ICJ has recently postponed the hearing of South Africa’s case against Israeli war crimes to January 12, 2026, providing it more time to annihilate Gaza. This marks the collapse and failure of the international system.
The Ongoing Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza
Since October 7, 2023, the Palestinians have been facing one of the worst genocidal operations in the world. More than 50000 Palestinian civilians, mostly women and children, have been intentionally killed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) under the pretense of eliminating Hamas. However, this war has exposed the self-proclaimed champions of human rights and liberalism. The United States and the European Union have constantly been providing military, diplomatic, and financial aid to Israel.
The latter has emerged as the largest recipient of the US aid since its illegitimate inception. Moreover, the US government has vetoed multiple United Nations resolutions seeking to establish humanitarian peace in the region. U.S. President Donald Trump also reiterated his country’s support for Israel after his re-election. He also proposed a plan to relocate the native people of Gaza to the neighboring countries and occupy the region for the long term.
The Zionist state has intentionally targeted aid workers, mosques, churches, hospitals, schools, and other civilian infrastructure in violation of international law. In an unprecedented move, the Netanyahu administration is using starvation and hunger as a weapon of war against the innocent civilians of the Gaza Strip. Several heart-wrenching images of starved children from Gaza have emerged on social media during all this time. Amnesty International and the different international humanitarian agencies have condemned these Israeli policies and declared them a war crime.
Global Legal Responses and the Case at the ICJ
While most of the Muslim nations hesitated even to utter a single sentence against the ongoing Israeli war crimes and genocide in Israel, South Africa filed a case against the Zionist state in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2023 under the 1948 Genocide Convention. This Convention, established to halt the recurrence of Holocaust like events, defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” More than 10 countries, including Turkey, Ireland, Egypt, the Maldives, Chile, Belgium, and Mexico, have joined the case against Israel.
The petition demanded urgent actions to prevent further Israeli war crimes in Gaza. However, despite the presence of numerous evidence and reports by international human rights organizations, the ICJ failed to halt the genocide of innocent civilians of the Gaza Strip. The court was also commissioned to determine whether the Israeli Defense Forces were committing genocide in Gaza. Since 2023, the court has made no considerable decision against the Israeli war crimes.
Exposing Hypocrisy and Seeking Alternatives to Western Hegemony
The world, especially the Gazans, is waiting for the international community to stand against the atrocities and the war crimes of the IDF and the Netanyahu government. However, the Western world and its puppet Arab nations are constantly ignoring the plight of the innocent Palestinians. This has exposed the international organizations, the OIC, and the Western liberal values. The ICJ’s recent decision to postpone the hearing till January 2026 demonstrates its apathy towards the citizens of Gaza in particular and towards the citizens of Third World countries in particular.
Israeli war crimes and apartheid in Palestine date back to the former’s inception in 1948. Since then, the Zionist groups in Palestine have been occupying the properties of the native peoples. Israel’s history is replete with rapes, torture, and killing of innocent children and women in Palestinian territory. The Zionist leaders have always supported sexual assault by the Israeli Defense Forces.
However, the international community remains indifferent to the plight of the Palestinians. The ICJ’s postponement of the hearing till next year demonstrates its commitment to justice and peace in the world. This move has once again revealed that the US-backed unipolar liberal world order has failed. It has also exposed the reality of the so-called champions of human rights. The United States and other Western nations have always echoed their concerns about the Ukrainian people. However, their nonchalance to the plight of the Palestinians exposes their hypocrisy.
Although the Palestinians and their supporters around the world were hopeful about the ICJ, this is the time to realize that all the international institutions were made merely to prolong the US hegemony and serve the Western interests. It is improbable that the ICJ would declare Israeli operations as genocide. However, even if it does so, it would be too late, as hundreds more Palestinians would have been killed by then. Nonetheless, South Africa’s case against the ICJ has further exposed the Western world order and its institutions. It is the right time for third-world countries to look for an inclusive and egalitarian world order. BRICS provides the best alternative to the developing countries pursuing their ambition of following independent foreign policies and mutual development.
May 20, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | European Union, Gaza, Israel, Palestine, UK, United States, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Trump is unlikely to pay any political price if he disregards the old guard’s unrealistic demands
Neocons and their allies in Washington, Israel, and beyond are making unrealistic demands about the outcome of U.S. talks with Iran on limiting its nuclear program. But President Trump has absolutely no reason to listen to them and should not take them seriously.
The anti-Iran deal campaign kicked into overdrive last week when Republicans on Capitol Hill sent a letter to the White House calling on Trump to refuse any agreement that doesn’t include the complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program.
“Every Republican senator except Rand Paul signed a letter to President Trump urging the administration to push for an end to Iran’s enrichment capacity,” Andrew Day, senior editor of the American Conservative, told RS. “They know that this demand is unacceptable to the Iranian regime and are clearly hoping to sabotage Trump’s diplomatic efforts.”
Center for International Policy senior non-resident fellow Sina Toossi called the letter’s demand “a poison pill.”
“Demanding zero enrichment, permanent restrictions, and total dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure — after the U.S. already broke the 2015 deal — is not a negotiating position,” he told RS.
Meanwhile, other deal opponents say that Iran can be allowed to keep its program for civilian energy production purposes with the caveat that it cannot enrich its own uranium.
The good news for Trump though — and those who see an opportunity to box in Iran’s nuclear program and avoid war — is that this anti-Iran deal coalition has no constituency outside Washington and Israel, and Trump will pay very little to no political price if he just ignores them.
Take for instance a recent poll conducted by the SSRS Opinion Panel Omnibus in conjunction with the University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll program. That survey found that a large majority of Americans — 69% — favor “a negotiated agreement limiting Iran’s nuclear program to peaceful ends, with stringent monitoring” as opposed to military action. But perhaps more importantly for Trump’s political fortunes, 64% of Republicans surveyed — i.e. his base — agreed.
Opponents of diplomacy with Iran try to obfuscate this reality and muddy the waters. For example, Foundation for the Defense of Democracies CEO Mark Dubowitz — who’s been pushing for regime change in Iran for nearly two decades — promoted a poll last week finding that “76% of Americans say Iran’s nuclear-weapons facilities should be destroyed.”
Of course there is one problem: Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons or a nuclear weapons program, and thus no nuclear weapons facilities, a fact that the U.S. intelligence community routinely concludes.
But it’s not just the American people or the GOP base that support Trump making a deal with Iran. Some of the more high profile figures in the MAGA-America First world back him too.
“It’s called sanity,” Steve Bannon said last week, referring to the SSRS/UMaryland poll. Bannon, of course, served as a senior adviser to Trump during his first term and remains influential within his orbit and among his supporters.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who also has clout with Trump’s base, has been very vocal recently against going to war with Iran. “There is no wedge between the base and President Trump,” she said earlier this month. “The wedge is between Congress and the establishment Republicans that are undermining the president’s agenda.”
And conservative media star Tucker Carlson, who like Bannon, has close ties to Trump world and is influential with the president’s base, has been similarly calling out neocons and others who are trying to kill Trump’s diplomacy with Iran and push for war.
