Danish shipping giant Maersk divests from firms linked to Israeli settlements
Press TV – June 25, 2025
Shipping giant Maersk has announced that it will sever business ties with companies linked to the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, citing concerns over complicity in Israel’s genocidal crimes against the Palestinians.
The Danish firm said in a statement on its official website Wednesday that it has tightened its vetting process “in relation to Israeli settlements.”
“Following a recent review of transports related to the West Bank, we further strengthened our screening procedures in relation to Israeli settlements,” read the statement.
It said the company’s decision “addresses only shipments to/from settlements” and is “not about cutting ties with the companies on the OHCHR (the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) list in general but only related to transport to/from Israeli settlements.”
Maersk has not specified the exact businesses or contracts affected, but the OHCHR database includes businesses involved in various activities related to the settlements, such as providing services, equipment, or financial operations.
The firm’s decision follows a months-long campaign led by the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), which accused it of playing a role in Israel’s military supply chain — including the shipment of weapons components.
Weeks earlier, Maersk shareholders voted at the company’s annual general meeting to review the firm’s involvement in arms shipments to the occupied Palestinian territories.
The Palestinian group welcomed the decision, which it said is a “step toward dismantling complicity in occupation and apartheid.”
“This sends a clear message to the global shipping industry: compliance with international law and basic human rights is not optional. Doing business with Israel’s illegal settlements is no longer viable, and the world is watching to see who follows next,” said PYM’s spokeswoman Aisha Nizar.
She called for further action though, arguing that Maersk still transports goods for the Israeli military, including components of its F-35 warplanes.
“Maersk continues to profit from the genocide of our people – regularly shipping F-35 components used to bomb and massacre Palestinians.”
Nizar said the campaign “will continue to build pressure and mobilize people power until Maersk cuts all ties to genocide and ends the transport of weapons and weapons components to Israel.”
In 2024, Spain banned Maersk ships transporting military goods to Israel from using its ports.
The PYM revealed earlier in June how the Danish firm was using the port of Rotterdam as an essential link in, as it said, a “supply chain of death.”
In response to those findings, Maersk has previously said it upholds a strict policy of not shipping weapons or ammunition to active conflict zones.
The PYM urged other logistics and shipping firms to follow suit and cut ties with companies complicit is Israel’s war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Gaza death toll reaches 84,000 far higher than official counts, new study finds
MEMO | June 25, 2025
A new study has found that at least 75,200 Palestinians were killed in Gaza between October 2023 and January 2025 as a direct result of Israel’s military campaign. This figure is almost 40 per cent higher than the death toll reported by the Gaza Ministry of Health (GMoH) for the same period, which stood at approximately 45,650.
The study, Violent and Nonviolent Death Tolls for the Gaza War: New Primary Evidence, present the results from a large-scale household survey the Gaza Mortality Survey (GMS). It is the most comprehensive and scientifically grounded estimate of war-related deaths in the enclave to date. It also estimates 8,540 excess nonviolent deaths, due to starvation, disease, and the collapse of healthcare systems, bringing the combined toll of the war to nearly 84,000 lives lost.
The research was conducted by an international team of scholars: Michael Spagat (Royal Holloway, University of London), Jon Pedersen (independent), Khalil Shikaki (Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research), Michael Robbins (Princeton University), Eran Bendavid (Stanford University), Håvard Hegre (Peace Research Institute Oslo), and Debarati Guha-Sapir (Université Catholique de Louvain).
Based on face-to-face interviews, the study randomly selected 2,000 households across Gaza, representing a population sample of 9,729 individuals. Data were gathered between 30 December 2024 and 5 January 2025, under conditions of extreme violence, displacement, and siege. The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research led the fieldwork.
The survey found that 56.2 per cent of violent deaths were among women, children and the elderly, figures that align closely with GMoH reports and counter claims that the ministry has inflated civilian casualties.
By contrast, the study found the GMoH likely undercounted total fatalities, with the official figure falling below even the lower bound of the study’s 95 per cent confidence interval. In absolute terms, the bottom estimate of 63,600 is still more than 17,000 above the GMoH total.
