sentimental, and politically sensitive; the other strategic, transactional, and sitting in Washington.

For the Palestinian cause, however, this choreography is devastating. It signals that the Arab world’s most powerful state is willing to sidestep Palestine’s central demand — an enforceable path to sovereignty — in exchange for advanced fighter jets and more. In this sense, the plan is not only shaped by US and Israeli priorities; it is enabled by Arab governments that have recalibrated their regional ambitions away from Palestinian self-determination and toward their own national security bargains.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs

November 25, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ambassador Mike Huckabee Secretly Meets Top Israeli Spy Jonathan Pollard

Let’s remove both Huckabee and Israel from American foreign policy

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • November 25, 2025

Given the high visibility of the Israeli genocide being carried out in Gaza, for the first time many among the American general public are beginning to ask why a rich country like Israel should be getting billions of dollars from the United States taxpayer to pay for waging its war when many Americans are struggling. Inevitably, of course, the press coverage of the questions being asked about the cash flow and what is playing out in Gaza have failed to discuss the real magnitude of the “aid,” which goes far beyond the $3.8 billion a year that President Barack Obama committed to America’s “best friend and closest ally.” In fact, over the past two years, Washington has given Israel more than $21 billion in weapons and cash and just last week the 1,000th US transport plane filled with weapons landed in Israel. On top of all that, there are trade concessions, co-production “defense partnership” projects and dicey charitable contributions from Zionist billionaires that our federal and many state governments shower on the Jewish state, easily exceeding $10 billion in a “normal” year without Israel claiming having “greater need” as it goes about violating ceasefires and killing Gazans, Lebanese and Iranians.

The fact that Joe Biden and Donald Trump have enabled Israel’s slaughter without so much as the slightest hesitation should in itself be damnable, but the average American is fed a steady diet of propaganda favoring Israel through the devastatingly effective Jewish media control that prevails nationwide. Interestingly, however, as the American public is beginning to tire of the Israeli lies, the Israel Lobby in the US is following the orders of Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu, who has declared that his country will be fighting eight wars – seven against all of its neighbors and one to control the United States’ increasingly negative opinion of what Israel represents. As a result, laws like the Antisemitism Awareness Act are being passed to silence “freedom of speech” critics of the Jewish state and criminalize what they are saying.

During his 2016 campaign Donald Trump swore that he would be the best friend that Israel has ever had in the White House, a pledge that some viewed skeptically as Trump was also committed to bringing the troops home from “useless wars” in Asia, most of whom were in the Middle East supporting Israeli interests. More recently Trump admitted that America was in the Middle East to “protect Israel” and he has indeed proven to be the great benefactor he promised to be in responding fully to Netanyahu’s wish list. In his first term in office, Trump increased tension dramatically with Iran, moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Syrian Golan Heights, and basically gave Israel the green light to do whatever it wants on the Palestinian West Bank, including getting rid of the Palestinians.

And currently as all that has already played out the Israelis have attacked and killed thousands of civilians in Gaza, Syria and the West Bank with impunity, protected by the US veto in the UN Security Council against any consequences for their actions while a subservient Congress gives Netanyahu fifty-six standing ovations and bleats that “Israel has a right to defend itself.” Trump has made the United States completely complicit in Israeli war crimes and has added a few unique touches of its own to include the widely condemned assassination of the senior Iranian official Qassem Soleimani while on a peace mission in Baghdad in January 2020.

Israel more-or-less openly admits that it controls the actions of the United States in its region, Netanyahu having boasted how the US federal government is “easily moved” when it comes up against the Israeli Lobby. Nor is there any real secret to how the Lobby uses money to buy access and then exploits that access to obtain real power, which is then used to employ all the resources of the US government in support of the Jewish state. The top donor to the Democratic Party, Israeli-American Haim Saban has stated that he is a one issue guy and that issue is Israel. This single-minded focus to promote Israel’s interests at the expense of those of the United States makes the Israel Lobby the most formidable foreign policy lobby in Washington.