“Thousands of Americans would die. We’d lose the war that follows. Nothing would be more destructive to our country,” he said last month. “Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy.”
Popular right-wing podcaster Charlie Kirk has piled on as well. “[T]here are people in Washington inside the Pentagon and inside the administration who want to launch military strikes on Iran. Often, they say it’d be easy. Just one strike in and out,” he said recently. “Now pause. How often have they actually been correct about the one in and out thing? Has that ever actually been the case?”
“President Trump has consolidated his power over the Republican Party to a remarkable degree and could certainly sign a good deal with Iran without suffering politically,” Day said. “The base still loves him, and lawmakers and conservative media are afraid of him. The elites would fall in line for fear of MAGA turning on them.”
Ryan Costello, policy director at NIAC, agrees. “Trump wouldn’t have been elected president twice if his foreign policy echoed the discredited views of the Bush-Cheney wing of the Republican party,” he said. “Trump can have a deal with Iran or he can be pushed into war by adopting rigid and inflexible demands — the vast majority of Americans want him to lead with diplomacy.”
Meanwhile, it appears increasingly unlikely that Democrats — most of whom supported President Obama’s Iran nuclear deal back in 2015 — will try to make much political hay with any agreement Trump makes with Tehran.
“This is not a time for politics on Iran,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a leading Democratic foreign policy voice in the House, said last week. “I support [Trump] trying to get a deal with Iran. I supported the Obama nuclear deal. How about we put the interest of our nation and peace above scoring political points at every moment?”
And what’s perhaps overlooked but maybe equally important: major regional powers like Saudi Arabia, who campaigned hard against Obama’s Iran deal, have changed their tune with Trump.
“Gulf leaders have been broadly supportive of the talks between the Trump administration and Iran because they don’t want to be caught in the crossfire of a regional escalation if they fail,” Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group told Middle East Eye last week. “That support doesn’t necessarily translate into success at the negotiating table but it’s a shift from the 2015 talks.”
Perhaps most importantly, Trump can get a deal with Iran that places strict limits on its nuclear program with incredibly intrusive verification mechanisms that will satisfy his stated goal of preventing Iran from building a nuclear weapon, all without zero enrichment provisions or requiring Iran to dismantle its entire program.
“Not only will adopting a hardline ‘no enrichment’ position push Iran from the negotiating table entirely, it is not necessary for an effective agreement and would not fully address Iran’s proliferation risk,” the Arms Control Association’s Kelsey Davenport wrote recently, adding that “dismantling the infrastructure does not erase the knowledge Iran has gained about uranium enrichment.”
In short, she concluded, the U.S. “can find the right combination of limits and monitoring to block Iran’s pathways to nuclear weapons while allowing Iran to retain a less risky level of uranium enrichment.”
Ben Armbruster is the Managing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He has more than a decade of experience working at the intersection of politics, foreign policy, and media. Ben previously held senior editorial and management positions at Media Matters, ThinkProgress, ReThink Media, and Win Without War.
May 20, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Wars for Israel | Iran, Israel, Sanctions against Iran, Saudi Arabia, United States |
Leave a comment
In the past several days, there have been surprising developments in the negotiations between Washington and Tehran over Iran’s civilian nuclear program.
U.S. President Donald Trump has frequently, but not always, defined the goal of the negotiations as being limited to preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. He repeated that definition as recently as May 25, saying Iran must “permanently and verifiably cease pursuit of nuclear weapons…They cannot have a nuclear weapon.”
But the message from his team has been contradictory. Then-National Security Advisor Mike Waltz said that the United States is demanding “full dismantlement,” and Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff said that “a Trump deal” means “Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.” Rubio said that Iran can have a civilian nuclear program, but by importing uranium enriched up to 3.67%, and no longer by enriching their own. On May 9, Witkoff told Breitbart News that “An enrichment program can never exist in the state of Iran ever again. That’s our red line. No enrichment.”
But Iran has drawn the mirror image red line. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has placed a firm limit that Iran will not negotiate “the full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.” Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian repeated that red line ahead of the talks, insisting that “Iran has never sought, is not seeking, and will never seek nuclear weapons” but that “Iran will not give up its peaceful nuclear rights.”
American insistence on ending Iran’s civilian enrichment program could put a quick end to the talks. Widening the negotiations to Iran’s missile program or to Iran’s relationship with its regional proxy groups could also jeopardize the talks.
But Trump raised that possibility on May 14 when he suggested that breaking off relations with proxy groups in the region must be part of any deal. Iran “must stop sponsoring terror,” he said, and “halt its bloody proxy wars.”
The contradictory statements emanating from the Trump administration appear to have been “because of a lack of decision on key strategic points,” Trita Parsi, Executive Vice President of Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and an expert on Iran, told me. And, indeed, on May 7, Trump said, “We haven’t made that decision yet.”
“As a result,” Parsi said, “the debate on these points is now, rather unhelpfully, taking place out in public.”
That the talks have progressed to a fourth meeting suggests, at this point, that the public crossing of these Iranian red lines may not be being repeated in the private meetings. Iran’s Foreign Minister hinted at that possibility when he identified one of the difficulties in the negotiations as being “contradictions both inside and outside the negotiating room.” Supporting this possibility, when Trump introduced Iran’s support of regional proxies into the discussion, Araghchi called the remark, not unproductive or unhelpful, but “deceitful.”
And Araghchi may know. Barak Ravid of Axios has now reported that, during the fourth round of talks, the United States presented Iran with a written proposal. The report says that, during the third round, Araghchi gave Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff a document with Iran’s proposals for a deal. The U.S. studied it and returned it to Iran with “questions and requests for clarifications.” Iran replied, the U.S. prepared a new proposal, and then presented it to Araghchi who has now brought it back to Tehran for consultations with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Masoud Pezeshkian.
How far down the path to a settlement the proposal is is unknown. Araghchi said future negotiations now become more difficult. But he said that “despite the difficulty and frankness of the talks, very useful discussions were held.” He then said, “We can now say that both sides have a better understanding of each other’s positions.”
This major breakthrough may have been facilitated by another recent development: a subtle change in tone by Trump. Following a flurry of American threats, the fourth round of talks was postponed. Iranian officials said that [d]epending on the U.S. approach, the date of the next round of talks will be announced.”
Recently, that approach subtly changed. Previously, Donald Trump had formulated Iran’s choice as “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing. It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.” But in his most recent remarks, which went largely unnoticed, Trump softened the consequence, saying only “If Iran’s leadership rejects this olive branch…we will have no choice but to inflict massive maximum pressure, drive Iranian oil exports to zero.” Notably, bombing was replaced with sanctions.
On May 15, Trump again seemed to reject the risk of war:
“Because things like that get started and they get out of control. I’ve seen it over and over again. They go to war and things get out of control, and we’re not going to let that happen.”
In another surprise development, Iran may have facilitated negotiations with a creative and unexpected proposal.
There are now reports that Iran has suggested for consideration that they could join with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in a nuclear enrichment consortium. Iran would continue to enrich uranium but accept a cap at the 3.67% enrichment required by a nuclear energy program. Saudi Arabia and UAE, who would gain access to Iran’s nuclear technology, would be shareholders and funders.
If true, the proposal would be based on a consortium idea first proposed by Princeton physicist Frank von Hippel and former Iranian nuclear negotiator Seyed Hossein Mousavian.
Von Hippel told me that the idea was inspired by the URENCO enrichment consortium of Germany, the Netherlands and Britain and by the ABAAAC consortium of Brazil and Argentina.
The consortiums, he said, allow nuclear experts from each country to “visit each other’s facilities to assure themselves that the activities are peaceful.” He added that “decisions that might have proliferation implications are made by the [partner] governments.” Saudi Arabia’s, the Emirates’ and Iran’s watchful eyes would all help the International Atomic Energy Agency ensure that the program is peaceful.
Aside from the implications for the nuclear negotiations, this level of trust between Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE was unthinkable only a very short time ago and testifies to the changes going on in the region and in the evolving Iran-Saudi Arabia relationship. That Iran would trust Saudi Arabia with access to its nuclear technology indicates that a region changing shift in the relationship is underway.
As Annelle Sheline, research fellow in the Middle East program at the Quincy Institute, told me:
“The Iranians’ willingness to join a consortium with Saudi Arabia and the UAE to develop civilian nuclear energy demonstrates significantly improved relations between these countries. This sends a strong signal that Tehran as well as Riyadh and Abu Dhabi would prefer to prioritize cooperation over conflict.”
She said that all three countries have growing motivation for peace in the region. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman needs to avoid violent conflict to encourage the foreign investment and tourism needed to fuel his planned economic diversification. Mohammed bin Zayed needs economic security in the face of competition from Saudi Arabia to be a regional hub. Iran needs to encourage peace in the region because of the recent weakening of its own strategic position in the region. Saudi Arabia and Iran have recently been moving towards enhanced friendship both bilaterally and through multinational organizations.
Sheline expressed the hope to me that “Trump should take advantage of these circumstances to sign a nuclear deal with Iran and avoid unnecessary war.”
All of these developments, from the contradictory American messaging, to the until now unreported existence of a written proposal, to the subtle and little noticed change in Trump’s tone to the Iranian idea of a nuclear consortium with Saudi Arabia and UAE are shocking and new. They may present an opportunity to return to a nuclear agreement with Iran and to usher in a new hope for peace and friendly relations both between the U.S. and Iran and in the region. Hopefully, the two sides will seize this opportunity.
May 20, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | Iran, Middle East, Sanctions against Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, United States |
Leave a comment
The EU and UK imposed new sanctions on Russia on Tuesday, escalating their campaign to pressure Moscow while ramping up support for Kiev.
The sanctions were announced shortly after a call between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump. Following the conversation, Trump warned that imposing additional economic restrictions on Moscow could hinder efforts to achieve peace in the Ukraine conflict.
The European Council, comprising leaders of EU member states and top officials, approved the bloc’s 17th round of sanctions, targeting what foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas called “nearly 200 shadow fleet ships.” Kallas, a vocal critic of Moscow, stated that further measures “are in the works” in Brussels.
Western officials claim that the targeted fleet enables Russia to evade G7-led efforts to enforce a price cap on its crude oil exports. In a coordinated move, the UK added 18 vessels from the same network to its sanctions list on Tuesday.
In addition, the UK imposed sanctions on the St. Petersburg Currency Exchange and Russia’s state deposit insurance agency, citing efforts to sever critical financial lifelines. Foreign Secretary David Lammy said the measures are intended to hold Putin accountable for supposedly “delaying peace efforts.”
Last week, delegations from Russia and Ukraine met for the first time since 2022, when Kiev abandoned negotiations in favor of pursuing victory on the battlefield, as advised by the then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
European backers of Ukraine initially supported Kiev’s demand for a 30-day unconditional ceasefire before resuming talks, and threatened additional sanctions if Russia refused. Zelensky later backtracked after the Trump administration supported Putin’s proposal for renewed diplomatic engagement.
Zelensky insisted, however, that Putin meet him in person in Türkiye to demonstrate his commitment to peace – an idea that the Russian president had not proposed. Ukrainian officials continue to call for expanded sanctions over what they describe as Moscow’s non-compliance with peace overtures.
The Putin-Trump call on Monday was characterized as productive by both leaders. Trump said he believes Putin is interested in ending the conflict and warned that additional economic pressure could obstruct US mediation efforts.
Putin has said Moscow and Kiev should negotiate a formal memorandum outlining a detailed path to a broader peace agreement, adding that a ceasefire could be part of the proposed road map.
May 20, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Russophobia | European Union, UK |
Leave a comment
When Utah lawmakers met during the legislative session to discuss and vote on whether to end the practice of fluoridating the state’s drinking water supply, 17-year-old Max Widmaier was there to offer key testimony.
In 2019, when Max was a fifth-grader, he was poisoned when a malfunctioning pump in Sandy, Utah, released undiluted hydrofluorosilicic acid into the water, affecting 1,500 households, institutions and businesses and sickening over 200 people.
An investigation revealed that fluoride was detected in the drinking water at 40 times the recommended levels, and officials failed to notify the public for 10 days.
Max unknowingly drank the over-fluoridated water in school. Soon after, he spiked a high fever, developed tics, had severe emotional swings, and experienced developmental regression so severe that at one point he lost the ability to compose sentences, his mother, Jenny Widmaier, told The Defender.
“I don’t remember fifth grade,” Max told Utah lawmakers. “That year is just a gaping hole where memory should be … because I drank the fluoridated water that day when Sandy City broke its line to public water.”
Jenny said that day, the school called her to pick Max up because he had a fever. She didn’t know if it was a virus, an infection, food poisoning or something else, so she asked Max about what he had been up to. Max mentioned that he drank water at school and it tasted metallic. At the time, Jenny didn’t give it a second thought.
After some severe gastrointestinal distress and about four days sick in bed, Max seemed fine, she said. The following Saturday, he hung out at a friend’s house, ate some tacos, and things seemed normal.
That night, Jenny’s husband, who came home late, checked in on Max before heading to bed. He immediately went to Jenny and asked, “What’s wrong with Max’s face?”
Jenny was surprised by the question. They went downstairs to examine Max together. “I was just watching him,” Jenny said, “and about every 30 to 45 seconds, his whole face would seize up and his head would drop, his chin would drop to his chest, and then he’d lift up and he was fine. He didn’t even notice it was happening.”
She asked Max what was going on with his face, but strangely, he had no idea what she was talking about. “It seemed he was blacking out,” Jenny said.
She called the emergency line for her pediatrician. They told her that if it happened while he was asleep, it could be serious, but that otherwise it was probably just a tic.
The “tic” seemed slightly better the following day, but Jenny took Max to the hospital to be evaluated. While they were there, the provider asked if they lived in Sandy City — which they didn’t.
When Jenny asked why it mattered if they lived in Sandy, the provider said there had been a fluoride leak there.
“Then it sort of clicked into place — the metallic tasting water, and his school is in Sandy,” Jenny said. The provider checked the map and saw that Max’s school was located in the fluoride leak zone. He told Jenny to get Max tested for heavy metals.
Water fluoridation comes with heavy metals
Jenny performed a home test on Max and it was positive for several metals, including chromium and lead. She kept him out of school the next day.
She said:
“At this point it was getting weird. He had reverted to being a 2-year-old. We took him to get some food, and he sat there and he had this little metal cow that he was using to make mooing noises.
“And his ability to put sentences together had declined dramatically. This is a kid who in fifth grade, was scoring high on what’s called the AMC 8 test, which is a mathematics test for eighth graders. And that day, he could hardly put words together into a sentence.”
The family struggled to find a place that could do the appropriate blood tests, although she did finally find an out-of-network provider. A neurologist told her it was late for a tic to present, but that Max probably just had tourette syndrome.
Max also experienced behavioral problems. He had panic attacks and would scream hysterically.
She reached out to the city for help, but got no response. Finally, through Facebook, she connected with Lorna Rosenstein, executive director of Waterwatch of Utah, who “was like my fairy godmother.”
Rosenstein, who had been active in attempting to end water fluoridation in Utah for years, connected Jenny with fluoride toxicity expert Phyllis Mullenix, Ph.D., who helped develop a treatment plan for Max so his body could eliminate the toxic levels of fluoride from his system.
In addition to a very strict diet, Max had to undergo several rounds of chelation therapy because he also had high levels of lead, arsenic and cadmium in his blood.
Most members of the public are not aware that heavy metals are present in the hydrofluorosilicic acid — a byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer production process — typically used to fluoridate water.
Max also had to do neurological exercises to retrain his brain. As the fluoride was eliminated from his system, his mental health also returned to normal.
None of the treatments were covered by insurance, Jenny said. The family never received any compensation from the city. The school, however, was very responsive. Jenny said they immediately turned off the water fountains and now provide filtered water for all students.
‘I have horrible balance and my sense of body is all screwed up’
“It took us about a year to recover him back to normal,” Jenny said. Max no longer has a tic unless he consumes food or drink with fluoride in it. “I can always tell almost immediately when he has eaten rice that’s been cooked in water, it’s not been filtered because he starts to twitch and his face starts to seize.”
Max told The Defender that his only memories of the entire year-long experience were of getting strange soreness at the edge of his eyes. He said he would blink to make it go away. Those were the blackouts.
When Max accidentally consumes something with fluoride in it today — now more than five years later — he experiences that same feeling and has to blink.
He also continues to have shaky hands. “My handwriting is horrible,” he said, so he uses heavy pens to counter the shaking. “I have horrible balance and my sense of body is all screwed up.”
Intellectually, he said, he feels fully recovered.
Max said he was glad to be able to tell his story to the legislators. “It was an acknowledgement,” he said. “It was like, ‘man what this kid went through is unfortunate’ from people on both sides of the water fluoridation debate.”
Max said he hopes his story raises the question for people about whether adding fluoride to water is worth the risk. “Sure, you can brush your teeth with a fluoride toothpaste or drink fluoridated water, but how much goes to your teeth and how much ends up elsewhere?”
“And there can be some freak accident. Is that a risk you are willing to take?”
Water fluoridation accidents occur frequently — but public often last to know
The 2019 accident in Sandy City was just one of many accidental fluoride spills and overfeeds that happen regularly, according to the Fluoride Action Network, which tracks publicly recorded accidents on a webpage.
Accidents range from a small, 10-gallon spill in 2012 in Connecticut to an incident in New Orleans in 2008, where the fluorosilicic acid ate through its storage tanks and then through a concrete containment tank.
In that case, to avoid a “catastrophic mix of toxic chemicals,” the environment department discharged nearly half a million gallons of the toxic acid into the Mississippi River.
Failure to warn the public about fluoride accidents is also common.
Last month in Richmond, Virginia, an accidental fluoride overfeed caused a discharge of approximately 5,900 gallons of fluoride solution into the drinking water. The city said the previous fluoride system had failed in January, and the recent leak occurred during the installation of a new pump.
The leak began on April 23. However, it wasn’t until April 27 — when a Richmond Water Treatment Plant employee called a state agency to report the overflow and said no one was taking action to address the problem — that any state officials even knew about the spill, 6 News Richmond reported.
The City of Richmond had not notified the Virginia Department of Health, neighboring counties or the public.
Officials said the short-term exposure didn’t cause a public health concern. However, that assertion was based on the claim that, “Fluoride levels detected at the Water Treatment Plant were 2.67 milligrams per liter (mg/L) which is below the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 4.0 mg/L, the highest level that is allowed in drinking water by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),” the city’s press release said. “The optimal target level of fluoride is 0.7 mg/L.”
While that may be technically true, last year, plaintiffs who sued the EPA alleging fluoride causes damage at levels far below 4.0 mg/L won their case.
A federal judge ordered the EPA to initiate a process to regulate the chemical, finding that it poses an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health even at the recommended 0.7 mg/L levels.
The 2.67 mg/L is several orders of magnitude higher than the level at which exposure for children becomes risky, even though it is under the legal limit, and that limit must now be changed.
The city’s press release warned that children under age 9 could be at risk of dental fluorosis — a tooth discoloration — from the leak and should be provided with an alternative water option.
It did not mention any of the recent research that has been making headlines for the last year, showing that ingesting fluoride is linked to reduced IQ, behavioral issues, disruption of thyroid functioning and the gut microbiome in children.
Nor did it mention the risks to pregnant women.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
May 20, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Timeless or most popular | Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
Montana has taken a decisive leap where others have faltered, becoming the first state in the US to officially outlaw a widespread government surveillance tactic: buying up private data without a warrant.
With the passage of Senate Bill 282 (SB 282), lawmakers have directly confronted what has become a backdoor into people’s lives, commercial data brokers selling sensitive digital information to law enforcement agencies, sidestepping the need for judicial authorization.
This so-called “data broker loophole” has allowed government agencies across the country to acquire personal details they’d otherwise need a warrant to access.
Instead of presenting probable cause to a judge, agencies could simply purchase location histories and other metadata from third-party brokers who gather it from mobile apps.
These apps often track users’ movements down to the minute, creating comprehensive logs of their daily routines. Until now, that information was effectively up for grabs, and no warrant has been required.
Montana’s new law puts a clear end to that practice. Under SB 282, state and local government entities are now barred from purchasing several categories of digital data, including but not limited to: electronic communications and their contents, geolocation data, financial transaction records, pseudonymous identifiers, and other forms of sensitive personal information such as religious beliefs, health status, and biometric details.
Importantly, the legislation doesn’t eliminate access altogether, it restricts how that access is obtained.
Law enforcement in Montana must now secure a judge’s approval via a search warrant or meet other legal standards such as investigative subpoenas. Consent from the device’s owner is also still a permissible route.