The researchers took additional steps to mitigate bias and account for the massive displacement of Gaza’s population, including statistical raking to match expected demographic distributions and using mobile tracking and live data uploads for verification. The survey also corrected for under-sampled areas like Northern Gaza and Rafah.
Nonviolent deaths, largely from disease, hunger, and denial of medical care, are often overlooked in conflict tolls, but the GMS sets a precedent by offering a grounded estimate. The study calculated that 8,540 of these were “excess” deaths—deaths that would not have occurred under peacetime conditions. Infants were particularly affected: among 357 children born after the war began, four died, indicating extreme neonatal vulnerability.
The authors say their results contradict narratives that cast doubt on Palestinian casualty reports. They found no evidence to support allegations that GMoH has exaggerated figures, and instead concluded that the ministry’s records are conservative. Furthermore, the demographic profile of the dead—mostly civilians—supports broader human rights findings that Israel’s war in Gaza has disproportionately targeted non-combatants.
This study comes as Israel faces a genocide investigation at the International Court of Justice and mounting scrutiny over its conduct in Gaza. The authors say their work lays the foundation for accurate historical reckoning and accountability.
Yemeni defence minister affirms maritime blockade of Israel to continue
MEMO | June 25, 2025
Advisor to the director of the Moral Guidance Department at the Yemeni Ministry of Defence, Brigadier General Abed Thawr stressed Tuesday that the maritime blockade imposed by the Houthis on Israeli and Israel-bound ships will continue, adding that the recent conflict between Iran and Israel and the subsequent ceasefire, will not affect the group’s support for the Palestinian cause.
“Gaza will remain our cause and our common destiny” he told Al-Resalah Net.
“From 7 October 2023, until now, Yemen has not stopped supporting Gaza politically, militarily, and popularly, because Palestine lives in our hearts, and the battle of Gaza is the battle of all free people,” he added. Thawr stressed that Yemen, under the leadership of its armed forces and revolutionary leadership, will continue to impose a naval and air blockade on the “Zionist entity” and will not allow any ship to pass into the occupied ports, regardless of its nationality or destination.
“The enemy has ignored humanitarian demands for the entry of food and medicine and the opening of the crossings, and therefore the Yemeni response will continue with our missiles and drones”.
Thawr explained that the weekly mass demonstrations in Yemen since the start of the aggression on Gaza in October 2023, are a clear manifestation of the depth of popular affiliation with the Palestinian cause.
“The people of Gaza are our people, their honour is our honour, and we will harness all our military and economic capabilities to support them until their suffering is alleviated and what the occupation has destroyed is rebuilt”.
He also criticised “shameful and humiliating” official Arab positions, stressing that the Yemeni people will not wait for action from subservient governments but will continue to stand with Gaza until its liberation.
“As long as Yemen exists, rest assured that Israel and America will remain besieged in the Red Sea, and that Gaza will never be left alone. Victory is near, God willing, and we will remain faithful to the covenant until the end,” he concluded.
Who Destroyed Four World Trade Center Buildings?
Tales of the American Empire | June 19, 2025
On September 11 2001, FOUR World Trade center buildings in New York were suddenly destroyed. We are told that no one could imagine that terrorists could knock down the two World Trade Center towers, even though Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu predicted this in his 1995 book. He warned the U.S. Congress this may happened unless the United States joined a war to expand Israel by destroying what he called terror states. Even before the smoke cleared on 9-11, the plotters blamed Osama bin Laden to block investigations into their weak official story.
Note: YouTube demonetized this video claiming “violence throughout”, even though there is no graphic violence, just some collapsing buildings often shown on television.