One of the tools used by Trump to facilitate the virtual slavery under the Israeli yoke is the appointment of passionately Zionist US Ambassadors to Israel, where they often behave as if they are there to represent Jewish interests rather that those of the United States. Trump’s first term appointment David Friedman was a personal lawyer with no diplomatic or international experience, so he inevitably endorsed with some enthusiasm every extreme proposal coming from Netanyahu, which he then went on to sell to Trump. Friedman, now retired, has a home in Jerusalem and has reportedly opted to spend much of his time in Israel.

Friedman was, however, somewhat of a gem compared to the current ambassador Mike Huckabee, an Israel-Firster Baptist preacher from Arkansas, who repeatedly expresses his love for the Jewish state and white-washes whatever it does. For what it’s worth, on October 13th, 2025, Friedman and Huckabee performed a rendition of Lynyrd Skynyrd’s hit song Sweet Home Alabama in Jerusalem but with altered lyrics that promoted Zionism and the city of Jerusalem itself. Friedman played guitar while Huckabee played bass. Trump, of course, is similar in his overweening embrace of Israel, whether it be because he is being blackmailed, or honestly believes in what he is saying, or even because he has converted to Judaism in 2017, as some believe. In any event, the theatrical duet performance by the two Israel-loving ambassadors failed to provide any benefit to the United States of America.

The complete contempt that the Israelis and Israeli supporters in the US – to include the Ambassador Huckabee – have for other Americans and their interests has been on full display recently and it involves the most significant espionage operation that Israel has ever “run” inside the United States. Jonathan Pollard, the most damaging spy in American history, stole for Israel the keys to accessing US communications and information gathering systems, which gave the Jewish state access to all US intelligence as it was being collected. He was Jewish and a US citizen, his father a professor at Notre Dame University. As a student at Stanford, where he completed a degree in 1976, Pollard’s penchant for dissimulation was already noted by other students. He is remembered for having boasted that he was a dual citizen of the United States and Israel, claiming to have worked for Mossad, to having attained the rank of Colonel in the Israel Defense Forces (even sending himself a telegram addressed to “Colonel Pollard”), and to having killed an Arab while on guard duty at a kibbutz. All the claims were lies.

Physically Pollard was also unappealing, overweight and balding, seemingly an unlikely candidate to become a US Navy intelligence analyst which he accomplished after having failed a polygraph test when trying to join CIA. One review board determined that he had been hired in the first place under pressure from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). According to an intelligence agency after-the fact-damage assessment “Pollard’s operation has few parallels among known US espionage cases… his first and possibly largest delivery occurred on 23 January [1984] and consisted of five suitcases-full of classified material.”

Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger wrote a forty-six page review of the Pollard case that remains largely classified and redacted to this day, detailing what incredible damage Pollard had done. Part of the document states: “In this case, the defendant has admitted passing to his Israeli contacts an incredibly large quantity of classified information. At the outset I must state that the defendant’s disclosures far exceed the limits of any official exchange of intelligence information with Israel. That being the case, the damage to national security was complete the moment the classified information was given over. Ideally, I would detail… all the information passed by the defendant to his Israeli contacts: unfortunately, the volume of data we know to have been passed is too great to permit that. Moreover, the defendant admits to having passed to his Israeli handlers a quantity of documents great enough to occupy a space six feet by ten feet… The defendant has substantially harmed the United States, and in my view, his crimes demand severe punishment… My foregoing comments will, I hope, dispel any presumption that disclosures to an ally are insignificant; to the contrary, substantial and irrevocable damage has been done to this nation. Punishment, of course, must be appropriate to the crime, and in my opinion, no crime is more deserving of severe punishment than conducting espionage activities against one’s own country.”

Pollard was detected and arrested in 1985, convicted in 1987, and imprisoned. The case sent shockwaves through both Washington and Tel Aviv at the time of the conviction. Pollard pled guilty, confessing to selling the thousands of pages of secret documents to the Israelis for cash, vacations to Europe, and promised future payments to be wired to a Swiss bank account. A federal judge correctly dismissed pleas for clemency.