What SB 282 achieves is a ban on the government using cash instead of cause to gather what should be protected digital traces.
This isn’t Montana’s first move to prioritize digital civil liberties.
The state has already passed a range of privacy-forward policies in recent years, including strong limitations on facial recognition, protections for genetic information, and a state constitutional amendment that explicitly shields digital data from unreasonable searches and seizures. SB 282 continues that trend, bolstering Montana’s reputation as a leader in privacy rights.
The structure of the new law aligns with the spirit of a federal bill, the Fourth Amendment is Not for Sale Act, introduced by Senator Ron Wyden.
In the vacuum left by federal inaction, states have begun crafting their own responses. Montana, despite its modest population, is now at the forefront of that movement.
Montana becomes first state to close the “data broker loophole” that allows law enforcement to purchase data without a warrant by enacting SB 282 which prohibits the government from using money to access certain types of sensitive digital information
May 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | Human rights, Montana, United States |
Leave a comment
A new chapter in digital journalism is taking shape as the Independent Media Alliance (IMA) prepares to unveil its own Portal within Odysee’s Decentralized Media Ecosystem (DME).
The alliance, spearheaded by investigative journalists Whitney Webb, Derrick Broze, and Ryan Cristián, aims to reclaim editorial independence and resist the growing stranglehold of centralized tech platforms on public discourse.
The Portal represents a structural shift away from platforms where algorithms and moderation policies routinely silence dissenting voices. Odysee’s model hands control back to creators, offering a space where journalists can publish, monetize, and manage their communities on their own terms.
The IMA, which includes Webb of Unlimited Hangout, Broze of The Conscious Resistance Network, and Cristián of The Last American Vagabond, has endured repeated clampdowns, from suppressed reach to financial de-platforming for pushing back against establishment narratives. Their decision to anchor their work in a decentralized system is a direct response to the growing marginalization of independent media.
Each Portal functions autonomously. Rather than being buried by algorithmic filters or subjected to arbitrary moderation, creators maintain full sovereignty over how content is shared, discussed, and funded.
“Portal is about returning control to the creators,” said Julian Chandra, Odysee’s founder and CEO. “The Independent Media Alliance shows how groups of journalists can build their own spaces, manage their own communities, and protect the integrity of their work without reliance on centralized platforms.”
For the IMA, joining Portal is a philosophical move. This step affirms that free expression requires infrastructure not beholden to corporate interests. It’s a rejection of the controlled environments that have made it increasingly difficult for journalists to reach audiences without interference.
The IMA’s move reflects a commitment to building an ecosystem where information flows freely and creators are no longer forced to compromise their principles.
By aligning with Odysee, the IMA is laying the groundwork for a resilient model of journalism, one that can’t be throttled by opaque policies or the shifting whims of tech giants.
May 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Full Spectrum Dominance |
Leave a comment
Last week, US President Donald Trump embarked on his first official overseas tour since taking office, choosing to visit three key Gulf nations – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
This itinerary was both unexpected and, in many ways, unprecedented. Unlike his predecessors, who traditionally began their foreign policy engagements with visits to long-standing Western allies, Trump opted to prioritize America’s Arab partners, deliberately bypassing Israel – Washington’s principal strategic ally in the region. This marked the first time in decades that a sitting US president visiting the Middle East consciously excluded it from the agenda.
This decision signaled a potential recalibration of Washington’s priorities in the region. Relations between the Trump administration and the Israeli leadership, particularly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, were already strained in the early stages – largely due to Israel’s growing intransigence on the Palestinian question and the increasing influence of far-right factions within the Israeli government. Faced with mounting frustration over Israel’s hardline policies, the White House appeared to pivot toward a more pragmatic, less confrontational, and economically advantageous partnership with the Gulf monarchies.
However, the rationale behind this shift extended beyond political calculation. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar have long played a pivotal role in sustaining American influence in the Middle East – not only because of their strategic geography but also due to their substantial investments in the US economy and multi-billion-dollar arms contracts. For a business-minded president eager to showcase the profitability of foreign policy through economic deals, these nations represented ideal counterparts.
The lavish receptions afforded to Trump during his Gulf tour might have been dismissed as mere pageantry were it not for their deeper symbolic resonance. The true significance of the visit lay in what it revealed about broader geopolitical currents: namely, the transformation of the Gulf monarchies from regional players into increasingly assertive global actors.
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar are no longer content with being perceived as passive participants in American-led regional frameworks. Instead, they are positioning themselves as independent centers of power in an emerging multipolar world order. Their growing international stature stems from several interrelated factors.
First, these countries have embraced ambitious and forward-looking development strategies, investing heavily in infrastructure, clean energy transitions, technological innovation, and global finance. No longer simply hydrocarbon exporters, they are becoming hubs of digital transformation, international logistics, Islamic finance, and global policy discourse on issues ranging from security to sustainable development.
Second, the Gulf states have pioneered a distinctive model of governance that blends traditionalism with modernization. While maintaining deep-rooted commitments to Islamic and tribal values, they have achieved remarkable progress in building diversified and globally competitive economies. This synthesis has not only enabled them to thrive amid intensifying global competition but, in some respects, to outpace certain Western nations grappling with internal divisions and economic stagnation.
Equally noteworthy is the political resilience of these monarchies. Western narratives often portray them simplistically as ‘absolute monarchies,’ failing to appreciate the internal mechanisms of governance that underpin their stability. In reality, the political architecture of the Gulf is more accurately described as ‘sheikhism’ – a system rooted in consensus among tribal and familial elites, structured around a balance of obligations, reciprocal loyalties, and ongoing consultation. This model, which integrates Islamic principles such as shura (consultation) with practical statecraft, has proven remarkably adaptive and resilient.
In this context, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar can no longer be viewed merely as privileged US allies or energy suppliers. They are emerging as autonomous actors in global politics – capable of forging regional alliances, shaping international agendas across energy, media, and technology, and mediating in global conflicts. Their evolving role reflects not dependence on external security guarantees, but the outcome of deliberate, long-term strategies to consolidate sovereignty, enhance prestige, and assert influence in the 21st century.
Money above all: Trump’s deal-based diplomacy
President Donald Trump’s visit to the Gulf states was far more than his first foreign trip as head of state. It was a bold, highly symbolic debut of a new US foreign economic doctrine rooted in pragmatism, transactionalism, and strategic capitalism. Unlike previous administrations, which typically foregrounded diplomacy, security alliances, and value-based partnerships, Trump approached this tour as a high-stakes business deal. His mindset was that of a dealmaker, not a traditional statesman. The objective was clear: to restore America’s economic dominance by leveraging the vast wealth and strategic ambitions of the Middle East’s richest monarchies.
Trump’s campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again,” found tangible expression in this tour. His mission was to bring back jobs, reindustrialize key sectors, boost the US high-tech ecosystem, and enhance national competitiveness – all fueled by a surge in foreign direct investment. In this pursuit, the oil-rich, capital-heavy Gulf monarchies – endowed with massive sovereign wealth funds and seeking greater global visibility – emerged as ideal partners.
In Saudi Arabia, Trump signed an unprecedented economic package worth over $600 billion, including the largest arms deal in US history – $142 billion covering missile defense systems, advanced aviation platforms, cybersecurity capabilities, and military-grade AI technologies. Equally significant was the launch of a new tech alliance: Saudi-based DataVolt committed $20 billion to build data centers and energy facilities in the US, while a consortium led by Nvidia, AMD, and Amazon Web Services will co-develop an AI innovation hub within the Kingdom. A $50 billion venture fund was also established to support US-based startups in renewable energy and cybersecurity.
In Qatar, the results were even more staggering: agreements totaling $1.2 trillion, the largest single-country deal package in US diplomatic history. Central to this was Qatar Airways’ order for 210 Boeing aircraft valued at $96 billion, making it the most lucrative deal ever for the American aerospace giant. Qatar also pledged tens of billions of dollars for joint ventures in quantum computing, smart energy networks, and STEM education programs for engineers and IT specialists in the US. In a provocative symbolic gesture, Qatar proposed gifting President Trump a custom-built Air Force One, sparking intense debate in the American media landscape.
In the United Arab Emirates, new agreements totaling $200 billion were signed – in addition to a previously negotiated $1.4 trillion package. Key components included the construction of an aluminum plant in Oklahoma, expansion of oil and gas infrastructure with US firms, and a landmark $100 billion commitment to American companies specializing in artificial intelligence over the next three years.
In total, Trump’s Gulf tour yielded over $2 trillion in contracts and investment pledges – an economic windfall of historic proportions. But beyond the numbers, the trip marked a fundamental redefinition of American foreign policy: from projecting power through military force and ideological alignment, to securing influence through economic penetration and transactional partnerships. Trump unveiled a new image of the US – not as a global policeman, but as a global entrepreneur. A nation that negotiates not with declarations, but with data, contracts, and employment metrics.
This new model resonated deeply with the Gulf monarchies themselves, which are undergoing profound transformations. Once reliant solely on oil exports, these states are rapidly evolving into tech-driven economies with ambitions to become global hubs of innovation, finance, and logistics. In Trump’s America, they found not just a security guarantor, but a strategic co-architect of a post-oil economic order – one where capital, innovation, and mutual profit outweigh traditional diplomatic protocol and ideological rhetoric.
Trump’s message was unambiguous: the era of foreign policy as charity is over. What now matters are mutual returns, strategic alignments, and economic gains. The Gulf states, driven by their own visions of modernization and diversification, eagerly embraced this shift. Together, they reimagined international relations not as a sphere of obligations, but as a marketplace of opportunities.
What about Israel?
One of the most significant – albeit unofficial – outcomes of Donald Trump’s Middle East tour could be discerned even before the journey began: the US President conspicuously bypassed Israel. This omission became all the more striking given that even Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who had initially planned a visit to Tel Aviv, abruptly cancelled his trip at the last moment. The message did not go unnoticed in either Washington or Jerusalem: nearly all observers interpreted the move as a clear sign of a cooling relationship between the US and Israel – more precisely, between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The rift between the two leaders appears less personal than strategic, rooted in diverging visions of the region’s future. Tensions had been mounting for months. The first major flashpoint came when Trump unilaterally announced the withdrawal of American forces from operations against Yemen’s Houthi rebels, citing the group’s supposed commitment to halt attacks on Red Sea shipping lanes. The decision, made without prior consultation with Israel – which continues to endure daily rocket fire from the Houthis – dealt a blow not only to diplomatic norms but also to the foundational trust between Israel and its closest ally.
An even more sensitive issue has been the quiet resumption of US contacts with Iran. With Oman acting as mediator, Washington has been exploring the outlines of a possible new nuclear agreement. Meanwhile, Israel remains steadfast in its conviction that no negotiations with Tehran should occur until decisive military action is taken against its nuclear and military facilities – a show of force intended to compel concessions. Netanyahu failed to persuade Trump of this hardline approach, and the US president has increasingly charted his own, more flexible course.
Tensions have also sharpened over the future of Syria. Israel refuses to recognize the country’s new leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa, branding him a former al-Qaeda affiliate and a dangerous actor. Israeli airstrikes on Syrian territory continue, the buffer zone in the Golan Heights remains under Israeli control, and the Druze population has formally been placed under Israeli protection. While Israel promotes the vision of a weak, decentralized Syria, Washington is embracing the opposite: al-Sharaa was invited to meet with Trump in Saudi Arabia, and following those talks, the US signaled its intent to lift sanctions on Damascus. Even more striking was the revelation that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE – previously restrained by US pressure – are now prepared to invest in Syria’s reconstruction, viewing it as both a stabilizing opportunity and a chance to expand their regional influence.
Israeli frustration has been further stoked by Washington’s evolving stance on the Palestinian issue. Despite Israel’s ongoing military operation in Gaza, Trump has increasingly expressed a desire – even a demand – for a resolution to the conflict. His Gaza reconstruction plan, unveiled in February, sent shockwaves through Washington: it proposed the complete depopulation of Palestinians from the enclave and the transformation of the territory into a luxury international resort zone under US control. Not only was this radical proposal never coordinated with Israel, but it also raised fundamental questions about the future of the US-Israel alliance.
To make matters more complex, credible reports have emerged that the US has been engaged in direct negotiations with Hamas, without informing Israel. The recent release of an American citizen, IDF soldier Idan Alexander, who was captured in October 2023, was reportedly achieved through these covert channels – of which the Israeli government only became aware through its own intelligence services.
Against this backdrop, speculation is growing that the White House is seriously considering formally recognizing an independent Palestinian state. Such a move would not be a mere diplomatic gesture – it would reshape the strategic architecture of the Middle East. Should Washington proceed down this path, Israel could find itself in strategic isolation, while the center of regional gravity shifts toward Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Türkiye – countries with which Trump is building pragmatic, mutually beneficial, and business-driven relations.
None of these states demand unconditional support from Washington, meddle in its internal politics, or leverage domestic crises for influence. More importantly, they offer Trump what he values most: investment, trade, strategic partnership based on reciprocal interest, and freedom from ideological constraints.
Thus, a new geopolitical reality is taking shape before our eyes. In this emerging landscape, Donald Trump appears less inclined to view Israel as an indispensable ally and more drawn to politically agile, economically potent, and regionally assertive actors across the Arab world – and Türkiye. If rumors of Palestinian state recognition prove true, it will mark the end of the long-standing era of “special relations” between the US and Israel and signal the dawn of a new chapter in American Middle East policy – one governed not by ideological loyalty, but by unambiguous political and economic rationality.
Murad Sadygzade is President of the Middle East Studies Center, Visiting Lecturer, HSE University (Moscow).
May 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | Israel, Middle East, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, UAE, United States |
Leave a comment
Nayib Bukele may be Palestinian, but the dictatorship he has built in El Salvador is very much made in Israel. From arming his security forces to supplying him with weapons and high-tech surveillance tools, MintPress explores the Israeli influence helping to prop up the man who calls himself “the world’s coolest dictator.”
Arming a Dictatorship
Since Bukele’s ascension to the presidency in 2019, Israeli exports to El Salvador have been rapidly advancing, growing at an annual rate of more than 21%. This increase consists primarily of weapons. Salvadoran forces are well supplied with Israeli hardware. The military and police use the Israeli-made Galil and ARAD 5 rifles, the Uzi submachine gun, numerous Israeli pistols, and ride in AIL Storm and Plasan Yagu armored vehicles.
Some equipment Salvadoran forces use comes free, courtesy of Israeli sources. In 2019, an Israeli NGO, the Jerusalem Foundation (a group that builds illegal settlements on Palestinian land), announced that it would donate $3 million worth of supplies to the Salvadoran police and military.
For others, however, the Bukele administration is paying top dollar, meaning that this relationship is extremely profitable for the high-tech Israeli defense sector.
In 2020, the Salvadoran police paid around $3.4 million for one year’s use of three Israeli spyware products. These tools include GEOLOC, a program that intercepts calls and texts from targeted phones, and Web Tangles, which uses individuals’ social media accounts to build up files on people, including using their photos for facial recognition. A third, Wave Guard Tracer (marketed in some regions as Guardian), tracks users’ movements through the GPS on their phone.
Perhaps the most notorious piece of spyware used, however, is Pegasus, developed by the NSO Group, an outgrowth of the Israeli Defense Forces’ Unit 8200. The app hit the headlines in 2022, when it was revealed that repressive governments the world over had used it to surveil thousands of public figures, including kings, presidents, politicians, activists, and reporters. El Salvador was one of the most heavily penetrated nations. A report from Citizen Lab found that the Bukele administration was using it to secretly monitor dozens of public figures critical of the president, including 22 journalists from the independent outlet El Faro.
Incarceration Nation
Bukele has used these Israeli tools and weapons to crack down on dissent and opposition to his rule. Since 2022, when he declared a State of Exception, suspending rights and civil liberties, he has imprisoned at least 85,000 people, a staggering figure for such a small country. Today, around 2% of the adult population — along with over 3,000 children — languish behind bars in dangerously overcrowded jails.
The most well-known of these is the Terrorism Confinement Center (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT), which is by far and away the largest prison in world history. Built to incarcerate over 40,000 people, it is to this center that the Trump administration has been sending migrants rounded up by ICE. In a meeting with Bukele in the Oval Office, President Trump stated that U.S. nationals would be sent there next.
El Salvador holds vastly more people in prisons per capita than any other country, and conditions are among the worst in the world. Food is sparse, lights are kept on 24 hours a day, and cells are frequently packed with more than 100 occupants. Those incarcerated at CECOT are allowed no contact with the outside world, not even with their families or lawyers.
Often, the first thing a Salvadoran family hears about their disappeared relative is news that he died while incarcerated. Torture is commonplace. Osiris Luna, the director of El Salvador’s prison system, has even been sanctioned by the U.S. government for his role in “gross human rights abuses.”
Bukele has justified the mass imprisonment of his countrymen as a necessary step to break the power of organized gangs and drug cartels. Yet a significant portion of those held are his political opponents. Among those detained are union leaders, politicians, and human rights defenders.
Facing the threat of imprisonment or other punishment, El Faro has moved its operations to neighboring Costa Rica.
A Palestinian Who Loves Israel
Amid the chaos, Bukele has fired tens of thousands of public service workers and reduced taxes on the business community. He has also reoriented El Salvador’s foreign policy from a progressive, anti-imperialist stance to allying itself with right-wing governments around the world, including Israel.
Despite coming from a prominent Palestinian family that emigrated from Jerusalem in the early 20th century, throughout his political career, he has made a point of vocally supporting Israel, its culture, and its foreign policy. As far back as 2015, when he was Mayor of San Salvador, the Israeli Embassy had identified him as a “partner for cooperation.”
Three years later, in February 2018, he visited Israel on a trip organized by Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Tzipi Hotovely, and American Jewish Congress President, Jack Rosen. There, he participated in a security conference attended by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin, and made a public appearance at the Western Wall.
In the wake of the October 7 assault, Bukele voiced his support for Israel and condemnation of Hamas. “As a Salvadoran of Palestinian ancestry, I’m sure the best thing that could happen to the Palestinian people is for Hamas to completely disappear,” he
wrote, describing Hamas as “savage beasts” and comparing them to MS-13, one of El Salvador’s most violent gangs.
El Salvador is home to a large Palestinian population; some 100,000 live in the small country. And yet, the Central American nation is far from a stronghold of support for anti-colonial struggles. Palestinians in El Salvador have generally done very well and entered society’s upper echelons. Bukele is actually the third Palestinian to become president.
Historically, the Latin American business community has sided with conservative or reactionary forces, and the Palestinian diaspora has shied away from supporting resistance movements in the Middle East.
“Bukele’s culture is not so much Palestinian as it is neo-fascist. That’s his culture. So he is going to identify with repressive governments around the world,” Roberto Lovato, a Salvadoran-American writer and professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, told MintPress News.
The country is also home to a large and active evangelical Christian community, for whom Israel’s rise is a key issue. Despite being the son of the country’s most notable imam — one who claimed his son is a practicing Muslim — Bukele has positioned himself as a Christian conservative, and his evangelical supporters say he was chosen by God to rid the nation of gang violence. “I believe in God, in Jesus Christ. I believe in His word, I believe in His word revealed in the Holy Bible,” he said.
Dirty Wars and Dirty Politics
The connections between Israel and El Salvador, however, predate Bukele by decades. During the 1970s and 1980s, the country was a hotspot in the Cold War, and U.S.-backed death squads battled the leftist FMLN rebels. The military regime killed around 75,000 civilians in a dirty war that scars the region to this day. The violence was so extreme and so well-publicized that even the United States sought to distance itself from it. Into that void stepped Israel, providing 83% of El Salvador’s military needs from 1975 to 1979, including napalm. In return, El Salvador moved its embassy to Jerusalem, legitimizing Israel’s claim to the city.
Lovato, a former member of the FMLN, told MintPress that the country was turned into a “laboratory for repression.”
During the Civil War, the U.S. government aligned a whole panoply of different practitioners of torture and mass murder. You had trainers from Taiwan, Israel, and other countries going to El Salvador to train the Salvadoran government to do what they had learned how to do.”
One of the most notable individuals who received Israeli training was Major Roberto D’Aubuisson, leader of a far-right death squad. D’Aubuisson is known to have ordered the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero. Nicknamed “Blowtorch Bob” for his penchant for using the tool on his opponents’ genitals, his death squad is thought to have killed some 30,000 people, many of whom were tortured to death. Thus, it is no stretch to say that El Salvador’s repressive state apparatus has long been sustained by Israeli money, tech, and know-how.
But this is far from an isolated example. Indeed, Israel has supplied weapons and training to repressive governments around the world, honing the skills acquired suppressing the Palestinian population and taking them global.