_____________________________________________________
“Bin Laden says he wasn’t behind attacks”; CNN; September 17, 2001; https://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16…
Related Tale: “The Empire’s Fake War on Terror”; 
• The Empire’s Fake War on Terror
Related Tale: “Osama Bin Laden WAS NOT Responsible for 9/11”; • Osama Bin Laden WAS NOT Responsible for 9/11
“U.S. Military Knows Israel Did 9/11 – Dr. Alan Sabrosky”; Augustus Berg; Bitchute; June 30, 2023; https://www.bitchute.com/video/Vsf4v1…
“9/9 and 9/11, 20 Years Later”; Pepe Escobar; Unz.com; September 9, 2021; https://www.unz.com/pescobar/9-9-and-…
Related Tale: “The 1993 FBI Bombing in New York; • The 1993 FBI Bombing in New York
“9/11 Conspiracy Theory Explained in 5 Minutes”; James Corbett; 2022; • 9/11 Conspiracy Theory Explained in 5 Minutes
“”The 9/11 Commission Was A FRAUD” – Curt Weldon EXPOSES CIA Cover-Up, Able Danger & Deleted Evidence”; PBD Podcast; YouTube; May 14, 2025; • “The 9/11 Commission Was A FRAUD” – Curt W…
“Rep. Curt Weldon: It’s Time to Finally Tell the Truth About 9-11”; Tucker Carlson; YouTube; April 14, 2025; • Rep. Curt Weldon: It’s Time to Finally Tel…
IAEA Failed to Protect Iran’s Nuclear Sites From US and Israeli Attacks
Sputnik – 25.06.2025
Iran suspending cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) comes as Tehran realizes that there is simply no benefit on continuing it, Foad Izadi, associate professor at the University of Tehran, tells Sputnik.
“Iranian lawmakers realize that being a member of NPT has no value for Iran. There is no logical reason for Iran to be a member of NPT,” he says.
While attacking nuclear sites, especially those under the IAEA supervision, is illegal under international law, that did not deter Israel and the US from attacking the Iranian nuclear facilities, Izadi points out.
Hence the question: why work with the IAEA at all?
“IAEA has a budget of $35 million, and $22 million out of that $35 million is spent inspecting Iran. So, by suspending the link, Iran is actually saving IAEA money,” Izadi remarks.
He also observes that the IAEA does not inspect Israel because it is not a member and is not a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), hence raising the question whether Iran should withdraw from the NPT too.
“The reason IAEA doesn’t bother with Israel is that Israel is not a member. So if Israel cannot be a member, Iranian officials, Iranian parliament members have decided that Iran cannot be a member, can leave IAEA, can leave NPT, and that’s what they’re planning to do,” he says.
Killing scientists’ families is not a strategy but a moral collapse
Israel’s campaign of assassinations has moved beyond military targets — now it’s wiping out families of scientists in their homes, and calling it strategy.
Iranian nuclear scientist Seyyed Mostafa Sadati-Armaki and his family
By Nadezhda Romanenko | RT | June 24, 2025
The recent revelation that Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Sadati-Armaki was killed along with his entire family – his wife, two daughters, and son – in an Israeli airstrike should stop even hardened strategists in their tracks. This wasn’t just a precision strike. It was an execution of a household.
Sadati-Armaki was not a senior official. He was a mid-level scientist—an engineer working within Iran’s nuclear framework. That role may have made him a target in the logic of modern conflict. But nothing, not even that logic, can justify killing his children in their own home.
This wasn’t an isolated incident. On June 13, at least five other nuclear scientists were killed in Israeli strikes across Tehran: Fereydoon Abbasi, Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, Abdolhamid Minouchehr, Ahmadreza Zolfaghari Daryani, and Seyed Amir Hossein Feghhi. Their credentials tied them to Iran’s nuclear program. All had played some role, technical or administrative, in Iran’s nuclear development. None were combatants. Most were academics. Some had already retired from state positions.
Crucially, they weren’t alone. In multiple reported cases, family members died alongside them. Wives. Daughters. The daughter of a senior official.
These were not errant missiles landing in crowded urban spaces. These were targeted strikes on homes, in residential areas, at night, when families were together. This isn’t the fog of war. It is its deliberate weaponization. The children didn’t make enrichment policy. The spouses didn’t oversee uranium labs. But they died because of proximity—because they were related to someone deemed dangerous.
To call this “collateral damage” is cowardice. When decision-makers approve a strike on a home, knowing who sleeps inside, the outcome is no longer an accident. It is a choice.
Some argue that in an asymmetrical war, deterrence must be personal. But this is not deterrence—it’s liquidation. It suggests that no civilian life adjacent to state infrastructure is worth preserving. It sends the message that not even scientists’ families will be spared, as if moral limits are luxuries we can no longer afford.