In 2015 Pollard was released from prison under parole which required him to remain in the United States. But in January 2021 Pollard was released from the parole conditions and was allowed to fly “home,” meeting Netanyahu as he disembarked from a private plane that had departed from Newark New Jersey before being given a hero’s welcome. The Pollard trip to his “home” occurred because Donald Trump had obligingly lifted the travel restrictions on him the week before, one more favor to Israel. At the airport, Pollard and his wife knelt to kiss the Israeli soil before Netanyahu handed him an Israeli citizen ID and welcomed him. The 737 luxury-fitted executive jet Pollard and his wife flew on belonged to Las Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, then the chief donor to the Republicans and to Donald Trump. Adelson was married to an Israeli, Miriam Adelson, who now survives him and continues the donations to the Republicans. Sheldon famously once said that he regretted having worn a US Army uniform when he was drafted in World War 2, much preferring instead that he might have done military service in the Israel Defense Forces.

But the Pollard story does not end there. In July Jonathan Pollard was a guest at the US Embassy in Jerusalem, where he met with Ambassador Mike Huckabee. The meeting was his first with US officials since his release and immigration to Israel. It was a break with precedent and the move by Huckabee, even all these years after the crime, still alarmed American intelligence officials even though, as it was Israel, media coverage in the US was minimal. John Kiriakou, a former CIA counter-terrorism officer, has argued that Pollard should have been detained by the Marine guards at the American Embassy in Jerusalem and should not have been allowed to meet with the ambassador. “[Pollard] has called for Jewish Americans who have security clearances… to begin spying for Israel, just like he did… So for him to be welcomed into the American Embassy is a bridge too far. If anything, he should have been snatched when he entered the American embassy.”

The Trump administration was apparently not consulted regarding the planned get-together. “The White House was not aware of that meeting,” Trump spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt claimed. It was reportedly left off the public schedule of the ambassador, suggesting at a minimum that it was a terrible decision by Huckabee acting on his own which he made some attempt to conceal. And yet, when the story broke the Trump administration still condoned the actions of the ambassador, who reportedly had a friendly chat with the spy who had done the most grave damage ever to the United States. “The president stands by our ambassador, Mike Huckabee,” Leavitt added, “and all that he’s doing for the United States and Israel.” She did not elaborate on what he has been doing for the United States.

After the story broke, Pollard accused “anti-Israel and isolationist elements within the US government of leaking that he met off-the-books with US Ambassador Huckabee in a bid to discredit and oust the pro-Israel envoy.” He claimed that “the New York Times story was part, or is part, of an effort to discredit the ambassador and have him removed. I think the people behind this are anti-Israel elements within the Trump administration, the neo-isolationists… and others, perhaps pro-Saudi, pro-Qatari elements within the administration that would like to see a person like Ambassador Huckabee sent home.” Pollard later gave an interview in which he named Steven Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner as likely culprits “representing Saudi and Qatari rather than US interests” in brokering the Gaza ceasefire, and he added that he “despises them” for daring to “carry on with terrorists.” Pollard added his view that the 20-point ceasefire plan, leaving the door open to the possibility for Palestinian statehood, threatens Israel’s security and “undermines our independence,” and the October 9th truce-hostage deal that is based on that plan would have been worthwhile only had Israel “unleashed… hell on Hamas” following the October 13th release of the last 20 living hostages from Gaza.

Pollard described his meeting with Huckabee as “personal” and “friendly” and confirmed that it was his first meeting with a US government official after his release by Trump from travel restrictions. He concluded that “A lot of people seem to think that I harbor an anger toward the United States, which I don’t. There were specific people that lied about me, that lied about Israel, that tried to use me as a weapon to undermine the US-Israel special relationship, and those are the people I have problems with but certainly people like Ambassador Huckabee, and others, I have absolutely no problem talking to. If I could guess, I would say it’s that community, particularly the CIA station in the embassy, that probably was the one that initiated this whole effort to discredit the ambassador.”