In Guatemala, Israel sold planes, armored personnel carriers and rifles to the military, and even built them a domestic ammunition factory. General Efraín Ríos Montt thanked Israel for its participation in a coup that brought him to power in 1982, stating that it went so smoothly “because many of our soldiers were trained by Israelis.” Around 300 Israeli advisors worked to train Ríos Montt’s forces into genocidal death squads who systematically killed over 200,000 Mayans. A sign of the deep connections between the two groups is that Ríos Montt’s men began referring to the indigenous Mayans as “Palestinians” during their attacks.
It is a similar story in Colombia, where the country’s most notorious death squads were trained by Israeli operatives, such as General Rafael Eitan. To this day, Colombian police and military make extensive use of Israeli weaponry. So normalized has the Israeli influence become in Colombian society that, in 2011, sitting President Juan Manuel Santos appeared in an advertisement for Israeli mercenary firm Global CST. “They are people with a lot of experience. They have been helping us to work better,” he stated.
Israel also armed and supported the military dictatorships of Chile and Argentina in the 1970s and 1980s, even as the latter explicitly targeted over 1,000 Jews in the largest slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.
In Nicaragua, Israel supplied the Somoza dictatorship, helping it carry out a dirty war. In Rwanda, it sold weapons to the Hutu government as it was carrying out a genocide against the Tutsi population. Israeli weapons were used by Serbia during the Yugoslav civil war in the 1990s. And successive administrations in Tel Aviv also helped sustain the Apartheid government of South Africa, sending it weapons and sharing intelligence with it.
Therefore, it should come as little surprise that Bukele’s administration has sought and established such close ties to the Israeli government. These weapons and techniques, honed on the Palestinian population, are going global, helping a government thousands of miles away crack down on civil liberties. While Bukele — a Palestinian — is very much in charge of El Salvador, it is clear that his dictatorship has a distinct Israeli flavor.
May 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Subjugation - Torture, War Crimes | El Salvador, Human rights, Israel, Latin America |
Leave a comment
The results don’t make sense arithmetically and foreign interference has been confirmed. The country has officially completed its slide into EU protectorate status. Prolific Balkans expert Dr. George Szamuely helps unpack what just happened.
Numbers Don’t Add Up
- Eurosceptic candidate George Simion won 41% in the May 4 first round. EU favorite Nicușor Dan got 21%. In round two, Simion took 46.4%, while Dan got 53.6% – a 155% boost.
- To do so, Dan needed the backing of 87% of the voters who backed neither him or Simion in the first round.
- Neither of the other major first round candidates (Crin Antonescu, 20%, Victor Ponta, 13%) threw their weight behind Dan in the second round. Where did his 30%+ surge in support come from? Unclear.
Fraud in Broad Daylight
Simion has alleged that 1.7 million dead people were on voter rolls, and urged voters to check if any deceased relatives or friends voted via a dedicated WhatsApp contact line.
Diaspora voters cast 1.64 million ballots in the second round of the vote, 660,000 more than round one (which Simion handily won, 61% to Dan’s 25.4%). Simion has alleged some polls were closed or not enough ballots were made available in some areas during the runoff, and manipulation of diaspora voting.
Foreign Meddling Alleged and Confirmed
Specifically, Simion has accused Moldova’s EU lapdog government of “immense fraud” amid reports of Romanian expats voting at 3X the rate they did in round one.
He’s also charged France of meddling using “lots and lots of money and pressure through their ambassador here, and through foreign institutions in order to rob the Romanian people of their votes.”
Telegram CEO Pavel Durov confirmed on Sunday that a request had been made by France to “silence conservative voices” in Romania ahead of the election.
May 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Deception | France, Romania |
Leave a comment
The Office of the Russian Prosecutor General has banned Amnesty International, the London-based non-governmental organization (NGO), accusing it of Russophobia and support for the Ukrainian military.
An official statement on Monday said that while the “organization positions itself as an active champion of human rights throughout the world,” its headquarters in the British capital have turned into a “center for preparing global Russophobic projects, paid for by accomplices of the Kiev regime.”
“Members of the organization support extremist organizations and finance foreign agents’ activities,” the Prosecutor General’s Office claimed.
Amnesty has been actively working toward “increasing military confrontation” since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Russian prosecutors have accused the NGO of whitewashing Ukrainian war crimes, calling for more financial support for Kiev and the economic isolation of Moscow.
Last month, Moscow banned US-based NGO Hope Harbor Society for providing financial support for the Ukrainian military as well as the coordination of anti-Russian protests in the US and other countries.
In early April, the Elton John AIDS Foundation was designated as ‘undesirable’ in Russia after being accused of promoting pro-LGBTQ agenda in the country.
Organizations with such a designation are banned from operating in Russia, and residents or companies may face legal penalties for providing financial or other forms of support to them.
The Russian Justice Ministry currently lists more than 200 such entities, including major Western influence groups such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, the US-based German Marshall Fund, and the pro-NATO Atlantic Council.
May 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | Russia, UK |
Leave a comment
Telegram founder Pavel Durov has claimed that French foreign intelligence chief Nicolas Lerner personally asked him to censor conservatives on his platform ahead of the contentious rerun of Romania’s presidential elections. The Russian-born entrepreneur said he refused the request.
The accusations of foreign meddling first surfaced last year after Romania’s top court annulled the November election results, in which independent right-wing candidate Calin Georgescu came first with 23%. Authorities cited “irregularities” in his campaign, along with intelligence reports alleging Russian interference – claims Moscow has denied. Georgescu was later barred from running again.
On Sunday, pro-EU centrist Nicusor Dan was elected president of Romania. His conservative, Eurosceptic opponent George Simion accused France and Moldova of attempting to sabotage his campaign.
In a post on X on Sunday evening, Durov said he met with Lerner, head of France’s Directorate-General for External Security (DGSE), in Paris. The agency, operating under the Ministry of the Armed Forces, is tasked with gathering intelligence and combating terrorist threats.
“This spring at the Salon des Batailles in the Hotel de Crillon, Nicolas Lerner, head of French intelligence, asked me to ban conservative voices in Romania ahead of elections. I refused,” Durov wrote. “We didn’t block protesters in Russia, Belarus, or Iran. We won’t start doing it in Europe,” he added.
Durov had previously hinted that France asked him to “silence” Romanian conservatives. The French Foreign Ministry rejected the allegations of election meddling as “completely unfounded.”
“France categorically rejects these allegations and calls on everyone to exercise responsibility and respect for Romanian democracy,” the ministry stated, labeling the accusations “a diversionary maneuver” aimed at distracting the public from “the real threats of interference targeting Romania.”
Last year, French authorities charged Durov with facilitating the distribution of child sexual exploitation material and drug trafficking due to alleged moderation failures on Telegram. He was arrested at Paris-Le Bourget Airport in August before being released on €5 million ($5.46 million) bail. Durov, who has denied any wrongdoing, was eventually allowed to leave France in March.
May 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | France, Human rights, Romania |
Leave a comment
Aletho News 