This is not a defense of Iran’s nuclear posture. It is a defense of the basic principle that families—children—cannot be combatants. If we abandon that line, we are not winning anything. We are declaring that fear is stronger than law, that vengeance is smarter than diplomacy.
Killing scientists’ families doesn’t dismantle programs. It doesn’t prevent future threats. It only makes peace more remote and retaliation more likely. What we normalize now, others will imitate later.
This is not strength. It is strategic and moral collapse. And if this is where warfare is headed, then everyone—regardless of nationality—should be deeply, urgently afraid.
Why Israel’s Blitzkrieg Tactics Failed to Break Iran
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 24.06.2025
Following Israel’s latest strikes on Iran, which targeted not just military figures but entire families, Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi sharply criticizes Tel Aviv’s actions and explained why they failed to achieve regime change.
Brutal Tactics
Marandi calls the assault a clear act of terror with echoes of Nazi-style tactics:
“Not only did they murder senior military officials in their Blitzkrieg attack, similar to the Nazi Germany attack, but they murdered families, neighbors, and in cases they murdered everyone in buildings,” Marandi tells Sputnik.
Dangerous Leadership
According to Marandi, Israel’s leadership is operating with no moral boundaries:
“The [Benjamin] Netanyahu regime is one of the most dangerous regimes in contemporary human history.”
And the issue runs deeper than one man: “They are ethno-supremacists and they consider others as inferior human beings.”
Iran Didn’t Break
Despite psychological warfare and direct threats, Iranian military leadership held firm:
“They reportedly called 20 Iranian generals, demanding surrender videos — or their families would be killed. NOT ONE complied.”
This, he says, revealed the strength of Iran’s armed forces: “It shows how dedicated they are.”
Failed Mission
Marandi concludes that Israel’s goals were not only brutal, but also unsuccessful. “They wanted to bring about regime change, but they failed utterly. This attack only exposed them to the world.”
“It was Netanyahu begging for a ceasefire.”
Moscow, beware: Germany just discovered the joys of illegal war
By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | June 24, 2025
Forget the fog of war. Even in war, and sometimes especially in war, some things are exceedingly clear. Regarding the so-called ‘Hamas-Israel War’, for instance, it is obvious that in reality it is not a war at all but a genocide, namely the Gaza Genocide, carried out by Israel against the Palestinians whose unbroken resistance will be the stuff of legends, and of history too.
Likewise, in the case of Israel’s current assault on Iran – really, of course, a combined US-Israeli attack from the get-go – there is no room for doubt that it is criminal and a “blatant act of aggression,” as multiple experts in international law agree. That’s because in essence, Israel is not acting with a UN mandate – which it would not have received – or in self-defense.
The legal basis for this compelling assessment is not complex and there is no room for good-faith debate: Israel’s attack violates Article 2 (4) of the foundational UN Charter, which is recognized universally as jus cogens, that is, a binding norm: no pick and choose.
The few generally accepted, narrowly defined potential exceptions to this article’s comprehensive prohibition on the use of force, such as an erroneous incursion, certain operations at sea, or a rescue of nationals, clearly do not apply. The Israeli onslaught also does not have the blessing of the UN Security Council, and it cannot possibly count as lawful self-defense under Article 51.
So far, so simple. If anyone tries to make this look complicated by flagrantly misapplying and abusing the notion of a ‘preemptive strike’, you are dealing with Israeli or Israel-Lobby disinformation and propaganda. That too is anything but surprising.
Yet what is more puzzling than the above is the response of the governments, and often the mainstream media of the West, to this clearly criminal Israeli attack. After years of invoking international law to go after Russia, it turns out that the same leaders and talking heads will tie themselves into 5-D pretzels to let Israel get away with whatever Israel feels like doing on any given day.
This is not really news either, of course: Western ‘elites’, with Washington always in the lead, have behaved no better when serving as accomplices in Israel’s Gaza Genocide. But there is something peculiar and noteworthy about how exactly some important Western politicians and their media and ‘think tank’ experts spin the attack on Iran.
Take, for instance, Germany. Its chancellor Friedrich Merz has gone out of his way to loudly endorse the assault on Iran. He has even exposed himself to ridicule and some – if far too little – criticism by employing revoltingly indecent language. Calling Israel’s actions “dirty work” (it sounds even worse in the original German: “Drecksarbeit”) that must be done and for which we all should be grateful, Merz has revealed his double racism: As a German and a historian, I can only say that a German leader praising Jews for doing “our” dirty work is, to put it very mildly, extremely boorish. Defining the criminal killing of Iranians as that “dirty work” adds a very nasty “colonial” flavor reminiscent of say, Kaiser Wilhelm II gloating over massacring Chinese during the so-called Boxer Rebellion.
While Merz has been clumsy enough to couch his obnoxious ideas in equally obnoxious language, he has by no means been alone. All too many prestigious German publications, such as the staid Frankfurter Zeitung or the also important Merkur newspaper, have hurried to either simply agree with Merz or at least to excuse and relativize his vile statement. In addition, rather overworked all-purpose ‘experts’, such as the reliably conformist and rarara-russophobic Christian Mölling, have used their perma-perk in Germany’s streamlined talk shows to cynically diminish international law and help dress up Israel’s newest crime as so necessary that it trumps all law anyhow.
Mölling was self-unaware enough to openly argue that some countries (read: Israel) can’t afford the “luxury” of accepting “normative limits” and that international law, anyhow, might be “protecting the wrong ones” (read: Iran). It’s breathtakingly brazen and intellectually primitive, and also historically speaking, very German in the worst sense: If we or our friends (read: Israel) feel constrained by international law, then that’s a problem not for us or our friends but for international law.
And now, let’s take a step back and think for a moment like a German who was not a conformist intellectual mediocrity: Enlightenment giant Immanuel Kant. For those with ears to hear and brains to process, Kant has taught us that reason and ethics demand that the justifications for our actions ought to be generalizable in good conscience. In short, when we act, we should be able to show that we are acting according to a fair and reasonable rule.
Let’s generalize into such a rule, then, what German leader Friedrich Merz has just said and what all too many German mainstream representatives agree with: A country (here: Israel) that feels sufficiently afraid (as judged by that country) of another country (here: Iran) has a right (that trumps international law) to attack that other country without provocation and even during ongoing negotiations.
Interesting. Consider that German elites have been fanning war hysteria relentlessly. Not a day seems to go by without some German general, spy, or politician warning their fellow Germans that Russia is at least likely, really almost certain, to attack within the next five years or so. Evidence: zero.
Indeed? So, if we are all supposed to be so afraid of Russia in Germany, does that now mean that according to Merzian logic we may as well one day launch a preemptive strike on Moscow? After all, we could then say we felt threatened and our military and the intelligence services were telling us that the Russians were coming. And moreover, we’d probably claim that we, the Germans, were proudly doing the ‘Drecksarbeit’ for all of NATO (minus, most likely, the US). And isn’t doing the ‘Drecksarbeit’ now officially a good thing in Germany, again?
Absurd, you say? Yes, absolutely. Exactly as absurd as Israel’s pretexts for attacking Iran. And yet those have been officially endorsed by a German chancellor, including self-revealing dirty language. Let’s hope that Moscow does not take seriously what Merz says. Because if Moscow did take it seriously, then by Merzian logic, it should feel very threatened indeed by Berlin – and again by Merzian logic, who knows where that might lead.
Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.
The Iran war is Trump’s unconditional surrender to Israel
Sidelining US intelligence, Trump and top principals rely on Israeli fabrications to promote war on Iran.
By Aaron Maté | June 21, 2025
[Note: this article has been updated following the US bombing of Iran]
Since his election in 2016, Donald Trump’s political opponents have portrayed him as a dangerous, unstable fabulist doing the bidding of a malign, nuclear-armed foreign power.
Having returned to the White House this year, Trump is proving his detractors correct on all counts but one: the location on the map. The rogue state that he’s colluding with — at great peril to the planet — is not Russia, as his most vocal detractors alleged, but Israel.
Israel’s June 13th attack on Iran sabotaged the then-ongoing talks on a new nuclear deal with the United States, and Trump has gone to unprecedented lengths to support its aggression. Trump undercut his own Secretary of State’s claim that Israel had undertaken “unilateral action” by acknowledging that “we knew everything” in advance of what he called a “very successful attack.” Administration officials then disclosed that Trump had previously authorized giving Israel intelligence support for the bombing. Trump then called on Tehran’s 9.8 million residents to evacuate, mused about killing Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and declared that “we” – meaning Israel – “have complete and total control of the skies over Iran.”
After Iran rejected his demand for “unconditional surrender”, Trump imposed a new deadline of two weeks, only to break it three days later by ordering a US military attack on three Iranian nuclear energy sites, including the deeply buried mountain complex Fordo, which he quickly hailed as a “great success.” Just as with Trump’s diplomacy with Iran, his two-week deadline turns out to have been a ruse whose “goal was to create a situation when everyone wasn’t expecting it,” a senior administration official said.
To wage war on Iran, Trump and his allies have employed the traditional Iraq WMD playbook of ignoring or manipulating the available evidence to fear-monger about a foreign state marked for regime change. Unlike the Iraq war, where the fraudulent case for invading was mostly concocted in-house, Trump has outsourced the job to Israel, while not even pretending to care about public opinion or Congressional approval.
Back in March, the US intelligence community assessed that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon” and “has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program… suspended in 2003.” According to US officials who spoke to the New York Times, “[t]hat assessment has not changed.” Moreover, the US has found that “not only was Iran not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon, it was also up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver one,” CNN reports, citing four sources.
Whereas Dick Cheney and company went through the trouble of nudging subordinates to fabricate intelligence, including via torture, Trump does not care about seeking their imprimatur. “[M]y intelligence community is wrong,” Trump told reporters on Friday. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt insisted that “Iran has all that it needs to achieve a nuclear weapon,” and, if authorized by Ayatollah Khamenei, “it would take a couple weeks to complete the production of that weapon.” In White House meetings, CIA chief John Ratcliffe has argued that Iran is close to a nuclear bomb and that claiming otherwise “would be similar to saying football players who have fought their way to the one-yard line don’t want to score a touchdown,” according to one US official who spoke to CBS News. (After the Iraq war, a “Slam dunk” basketball analogy is no longer available).
If Trump’s intelligence community is “wrong,” who does he think is right? As US officials told the New York Times, the claims from Trump and his circle “echoed material provided by Mossad,” Israel’s intelligence agency. And whereas some in the government, undoubtedly those close to Trump, “find the Israeli estimate credible”, others believe that “Israeli assessments have been colored by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s desire to gain American support for his military campaign against Iran.” Moreover, according to multiple officials, “[n]one of the new assessments on the timeline to get a bomb are based on newly collected intelligence,” but instead on “new analysis of existing work.” In other words, Trump is sidelining his own intelligence community to trust a “new analysis” that is based on no new information, just the manipulation of a foreign government.
Trump’s disdain for his own agencies is a particular slight to intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard. “I don’t care what she said,” Trump said this week, referring to Gabbard’s presentation of the US intelligence consensus on Iran in March. “I think they [Iran] were very close to having it.”
Rather than defend the agencies she oversees – and the record she earned challenging previous US-driven regime change deceptions — Gabbard has bent the knee to Trump, and Israel by extension. In a social media post, Gabbard chided “the dishonest media” for taking her March testimony “out of context.” The US, Gabbard now claimed, “has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly.” Gabbard also shared video of that March testimony, without addressing the contradictory fact that it does not include any mention of her newfound claim that Iran has the capability to produce a nuclear bomb “within weeks to months.”
Gabbard is engaging in disingenuous wordplay. If Israel tells America that Iran “can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks”, then yes, American intelligence now “has” that intelligence. That doesn’t mean it is true, or that American intelligence believes it, which it does not. A US official familiar with the available record on Iran tells me that there is no US intelligence assessment concluding that Iran is “weeks” away from building a nuclear weapon. Gabbard is only saying, therefore, that the US intelligence community has received “intelligence” from Israel, without mentioning that the IC does not actually endorse it.
Moreover, pretend for a moment that the Israeli claim is correct. Gabbard’s caveat of “if they decide to finalize” is an acknowledgment that Iran has not decided to build a nuclear weapon. That’s because Iran has said it does not want one, and is willing to commit to that in a binding agreement — the one they were negotiating with the US until Trump and Israel sabotaged it, and not for the first time. In fact, as US intelligence officials have also predicted, Trump’s bombing now increases the likelihood that Iran will pursue the nuclear bomb that it has long foresworn. Iran claims to have moved enriched uranium stockpiles prior to the US bombing, which preserves its capacity to weaponize.
Trump and Israel insisted, in the president’s words, on “unconditional surrender”: capitulation to maximalist US-Israeli demands that Iran end its uranium enrichment program, which it is entitled to have under the Non-Proliferation Treaty; and that it limit its arsenal of missiles. In other words, Trump and Netanyahu demanded that Iran agree to abandon its sovereignty and right to self-defense just as it is under attack from US-backed Israeli aggression; and all while US-backed Israeli mass murder in Gaza and annexation of the West Bank continues unimpeded.
Iranian officials did not surrender. Trump, by contrast, cannot say the same. By enabling its bombing campaign, parroting its deceptions, and now going to war against Iran on its behalf, Trump has already offered an unconditional surrender to Israel — a betrayal that grows more dangerous by the day.
Europe bears ‘share of the blame’ for Israel’s attack on Iran – Russia
RT | June 24, 2025
European leaders pressured the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to issue a negative assessment of Iran and “bear a share of the blame” for Israel’s attack on the Islamic Republic, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.
Israel attacked Iran shortly after the UN nuclear watchdog declared Tehran to be in breach of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), despite Iran’s claims its uranium enrichment program is peaceful. The US joined the Jewish state’s air campaign to strike Tehran’s nuclear sites shortly before Washington announced a ceasefire had been reached between Israel and Iran.
Speaking at the Primakov Forums meeting in Moscow on Tuesday, Lavrov accused European leaders of pressuring the IAEA’s director, General Rafael Grossi, into publishing an accusatory report on Iran.
“The Europeans have taken a purely neocolonial position… They were actively preparing Grossi so that he would put the most ambiguously negative formulations into his report,” the top diplomat said.
The UK, France, Germany, and later, the US ran with the IAEA assessment and pushed a resolution through the IAEA Board of Governors that condemned Iran for allegedly violating the NPT, he added.
“A few days later, Israel launched its attacks,” Lavrov said.
The Europeans bear a share of the blame for this happening and for the fact that such attacks were carried out.
This highlights that the West “exerts very serious influence on international organizations, and has even privatized them to an extent,” Lavrov said, adding that most such bodies are no longer “guided by the requirement of impartiality.”
Weeks before the escalation, Reuters cited anonymous diplomats as saying that Western powers were pressuring the IAEA to declare Tehran in breach of its NPT obligations, at the height of US-Iran nuclear talks.
Tehran has since accused Grossi of taking sides and turning a blind eye to Israel’s attacks on Iran’s nuclear energy facilities. Multiple IAEA resolutions state that any use of force against peaceful nuclear facilities is illegal under international law.
Moscow has condemned Israeli and US attacks against Iran as “illegitimate.” The recent ceasefire, announced by US President Donald Trump on Tuesday, “can and should be welcomed,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Moscow hopes that it “proves to be sustainable,” he added.
In significant policy shift, Trump says China can keep buying oil from Iran
Press TV – June 24, 2025
US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that China can keep buying oil from Iran, marking a significant shift from his so-called maximum pressure campaign.
His remarks came hours after the Israeli regime was forced to halt its aggression against the Islamic Republic as Trump showed reluctance in further American involvement in the war.
Trump claimed in a social media post that he had worked out a “ceasefire” between Iran and Israel 12 days after Israel launched an unprovoked war on Iran, prompting a powerful Iranian response that inflicted heavy blows on the regime and its military infrastructure.
“China can now continue to purchase Oil from Iran,” Trump said in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social.
“Hopefully, they will be purchasing plenty from the US, also. It was my Great Honor to make this happen!” he added.
The development came more than a month after Trump warned China that it would face harsh penalties if it continued to buy oil from Iran.
The US president had signed a presidential memorandum on February 4 ordering a campaign of maximum pressure on Iran.
The US Treasury has imposed several rounds of sanctions on Chinese companies and tankers that it says have been involved in the Iranian oil trade.
China accounts for a bulk of oil purchases from Iran as estimates suggest that private refiners in the country receive an average of more than 1.5 million barrels per day of oil from Iranian suppliers.
Beijing has repeatedly indicated that it does not recognize unilateral sanctions imposed by the US on other countries.
Trump’s latest announcement on Iranian oil also comes amid concerns that his sanctions on Chinese imports of oil from Iran could push up international oil prices and lead to consumer dissatisfaction inside the US.
Trump used the Israeli war against Iran to order airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities early on Sunday. Iran responded by firing missiles at a key US air base in Qatar late on Monday.
Featured Video
Can the U.S. Afford to Annihilate Iran?
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Sanctions, War and the Policy of Dual Containment
By SASAN FAYAZMANESH | March 17, 2008
It is now nearly three decades since the Unites States adopted the policy of dual containment of Iran and Iraq. While much has been written about the containment of Iraq, there has been very little in-depth analysis of this policy when it comes to Iran. In a book that is going to be released on March 31, 2008, entitled The United States and Iran: Sanctions, Wars and the Policy of Dual Containment (Routledge), I attempt to address this shortcoming by investigating when and why the US policy of containment of Iran came about, how it evolved, and where it stands today.[1] To the extent that Israel has been involved in US policy making, the study will also include the role that Israel has played in the containment of Iran. Also, since the fate of Iran has been inextricably linked to that of Iraq, occasionally the investigation will overlap with the containment of Iraq.
The policy of dual containment of Iran and Iraq originated during the Carter Administration, but it was not until the Clinton Administration that the expression “dual containment” became popular. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Can the U.S. Afford to Annihilate Iran? /Seyed M. Marandi
- Elmo Sold mRNA Jabs to Your Toddler. Now They Are “Off-Label.”
- British state targets Palestine Action with yet another crooked trial
- Americans are paying the price to preserve Israel’s nuclear hegemony
- Resistance factions are necessary to ensure a permanent US Iraq withdrawal
- How Israel destabilizes the Middle East: Denying sovereignty and the right to exist
- Europe’s Establishment Is Embracing War – and Losing Voters
- NATO chief advocates war of aggression
- No Vote, No Representation, No State: Democracy, Israeli Style
- Zionist Bought Senate Blocks Information About American Citizens Killed By Israel
- If Americans Knew
- Israeli Soldiers Abduct At Least 22 Across Occupied West Bank
- Eight Palestinians Killed in Israeli Attacks on Gaza
- Israeli former leaders and security chiefs threaten legal action over ‘Jewish terrorism’
- Israel map in LA Times ad includes all land from the river to the sea
- Inside Lebanon’s 200-page dossier on Israeli war crimes
- Flydubai, genocide, settler violence, Trump abuse of power to deport – Daily Update
- Counting Antisemitic Incidents: What the ADL Audit Reveals — and Obscures
- Mamdani releases plan to combat antisemitism and hate crimes in New York City
- Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Publish Letter to the American People
- DMFI launches $1 million ad campaign supporting Virginia’s Elaine Luria
- No Tricks Zone
- Green Energy Debacle: German Expert Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Warns Of Severe Economic And Social Consequences
- Two More Paleo Reconstructions Affirm Meters-Higher Sea Levels Across Ireland, Brazil 7000-6000 Years Ago
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
- 2025 Nature Paper Claiming Worsening Global Drought Gets RETRACTED …Heavily Flawed
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
- Energy Crisis: Germany Enters Heating Season With Historically Low Gas Reserve Fill Levels
- New Study: The Antarctic Ice Sheet Gained Mass From 2020-2024 Due To Staggering Snow And Ice Accumulation
- Study: Ocean Heating Rates From Thousands Of Years Ago ‘Dwarf’ Modern Ocean Heating Rates