Pollard clearly is promoting a false narrative that makes himself look like some kind of honorable and valiant defender of Israel when in reality he did what he did for the most base of reasons, i.e. for money. Money is indeed how the Israeli boosters in the United States have been able to flat out corrupt America’s political process to attain the dominance that has enabled them to promote the Israeli agenda. They have bought or intimidated every politician that matters to include presidents, congressmen and even those in state and local governments. Anyone who criticizes Israel or Jewish collective behavior in support of the Israeli state is subject to character assassination and blacklisting a la Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Tom Massie. Those who persist are denounced as anti-Semites, a label that is used liberally by Zionist groups. Now Pollard is portraying himself as some kind of Israeli hero. The end result is that when Israel kills civilians in violation of a ceasefire in Gaza and is allowing rampaging armed settlers to destroy Palestinian livelihoods the United States government chooses to look the other way and instead showers the rogue state with money so it can continue to do its dirty work. Providing that political cover for Israel is in part the real dark side of Huckabee’s job as he sees it, not to engage over real American interests.

And then there are the hot buttons a-la the lies about Israel being advanced by Pollard and his ilk which, if the US actually had a functional government that is responsive to the people, should have been pushed long ago. “Best friend” Israel is ranked by the FBI as the number one “friendly” country in terms of its spying against the United States. Pollard is an exception who was actually punished since his crime was so dramatic and damaging, but Israeli spies are routinely slapped on the wrist when caught and never face prosecution for that crime, as one might note in the current “investigation” of Jeffrey Epstein, which was undoubtedly a major MOSSAD intelligence operation.

And there are also the MOSSAD agents who were the “Dancing Shlomos,” celebrating while the twin towers went down on 9/11, who were allowed to go home and various assassinations including JFK and even Charlie Kirk that have an Israeli back story. And Israel has never truly paid any price for the horrific bombing and torpedoing of the USS Liberty fifty-eight years ago, which killed 34 Americans and injured over one hundred and seventy more. The completely unprovoked attack took place in international waters and was later covered-up by President Lyndon Baines Johnson, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and Congress. May they burn in hell. The few remaining surviving crew members are still waiting for justice.

Good riddance to scum like Jonathan Pollard and the Israel-Firsters who enable him. It is reported in Israel that Pollard is now preparing to run for the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, which explains his demeanor and phony narrative. It also all means that it is past time to get rid of folks like Ambassador Mike Huckabee who prefer to advance Israeli interests rather than those of his own country because, he believes, God is telling him to do so. More generally speaking, it is well past time to get rid of the special relationship with Israel, sanctified in the halls of Congress and by a Jewish dominated media, which does nothing good for the United States and for the American people. Israel’s constant interference in the US political system and economy comes at a huge cost, both in dollars and in terms of actual American interests.

So, let’s all resolve for 2026 to do whatever we can to pull the plug on Israel. Let Israel, which is now seeking a 20 year commitment of even more cash annually from the US taxpayer, pay its own bills and take care of its own defense. American citizens who prefer the Jewish ethno-religious state to our constitutional republic should feel free to emigrate. In fact, they should be encouraged to leave. Lacking Washington’s backing, Israel will also be free to commit atrocities and war crimes against all of its neighbors but without the US United Nations veto it will have to begin facing the consequences for its actions. But most of all, as Americans, we will no longer have to continue to carry the burden of a country that manipulates and uses us and also has a certain contempt for us while doing so, witness how Trump’s kid-glove handling of Jonathan Pollard has played out. And maybe just maybe freeing the United States from Israel could lead to an end to all the wars in the Middle East that Washington has been waging in spite of the fact that we Americans are threatened by no one in the region and have no real interest whatsoever in prolonging the agony of staying engaged there.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org

November 25, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »