Evidence indicates federal agencies must have been involved in Trump’s attempted assassination
By Uriel Araujo | July 30, 2024
It has been reported that Donald Trump’s would-be assassin, Thomas Matthew Crooks, was seen carrying a rangefinder (a device employed to measure distances to remote objects, often used by hunters and military) and was deemed a suspect over 90 minutes before shooting. This has been revealed by newly released text messages exchanged between members of the Beaver County Emergency Service Unit. The messages are clear enough: “he know you guys are up there”, “I did see him with a range finder”. Pictures of Crooks were also shared with Secret Service. Forbes has called this a “possible security lapse”, but in the overall context, such sounds almost like a euphemism. It is far from being the only “lapse” in an increasingly strange case.
One may remember that, as I wrote, according to the FBI, during the Trump rally the would-be assassin was spotted on the roof, holding a weapon, no less than 20 minutes before the shooting, with civilians in the crowd alerting the authorities – and bizarrely nothing was done. Moreover, CNN reported that “forensic analysis suggests that as many as three weapons were fired at the Trump rally.” Stephen Bryen, security expert and former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, also takes the possibility of there being at least a second shooter seriously and calls for a “solid FBI investigation with Congressional oversight” on the issue.
On top of all of that, let us consider the following points hyperlinked below – for the sake of brevity I shall not elaborate too much on each, but shall merely present them:
1. The Oversight Project (OP) employed mobile ad analysis in a geo-location investigation and claims to have thusly “tracked devices that regularly visited both Crooks’s home and place of work and followed them.” It leads straight to Washington DC – to a building that happens to house both the Gallery mall and offices of the FBI, of all places: “someone who regularly visited Crooks home and work also visited a building in Washington, DC located in Gallery Place. This is in the same vicinity of a FBI office on June 26, 2023.”
Of course, this is a busy downtown area in DC, and geolocation cannot pinpoint someone to the most precise address. But still, given the context, the coincidence is enough to raise eyebrows. It does not necessarily mean something more sinister: it could just mean that federal agents were monitoring Crooks before the incident – neither scenario looks good, though (the latter would only make the security breach look even stranger). The OP is a pro-“government transparency” initiative by the Heritage Foundation that uses Freedom of Information Act requests.
2. The FBI, after finally having broken into the shooter’s phone device, claims to have found no leads pertaining to motives. The Bureau also claimed that encrypted messaging applications are a “real challenge”. The espionage capabilities of the US federal agencies regarding telecommunications are well known, which makes this claim hard to swallow.
3. Crooks even flew a drone over the rally’s perimeter, on the day of the attempted assassination, and he might have used a ladder to climb the roof.
5. Before the shooter went up, two local officers inside a building overlooking the same roof left their posts, a short while before Crooks started firing.
6. The SS admitted having repeatedly denied requests for extra security at Trump rallies.
All of the above is very hard to explain in terms of a mere “security lapse”. In fact, such a hypothesis sounds even absurd. Had any of that taken place in any other country in the world, the whole international media would be asking questions about authorities being involved or a cover-up. In the US political culture, however, one usually cries “conspiracy theory” to shut down discussion. It remains to be seen whether this will work in this case, though.
If one looks at the timeline, a man (Crooks) was seen acting suspiciously within the Trump’s rally perimeter (60 minutes before the incident); was then spotted walking around with a rangefinder, a telescope-like device (40 minutes before); was later spotted by Secret Service on the roof (20 minutes before), and was even seen by civilians attending the rally who pointed and shouted “he’s on the roof, he’s got a gun” while Trump gave his speech (2 minutes before); and even pointed his rifle at an officer (30 seconds before). Then, of course he fired eight shots at Trump, hurting the former President’s ear (only because Trump tilted his head to read something on a screen) and hitting three civilians – one of them died. Crooks was finally killed by a SS counter-sniper. Before all of this, at no point was he questioned, asked to leave, detained or shot – having been shot down only after attacking the former President.
It is no wonder then the US Secret Service itself is being investigated by Homeland Security, with a probe looking into all these security lapses; and it is no wonder SS Director Kimberly Cheatle finally resigned after appearing under subpoena in front of the House Oversight Committee. As I’ve written, the Secret Service is increasingly under suspicion, amid its several contradictions.
The hard truth is that, considering all of that, some Secret Service role in an attempted assassination is the most likely scenario so far. During a congressional hearing last week, the now-resigned SS Director was asked: “Was there a stand-down order, Ms. Cheatle? Was there a conspiracy to kill President?” It certainly seems so, considering all the above. The Director may have resigned, but the crisis remains – and this is not the only scandal haunting Washington before the upcoming elections.
With an incumbent President whose senility and mental decline has been covered up by the White House’s inner circle, it is even unclear who has been governing the country thus far – with some talking about a “ triumvirate” (referring to Biden’s close advisers Bruce Reed, Mike Donilon, and Steve Ricchetti). One can thereby forecast political instability and turmoil within the United States, including possibly espionage agencies infighting, with unclear and unpredictable consequences foreign policy-wise.
Did an Israeli Iron Dome missile cause the Majdal Shams massacre?
By Ali Halawi | Al Mayadeen | July 28, 2024
The Majdal Shams strike resulted in the tragic loss of 12 lives, all natives of the occupied Golan. What insights can we recover from the evidence gathered following yesterday’s incident?
Israeli regime authorities claimed on Saturday afternoon that Hezbollah launched a rocket at the occupied town of Majdal Shams, killing twelve civilians, including 10 children, in the process.
The Israeli military command even specified the type of rocket artillery shell used in the alleged attack, which it claimed was the Falaq-1 rocket.
On the other hand, the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon – Hezbollah fully denied any involvement and responsibility for a deadly strike on the village in the Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan.
So where does the truth lie?
A brief analysis of the impact site and the video capturing the moment of the strike dismantles the Israeli narrative, bolstering Hezbollah’s account.
A few points must be made clear before analyzing the moment of the strike on Majdal Shams and the aftermath caused by the explosion.
First, Israeli officials said the Israeli occupation forces were able to identify the shell used in the attack as the Falaq-1 rocket, reportedly confirming their suspicions.
The Falaq-1 rocket is a rocket artillery shell with the following specifications:
- 240 mm caliber
- 1320 mm length
- Estimated 10 km range
- Maximum flight ceiling of 3.5 km
- 50 kg high explosive warhead
- Solid-propellant rocket
Second, high-explosive warheads usually contain a mixture of explosives alongside components that would act as shrapnel propelled by the pressure caused by the aforementioned explosives. Following the moment of impact with the surface, a crater should be formed.
The size of this crater varies according to several factors, which include the mass of the explosives, the pressure generated by the warhead into the ground, and the surface’s composition, among other elements.
Third, the Falaq rocket exhausts the solid propellant less than two seconds after being fired.
Israeli Iron Dome interceptors record multiple failures since October
Another important nuance that would aid Hezbollah’s denial of involvement is the failure of Iron Dome interceptors, Tamir surface-to-air missiles, on several occasions in the past months.
This includes a crash of an Iron Dome interceptor in Tel Aviv in early December 2023 and a fire caused by an Israeli interceptor in occupied al-Jalil following a failed interception of a Hezbollah drone on July 25, 2024.
There are many such incidents, with some being captured live on camera, including an event in which an Israeli Tamir missile struck a hospital in Tel Aviv on November 6, 2023.
Several technical issues related to an Iron Dome battery could result in a catastrophic interception failure. These issues include a malfunctioning engagement radar, a faulty radar seeker, a defective self-detonation sensor, and a compromised motor, among other potential problems. The most dangerous of these are faults in self-detonating sensors, which leave operators unable to destroy rogue surface-to-air missiles.
Did an Israeli Tamir missile impact Majdal Shams?
It is highly probable that faults in a surface-to-air missile fired from an Iron Dome launcher just behind Majdal Shams caused the grave massacre.
Majdal Shams, which is among the towns and cities occupied by “Israel” in 1967, hosts a vast majority of Arab Syrian Druze and a minority of Israeli settlers. The town and other similar demographics, where natives are significantly represented, have not come under the direct fire of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon since October 8, 2023.
Although the Resistance has launched highly precise weapons such as an anti-tank guided missile and drones at Israeli military positions in towns such as Arab al-Aramshe, it never fired unguided rocket artillery weapons at these towns.
Specifically, Majdal Shams has never come under an attack by Hezbollah, throughout the nearly 300 days of intense confrontations near the Lebanese-Palestinian border.
The Resistance has also not been shy of taking responsibility for mishaps in the past, such as an incident in the 2006 war on Lebanon when a rocket launched by Hezbollah fighters impacted a home in occupied al-Nasirah.
The attack took place on July 19, 2006, and the Secretary-General of Hezbollah Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah took the nearest opportunity amid the ongoing war to apologize to the family.
“To the family that was hit in al-Nasirah — on my behalf and my brothers’, I apologize to this family,” he said.
“Some events like that happen. In any event, those who were killed in al-Nasirah, we consider them martyrs for Palestine and martyrs for the nation. I pay my condolences to them.”
A corresponding crater
As for evidence collected from the impact site, the crater formed by the projectile is around 2 meters wide and a few centimeters deep. This indicates that the warhead that detonated in the area is far less than 50 kg and closer to the 10 kg range.

In comparison, a crater formed by a Falaq-1 rocket in Kiryat Shmona ripped through cement and caused extensive damage to nearby infrastructure as seen in this video.
The Falaq-1 rocket is among Hezbollah’s heaviest rocket artillery shells that can be fired from multiple rocket launchers and which can cause extensive damage to targets.
On the other hand, the crater seen in Majdal Shams could be more closely attributed to a Tamir missile.
The possibility that Hezbollah used a smaller caliber munition to conduct the attack is improbable, as it was Israeli authorities who claimed that the munition used in the attack was a Falaq-1 rocket.
Large flames produced by liquid propellant
Another aspect to examine is the relatively large amount of combustion that occurred as a result of the impact on the football field.
High-explosive warheads generally do not produce large fireballs upon detonation. Instead, they create a powerful blast wave and intense fragmentation. The explosion of an HE warhead primarily generates heat, shock waves, and shrapnel rather than a visible fireball. A large-sized and visible fireball is typically associated with the combustion of fuel, such as that found in rocket engines or fuel tanks.
As seen in this footage, the projectile produced a large fireball.
A Tamir missile launched from a nearby position is likely to contain a substantial amount of fuel, as the air defense rocket was designed to fly for around 70 km. This means that the majority of the fuel meant for the missile’s flight after take-off detonated and produced the fireball seen in the video.
Despite Israeli assertions of a Hezbollah attack using a Falaq-1 rocket, substantial analysis points towards a malfunctioning Israeli Tamir interceptor missile as the more plausible cause of the explosion. The discrepancies in crater size, the nature of the explosion, and Hezbollah’s historical targeting patterns all support this alternative explanation. The true story behind the Majdal Shams explosion remains shrouded, but the evidence presented here offers a compelling case for reconsidering the initial narrative.
Harris claims support of Palestinian rights, sends IOF weapons: DFLP
Al Mayadeen | July 27, 2024
The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine responded to the US Vice President’s statement regarding Palestinian rights, saying “There is nothing new about such statements, the lesson remains in implementation.”
Vice President Kamala Harris had previously discussed the Palestinian people’s rights to liberation, self-determination, and security, in a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In a statement, the DFLP compared Harris’ words to those of the US presidents that came before her.
“Barack Obama, in a visit to Cairo at the beginning of his term as president, claimed that Palestinian Statehood was part of US national security.
Before him was Bush Jr., who vowed to establish a Palestinian State until he concluded his presidency in 2008 with a brutal war on the Gaza Strip via Ehud Olmert’s Israeli government.
Biden also vowed to instate the two-state solution but rapidly backed down before Netanyahu’s fascist government, which rejected the establishment of a Palestinian State. Biden evaded the issue saying there is more than one model for a Palestinian state, hinting at self-administrative rule for our people,” which he considered to be an Israeli-American model of the so-called two-state solution.
The Democratic Front further blasted Harris, noting that while she speaks of Palestinian liberation and self-determination, the US military continues to supply the Israeli occupation forces with weapons to commit massacres against Palestinians and transform the entire Gaza Strip into a murder zone using Israeli-American war machines.
Amid theatrics about Gaza, Harris starts campaign with lies: Hamas
Izzat al-Risheq, a member of the political bureau of Hamas, considered Kamala Harris’ pretensions about her concerns and sorrow regarding the humanitarian situation and human suffering in Gaza to be yet another American lie.
He reiterated that the United States could have ended the war and blocked its military, security, political, and intelligence support to “Israel’ and its occupation forces if it wanted to.
Al-Risheq also affirmed that the presidential candidate and vice president kickstarted her presidential campaign with fabricated lies, reminding her that Gaza’s martyrs are not just “deaths”, but innocent civilians, elderly, women, children, and refugees, killed by the “Zionazi army” with American decisions, weapons, and political cover.
Harris “disregards the human rights she pretends to protect, and the Resistance’s right to confront an occupier protected by international law,” he said, adding that her vision was biased toward the Israeli occupation and opposed the people of Palestine in Gaza.
This comes after Harris convened with Netanyahu and emphasized her rock-solid support for “Israel”.
Leaked: Israel attempted to obstruct US lawsuit against Pegasus spyware
Press TV – July 25, 2024
Israel has gone to great lengths to obstruct a high-stakes US lawsuit that could potentially expose highly confidential information regarding the regime’s Pegasus spyware, one of the world’s most notorious hacking tools, leaked files suggest.
Israeli officials confiscated documents related to the Pegasus spyware from its manufacturer, NSO Group, in a bid to prevent the company from complying with demands from WhatsApp in a US court to provide information about the intrusive technology, said the British media on Thursday.
These documents indicate that these seizures were part of an unusual legal tactic devised by the Israeli regime to prevent the disclosure of details about Pegasus, which Tel Aviv feared could lead to significant diplomatic and security repercussions for the regime.
Pegasus enables NSO clients to secretly install hidden software on smartphones, allowing them to extract messages and photos, record calls, and activate microphones covertly. NSO’s clients have included both authoritarian regimes and democratic nations, and the technology has been implicated in human rights abuses worldwide.
NSO has sold its spyware – known as Pegasus – to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Hungary and India among others.
The spyware also allows its users to monitor conversations, text messages, photos and location, and even encrypted messaging apps such as Signal and WhatsApp. Pegasus can turn phones into remotely operated listening devices.
Since late 2019, NSO has been embroiled in a lawsuit in the US filed by WhatsApp, alleging that the Israeli firm exploited a vulnerability in the messaging service to target over 1,400 of its users across 20 countries within two weeks. NSO rejects the allegations.
The seizure of files and computers from NSO’s offices in July 2020, kept secret until now by a strict gag order issued by an Israeli court, sheds new light on the close relationship between Israel and NSO, and the shared interests of the privately owned surveillance company and the country’s security establishment.
The removal of files in July 2020 occurred after talks between Israeli officials and NSO about how to respond to WhatsApp’s demands for NSO to disclose internal documents regarding its spyware, prompting questions about potential coordination to withhold certain information from US legal proceedings.
At one point, NSO’s lawyer, Rod Rosenstein, a former US deputy attorney general during the Donald Trump administration, reportedly asked one of Israel’s US attorneys whether the Israeli regime would intervene to assist in the legal dispute with WhatsApp.
Earlier this month, WhatsApp accused NSO of failing to fulfill its responsibilities to provide internal documents as part of the legal discovery process. This process aims to help WhatsApp gather information crucial for its case and reveal unprecedented details about how NSO’s government clients have utilized Pegasus.
Nevertheless, the covert involvement of the Israeli regime has impeded WhatsApp’s efforts to compel NSO to provide crucial information. Recently, WhatsApp’s lawyers informed the US court that NSO has “only produced 17 internal documents of its own.”
Both Israel and NSO anticipated expansive demands from WhatsApp for confidential internal company documents, including lists of its clients.
As the discovery process became imminent in the early part of 2020, NSO considered requesting a “blocking order” from the Israeli regime. This order would prevent NSO from disclosing specific information to WhatsApp. A memo outlining this proposal was shared with Israel’s justice ministry in April of that year.
Tel Aviv’s actions seem to have significantly affected the case. NSO has contended that its ability to engage in the discovery process has been constrained by several legal restrictions in Israel.
Earlier this month, WhatsApp’s lawyers told the court they had not yet received any documents relevant to Pegasus, accusing NSO of a “continued refusal to meaningfully participate in discovery.”
The US government blacklisted the Israeli company in 2021 for its sale of hacking tools to repressive regimes.
FBI accusing Russia to ‘divert attention’ from its failures – Moscow
RT | July 25, 2024
The FBI is using a supposed ‘threat’ to American democracy from Russia as a diversion to draw public attention away from the bureau’s own failures, Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov claimed on Thursday.
He was responding to allegations made by FBI Director Christopher Wray, who claimed before Congress on Wednesday that Moscow had been attempting to interfere in the US “election cycle after election cycle,” in particular, during the current race for the White House.
“We assess that the Russian government continues to want to influence and in various ways interfere with our democracy, with our electoral process,” Wray told lawmakers, claiming that investigators had recently uncovered a “significant disruption of a generative AI-enhanced social media” of Russian origin, which was “designed to be an influence operation.”
Antonov dismissed Wray’s allegations, describing them as “yet another unsuccessful example of blame-shifting.” He said this was a policy that is often utilized by both the FBI director and other American officials.
“These are obviously yet more attempts to play the ‘Russian card’ to justify their own failures,” he stated, adding that “it is understandable” that representatives of the US administration “want to divert the attention of ordinary citizens from their mistakes and the numerous internal contradictions in America.”
“We flatly reject insinuations against Russia. Our country has never interfered in democratic processes. Moscow has always respected and will always respect the choice of the American people.”
Antonov suggested that, in order to find those responsible for the problems within the US, Wray and other Washington officials “should look at their reflection in the mirror.”
Wray’s testimony on Wednesday was largely focused on the investigation into the assassination attempt on former US President and Republican nominee for this year’s election, Donald Trump. The attempt on Trump’s life during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 13 caused public outcry, with Republicans lambasting the US Secret Service for failing to protect the presidential nominee. Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle was forced to resign earlier this week, having admitted that Trump’s attempted assassination was “the most significant operational failure at the Secret Service in decades.”
Wray is not the first Washington official to make allegations of Russian interference in the US electoral process. During the 2016 and 2020 elections, US intelligence agencies repeatedly claimed that Moscow had deployed hackers and used disinformation to affect the vote in favor of Trump. Earlier this month, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) alleged that Russia had launched a “whole-of-government” effort “to shape electoral outcomes” in this year’s election to turn public opinion against President Joe Biden. None of the claims made in previous years have been substantiated.
Human Rights Watch Report on October 7 accused of bias, Here’s why
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | July 23, 2024
On July 17th, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a 236-page report that accused Hamas and other Palestinian Resistance groups of committing war crimes on October 7th. However, the report has significant shortcomings, including a heavy reliance on Israeli sources and forensic evidence based on analogies of information provided by the infamous ZAKA rescue service, known for fabricating crime scenes and disseminating various propaganda hoaxes.
Despite its length and the new details it brings to light on the events of October 7 during the Hamas-led Al-Aqsa Flood offensive, the new HRW report is perhaps the most biased international investigation so far, and does not make mention of the ‘Hannibal Directive’ and “Israel’s” role in killing its own non-combatants on that day.
Given the report’s extensive nature, with over 800 footnotes, it’s impossible to cover every aspect in a single article. However, it’s important to examine some areas where it falls short.
Dealing with claims that HRW was biased
To begin with, Sari Bashi, the Israeli Program Director for the report and co-founder of the “Gisha- Legal Center for Freedom of Movement,” which is funded by Zionist sources such as the “New Israel Fund“, stated the following on X:
“This is the most comprehensive account of October 7 by an independent international organization and concludes that Hamas-led attacks against civilians in Israel rise to the level of crimes against humanity. We need accountability and civilian protection. Now.”
The methodology of the report is perhaps the most telling part, from which we can decipher how HRW reached its conclusions. Many of these conclusions do not hold up to scrutiny or, at the very least, demand further answers.
In their methodology section, HRW notes that it interviewed “94 survivors and witnesses from the October 7 assault”, which suggests a comprehensive picture of what occurred across “19 kibbutzim and five moshavim (cooperative communities), the cities of Sderot and Ofakim, two music festivals, and a beach party” that they noted in their overview. However, they admit that they were only able to actually interview survivors from the Moshav Pri Gan, Moshav Yachini, and the Psyduck music festival sites – just three out of 24 locations mentioned in their summary of events.
The report goes on to state that for its actual forensic information, HRW “spoke to two medical experts hired by the Israeli government to examine the remains collected by ZAKA (see below) and provide forensic advice.” They further note that “following October 7, some ZAKA members provided information to the media that proved unfounded”, which is a major understatement. The head of the “Search and Rescue” service has repeatedly peddled debunked lies, as ZAKA produced false claim after false claim, ranging from grotesque stories of rape, sexualized torture, babies strewn on clothing lines, to the infamous “40 beheaded babies” lie.
Despite this, HRW interviewed 10 ZAKA members who were all first responders on October 7 and claimed that it only used independently verifiable information. However, it admits that the two experts they spoke to that were tasked with examining the forensic evidence provided by ZAKA, were both hired by the Israeli regime directly.
Without going through every detail in their methodology, it consists of interviews with Israeli journalists, ZAKA members, an Israeli soldier, a range of experts without specifying who they were exactly, in addition to some interviews with Palestinian citizens of “Israel” and Palestinians in Gaza. “Most of those interviewed were Jewish Israelis, but we also interviewed Palestinians from Gaza, Palestinian citizens of “Israel”, and foreign workers from Nepal, Thailand, and the Philippines. Interviews were primarily conducted in Hebrew with the assistance of interpreters, and in Arabic, English, Spanish, and Thai”, the report states.
Then there is the fact that the HRW was prevented by the Israeli authorities from entering any other site than Kibbutz Be’eri, where they were not given unrestricted access, meaning that their ability to actually inspect would have been restricted. In the segment of the HRW report on Kibbutz Be’eri, they cite survivor testimonies and build a narrative about what occurred there, without bothering to mention the fact that the Hannibal Directive was triggered there.
In one case, at Yossi Cohen’s home in Kibbutz Be’eri, where the Israeli military opened fire with light arms and then tank fire, killing 13 Israelis, the account is completely one-sided and omits key information that is readily available online. It mentions a key witness, Yasmin Porat, who survived the battle between Hamas fighters and the Israeli military. While the report says that Porat “briefly spoke to Human Rights Watch and confirmed these events, albeit in less detail“, this comes off as an attempt at providing a linguistic loophole in order to provide cover to the fact that Porat did not actually confirm the precise characterisation of events presented by HRW.
In reality, Yasmin Porat was lambasted after a number of appearances she made on Israeli television, where she said that during hours of being kept under Hamas captivity “they did not abuse us. They treated us very humanely,” adding that “they give us something to drink here and there. When they see we are nervous they calm us down. It was very frightening but no one treated us violently. Luckily nothing happened to me like what I heard in the media.” Porat also said that a Palestinian fighter spoke to her in Hebrew in order to calm her down and said “‘Look at me well, we’re not going to kill you. We want to take you to Gaza. We are not going to kill you. So be calm, you’re not going to die.’ That’s what he told me, in those words.” Porat lost her husband on October 7 and undoubtedly endured significant trauma, which is why her testimony was so powerful at the time.
Porat did not attempt to justify the actions of Hamas, but she presented a completely different picture to the one depicted in the HRW report, which is not at all acknowledged. If anything, the way the report deals with this specific incident is evidently omitting important details.
Then we have the allegations of a premeditated mass rape campaign, which the Israeli regime claims was carried out on the orders of Hamas that day. The report, in its section titled “Crimes Involving Acts of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence”, admitted the following:
“Human Rights Watch was not able to gather verifiable information through interviews with survivors of or witnesses to rape during the assault on October 7. Human Rights Watch requested access to information on sexual and gender-based violence in the possession of the Israeli government, but this request was not granted.”
Although this is a massive blow to the Israeli narrative about a mass rape campaign, they did claim that “forced nudity, and the posting without consent of sexualized images on social media”, but provided no in-depth information and simply stated that it came to these conclusions after “interviewing first responders, and experts on sexual violence who provided information about the context, and reviewing images captured during the assault”. It did not name who these experts and first responders were, however, we can reasonably assume from the information presented on methodology that ZAKA and Israelis were the bulk of those sources. The photographic evidence aspect is also not clearly explained or detailed, which does not enable us to further inspect such claims.
This segment seems, however, to rely heavily on a report by the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, Pramila Patten, which concluded that there is “reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 October attacks in multiple locations across Gaza periphery” despite admitting no conclusive evidence. This report was made at the request of the Israeli regime and did not claim to be investigative in nature, however, it did reveal the below-mentioned issues:
“At least two of the allegations of sexual violence previously reported were determined by the mission team to be unfounded, due to either new superseding information or inconsistency in the information gathered, including first responder testimonies, photographic evidence, and other information. These included the allegation of a pregnant woman whose womb had reportedly been ripped open before she was killed, with her fetus stabbed while still inside her. Another such account was the interpretation initially made of the body of a girl found separated from the rest of her family, naked from the waist down. It was determined by the mission team that the crime scene had been altered by a bomb squad and the bodies moved, explaining the separation of the body of the girl from the rest of her family. Allegations of objects found inserted in female genital organs also could not be verified by the mission team due in large part to the limited availability and low quality of imagery.”
In addition to this, the HRW report notes that they viewed and analyzed hundreds of videos and photos from that day, most of which were from Telegram channels and have long been available to the public. These only provide snapshots of what went on and are no way conclusive.
On top of this, there was no analysis, investigation, or even mention of “Israel’s” triggering of the Hannibal Directive at numerous sites that day, which has now been confirmed as per sources cited by the Israeli daily Haaretz. Right here, this is the biggest red flag that indicates bias and debunks the idea that this report was in any way comprehensive, as it completely left out the role of Israeli forces in killing non-combatants that day. The most recent UN report which focused heavily on October 7, released on June 12 under a Human Rights Council resolution, mentions the Hannibal Directive and reports of Israeli forces killing their own people, making it a lot more balanced than the HRW report.
Overall, if we look at the examples noted above, the claim that this report is unbiased and presents a comprehensive view of the situation is false.
AIPAC, the leading Israeli lobby group, and its role in subversion of US democracy
By David Miller | Press TV | July 23, 2024
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is the most famous and equally notorious Israeli lobby group in the world. But how important is it really?
Some argue that its influence has been exaggerated and it can at best influence American policies at the margins, while others say it wields considerable clout in US power corridors.
Many of these arguments come from the political left like the one published in Mother Jones, the US leftist magazine, or the one from the former stalwart of the Palestinian cause, Christopher Hitchens, or even the one by Novara Media, a British “leftist” website.
In it, David Wearing presents his argument in these words:
AIPAC may best be seen as performing a disciplinary function within US politics. One can certainly argue that US support for Israel is made somewhat firmer given AIPAC’s role, and these marginal factors matter. But they are still marginal.
Certainly, the Zionist movement is keen to downplay its influence. A report in the Tablet: “How Influential Is AIPAC? Less Than Beer Sellers, Public Accountants, and Toyota” states:
The way AIPAC is talked about, you’d think they’d be a lobbying juggernaut, surely one of the largest in the nation’s capital. Wrong…:
Between 1998 and 2018, AIPAC didn’t make a dent in the Center for Responsive Politics list of the top-spending lobbying groups. In 2018, total pro-Israel lobbying spending was around $5 million, of which AIPAC accounted for $3.5 million.
In contrast, Native American casinos spent around $22 million that year. By Tablet’s count, AIPAC was the 147th highest-ranked entity in terms of lobbying spending in 2018.
This is an attempt to pretend that the influence of the Zionist movement is much less than suggested by observers.
However, based on our findings, we can present these facts:
- Taking the figure disclosed to the lobbying regulator as if that was all AIPAC spends on lobbying is profoundly mistaken. Though it disclosed only $2.7 million lobby expenditure in 2022, its actual total expenditure was £79.1 million.
- In addition, AIPAC controls another nonprofit, the American Israel Education Foundation. It discloses nothing to the regulator, yet had a 2022 expenditure of a further $44.6 million.
- When we add campaign contributions the figures rise significantly. Donations by AIPAC’s Political Action Committee (PAC for short) and its new Super PAC, the United Democracy Project, in the most recent period (2024) total $17.4 million and $31.5 million respectively. It’s worth noting that none of this was donated by AIPAC itself. This adds to donations it has raised from others. The United Democracy Project is the third largest Superpac in the US in terms of 2024 expenditure, according to Open Secrets, the US lobby watchdog. This easily outstrips all corporate-related Superpacs.
- Looking more widely at the Israel lobby in general declared lobbying expenditure by the lobby in 2018 was $7 million not “around $5 million” as stated by the Tablet. The figure for 2022 was $5.4 million, with the following groups making significant declarations: Anti-Defamation League ($340,000), Christians United for Israel ($240,000), Foundation for Defense of Democracies ($180,000), J Street ($640,000), Jewish Federations of North America ($893,000), Republican Jewish Coalition ($320,000), Zionist Organisation of America ($160,000). But of course, their actual budget/expenditure is much higher than the narrow specific lobbying disclosure data.
However, taking figures the lobby narrowly conceives are woefully inadequate as it does not include money spent by Israeli firms or by foreign agents registered with the US Federal government’s Foreign Agents Registration Act office.
- $6.3 million was spent in 2022 by Israeli firms including arms firms Elbit ($770,000), Rafael ($680,000), Israel Aerospace Industries ($446,000), and phone hacking firm Cellebrite ($440,000).
- $16 million in the same year was spent by registered foreign agents of Israel including the regime itself, the World Zionist Organisation ($4.2 million), the Jewish Agency ($9.5 million), and the phone hacking firm NSO Group ($1.5 million).
But even that pales in comparison to data compiled by the Israellobby.org website.
It collates data on Zionist groups providing subsidies to the Zionist entity (including illegal settlements and the occupation forces) and lobbying and education.
It shows a total annual budget of £3.6 billion as long ago as 2012, rising to an estimated £6.3 billion in 2020. These figures do not include the data above on Israeli firms or foreign agents.
However extensive this data is (the best available source on the extent of the economic basis of the Zionist movement), it does not include the following:
- The American Zionist Movement is the official US affiliate of the World Zionist Organisation. It has 46 members. Of these, only 13 are included in the Israellobby.org data.
- The many branches of Chabad-Lubavitch in the US. Chabad is an extreme, genocidal ultra Zionist Hasidic sect. Two Chabad-Lubavitch foundations are included in the data, but according to Lubavitch official figures, which almost certainly underestimate its full reach there are some 1,274 Chabad-Lubavitch groups in the US, (by far the largest number anywhere in the world). Internal Revenue Service data on Chabad-Lubavitch lists 1,313 separate groups in the US.
- Virtually none of the other Hasidic and Haredi groups in the US are included in the data. These groups are overwhelmingly ultra-Zionist, though some refuse to allow their young men to serve in the occupation forces and the Satmar appears to remain anti-Zionist.
- Lastly and perhaps of most significance, the non-profit Foundations which funds many of the groups above, of which there are many hundreds, are excluded. These are Zionist family foundations or Zionist community foundations, including the following well-known examples: Adelson Family Foundation, Allegheny Foundation, Anchorage Charitable Fund, Castle Rock Foundation, Earhart Foundation, John M. Olin Foundation, Klarman Family Foundation, Paul E. Singer Foundation, Smith Richardson Foundation, Sarah Scaife Foundation, Scaife Family Foundation, The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, William Rosenwald Family Fund.
There is hardly any research on the depth and extent of the Zionist penetration of US society which is cognizant of this data.
It’s time to dig deeper and reveal the actual spending power and reach of the lobby.
Turning back to AIPAC, it has a deserved reputation as the most powerful Israeli lobby group in the US. However, a key Zionist talking point is the claim that it is not so powerful.
AIPAC was created by Isiah Kenen a contractor for the Zionist regime in 1963. It was initially called the American Zionist Council. Two months after the American Zionist Council was ordered to register as a foreign agent, Kenen incorporated AIPAC which did not register as a foreign agent, though it is.
One element of AIPAC activities not well understood is its role in spending millions every year ferrying Israeli settlers for eight-day junkets.
The trips are organized through a cutout called the American Israel Education Fund, a charitable organization founded by AIPAC, from which it borrows its offices, board members, and even part of its logo. Like other tax-exempt nonprofits, AIEF must file a Form 990 every year with the Internal Revenue Service, but donors are redacted from the public version.
Recently, an unredacted tax filing for 2019 was obtained by The Intercept. It revealed that the financiers are a clutch of large foundations and nonprofits, some of which are family-run, which also offer funds to other genocidal Zionist groups.
They include foundations associated with the following families, Koret, Swartz, Schusterman and Singer.
The role of AIPAC in campaign contributions is also poorly understood. In November 2023, it was reported that AIPAC was “airing attack ads and beginning to back primary opponents to challenge Congress members who are not voting for or supporting Israel’s war on Gaza.”
According to the report in the Guardian :
Although AIPAC’s roots trace back to the 1950s, the group spent decades focusing most of its attention on lobbying members of Congress – only getting directly involved in races in the past few years. In late 2021, AIPAC announced the formation of a political action committee, known as AIPAC Pac, and a Super Pac, the United Democracy Project, to get more directly involved in congressional campaigns.
The groups hit the ground running in the 2022 midterms, spending nearly $50m across the election cycle. Aipac Pac boasts that it supported 365 pro-Israel candidates from both parties in 2022, while critics condemned the group’s endorsement of dozens of Republicans who voted against certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election.
The Guardian reported that A group of Super Pacs and dark-money non-profits – most notably groups such as the United Democracy Project ($31,679,020) and the Democratic Majority for Israel ($35,000) – as well as other PACs (AIPAC PAC ($1,491,025) tied to Israeli interests contributed about significantly to US campaigns during the last cycle, according to Open Secrets, a campaign finance watchdog.
Open Secrets data show that this amounts to some $58.4 million in the past year.
In the spring of this year, it was revealed that AIPAC had a $100 million war chest for the upcoming election cycle.
AIPAC’s Super Pac is amusingly named the United Democracy Project. It spends targeted funds on lawmakers who challenge any pro-Israel policy including the mildly critical Squad of Democrat representatives and also Libertarian Republicans such as Thomas Massie who has voted against military aid to Israel.
It was Massie who revealed in an interview with Tucker Carlson that AIPAC appoints handlers for each Congress person.
Here is his description: ”It’s like your babysitter. Your AIPAC babysitter who is always talking to you for AIPAC. They’re probably a constituent in your district, but they are, you know, firmly embedded in AIPAC.
In November 2022, AIPAC claimed that “more than 95% of AIPAC-backed candidates won their election last night! Being pro-Israel is good policy and good politics!”
In July 2024, AIPAC claimed “So far this cycle, all 90 AIPAC-endorsed Democrats have won their primary election”
When all of this data and activity is considered we can see that AIPAC is much more of a player than is admitted in those views from the right and left who minimize its importance.
AIPAC is part of a complex network of lobby groups which collectively can be described as the “Israel lobby”. Further, the lobby is itself only a smallish part of the much larger Zionist movement. It is this which needs to be assessed in all its complexity.
When we do that a more rounded and complex account emerges. The role of AIPAC cannot be considered outside its role in the wonder movement because its activities including raising funds and deploying them through other groups and organizations are a core element of its strategy.
Reducing AIPAC to its lobbying disclosure expenditure or its total budget cannot capture its significance in the movement, let alone the significance of the Zionist movement in total.
Hence, AIPAC, and the rest of the Zionist movement, must be stopped.
David Miller is the producer and co-host of Press TV’s weekly Palestine Declassified show. He was sacked from Bristol University in October 2021 over his Palestine advocacy.
“Tear Up Texas”: FBI Encouraged a 2015 Shooting & Did Nothing to Stop It
Remembering the Curtis Culwell Center attack in which an undercover FBI agent encouraged shooters, followed them to the attack site, and didn’t stop them.
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse™ | July 23, 2024
The most plausible hypothesis for the July 13, 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania is that Thomas Matthew Crooks was already on the radar of the Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security, or the FBI in the days before he went to the event with his rifle.
Most likely, he indulged in some online chatter with others whose true identity he himself did not know. In the course of this chatter, he identified himself as being passionately interested in shooting rifles and frequently practiced firing his rifle at a range—a representation that could be easily verified. A good investigator would also examine the hypothesis that he somehow—probably in veiled language—indicated he was interested in shooting Donald Trump.
Instead of discouraging this fantasy, someone on the other side of the chat encouraged it, and encouraged him to attend the scheduled rally in Butler to take a shot at Trump. Again, the language was probably veiled—something along the lines of, “I hear there’ll be a nice shooting range at the Butler Show Grounds this Saturday between the American Glass Research building and the stage.”
Contemplating this hypothesis reminded me of the Curtis Culwell Center attack in Garland, Texas on May 3, 2015. The perpetrators had been monitored by the FBI for years, as they were suspected of consorting with Islamic terrorists and probably planning a terrorist attack on American soil.
The would-be shooters, who lived in Phoenix, Arizona, thought they were exchanging text messages with a fellow Islamic terrorists. In fact they were texting with an undercover FBI agent who encouraged them to attack an event scheduled at the Curtis Culwell Center. As the agent memorably put it in a text message, “Tear Up Texas.”
The two perpetrators then loaded their car in Phoenix and hit the road to Arlington. Again, unbeknownst to them, they were being tracked the entire time. On the day of the convention, they parked by the Curtis Culwell Center, got out of their car with their loaded weapons, and walked towards the entrance—with the FBI undercover agent following right behind them.
While the undercover agent did nothing to intervene, a local security guard saw the armed men approaching, and he took decisive action, using his own sidearm to neutralize the men before they could enter the convention center with their semi-automatic rifles and innumerable loaded magazines. Had the security guard not intervened, God knows how many people in the building would have been shot.
Not long after the incident, it was discovered that the undercover FBI agent had encouraged the shooters, followed them to the event, and done nothing to intervene. The security guard—who was shot and wounded but survived his injury—sued the FBI and Department of Justice, which dodged liability when their declaration of sovereign immunity was upheld in court.
Readers who are interested in learning more about the Curtis Culwell Center attack may check out this 2018 news report on the lawsuit.
A proper investigation of the Butler, Pennsylvania assassination attempt on Donald Trump would start with the hypothetical proposition at least one federal law enforcement agent knew about Thomas Matthew Crooks before he attended the rally. Crooks drove to the rally without encountering any intervention and then climbed onto the roof of the American Glass Research building with his rifle—again with no law enforcement intervening to stop him.
Congressional Incompetence in Its Trump-Shooting Investigation
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | July 23, 2024
Members of Congress are besides themselves over the testimony of Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle regarding the near-assassination of former president Trump. They are upset that Cheatle was unable to provide them with adequate explanations as to what appears to be incompetence at best and willful blindness, conscious indifference, or complicity at worst on the part of the Secret Service.
But if incompetence is the right explanation, it is matched by the incompetence of Congress in its supposed investigation into the shooting. After all, Cheatle wasn’t even there. Therefore, anything to which she testifies is necessarily based on nothing more than what others have told her. How is that type of testimony supposed to get to the bottom of what actually happened? It’s not.
If Congress really wants to determine what happened and why, it should subpoena every single Secret Service agent and every single police officer on duty that day. Take the sworn testimony of all of them. Don’t let any of them sit inside the chamber and listen to what other witnesses are saying. Then put all that sworn testimony together and see if there are any contractions, anomalies, etc. If there are, then follow up on them.
That’s the only way for Congress to determine whether the facts and circumstances go beyond incompetence and cross the line into conscious indifference, willful blindness, or complicity.
If this was a deep-state operation, as some are alleging, it would be extremely difficult to pierce it, especially since the purported shooter, Thomas Crooks, is dead and, therefore, can’t talk. After decades of study and practice, the deep state is very good at state-sponsored assassinations and, equally important, at keeping its role in such assassinations secret.
Recall the CIA’s assassination manual from 1953 that was uncovered in the 1990s. It not only provided the means of assassination, it also provided the means of conducting such assassinations without anyone figuring out that it was the CIA that was behind the assassination. Getting away with the assassination is as important as committing it.
Thus, ordinarily the only way that a deep-state assassination is going to be pierced is with a fierce investigation that specifically makes the deep state a target of investigation. Simply having a big-publicized political circus in which some head of a federal agency is skewered and maybe even forced to resign will not pierce a deep-state assassination. It will just garner big publicity and political satisfaction.
The big reason why Congress or any other federal agency will never aggressively investigate whether the Trump shooting went beyond incompetence is that nobody within the federal government can afford to suggest that the Secret Service might have crossed the line from incompetence to willful blindness, conscious indifference, or complicity. That’s because they would then be acknowledging that such a thing is possible here in the United States. Nobody within the federal government or even the mainstream press wants to go down that road.
We saw this phenomenon in the JFK assassination. In the immediate aftermath of the assassination and afterward, the standard question among U.S. officials and the mainstream press was: Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone or in a conspiracy? Hardly anyone asked: Could this be a highly sophisticated national-security state regime-change operation in which Oswald, who was now dead, was being made a patsy? That’s because it was considered to be simply inconceivable that such a thing could happen here in the United States. That type of thing only happens in foreign countries.
Thus, hardly anyone thought it strange, for example, that the military took control over JKF’s autopsy or that former CIA Director Allan Dulles, who JFK had fired after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, was appointed to the commission that was ostensibly intended to investigate the crime.
In the 1970s, the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, in response to public pressure, reopened the investigation into the JFK assassination. It hired a fierce and honest criminal prosecutor from Pennsylvania, Richard Sprague, to lead the investigation. Sprague specifically targeted the CIA for investigation. He refused to comply with the CIA’s demand that Sprague sign a secrecy agreement, responding that he, not the CIA, was in charge of the investigation. He also forced a CIA official named David Atlee Phillips to testify regarding Oswald’s trip to Mexico City. Sprague caught Phillips red-handed committing perjury and recommended that he be indicted for perjury.
Sprague soon learned the difficulty in making the deep state a target of investigation in a state-sponsored assassination. He was run out of town before he could get to first base. He was replaced by a lawyer named Robert Blakey, who followed a deferential policy toward the CIA.
My prediction? Cheatle will be made a sacrificial lamb and be forced to resign, and the Trump shooting will be blamed on incompetence. The congressional “investigation” into the shooting will be over. Most everyone in Washington, D.C., will be satisfied.
NEW STUDIES SHOW PEDIATRIC “BEST PRACTICES” NOT BASED IN SCIENCE
The Highwire | July 18, 2024
Learning nothing from the opioid crisis, research misconduct and regulatory failure has opened the door to widespread public harm from new classes of weight loss and trans medicine drugs classes. Also, a new kind of scientific methodology is being brought to the forefront, driven by AI.
Scott Ritter: Biden’s Election Withdrawal Shows Who is Actually Running America

Sputnik – July 22, 2024
The timing of Joe Biden’s sudden withdrawal from the presidential race raises questions, argues former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-weapons inspector Scott Ritter.
“There’s no doubt that Joe Biden is unfit to be president of the United States. No doubt. But here’s the question. If he’s unfit to run as the candidate of the Democratic Party, why did they put him up?” former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-weapons inspector Scott Ritter said, noting that signs of Biden’s frailty were visible during the G7 summit in Italy last month.
According to him, the fact that Biden is unfit to be the POTUS but was still allowed to “function” begets the question: who is really in charge in the United States?
“Who’s running America? Because it’s not Joe Biden. We don’t know who. It’s an unelected group of handlers who are drawn from what I guess we can call the establishment. Some people might refer to it as the deep state. And these are the people who are calling the shots,” Ritter stated, noting that “the critical decisions of governance” this group makes are made “for the American people, but not necessarily on behalf of the American people.”
He describes the 2024 presidential election in the US as “a test of American democracy” and a “contest between established elites that are found in the Democratic Party and this surge of populism in the form of Donald Trump who is taking control of the Republican Party.”
Yet while Americans are normally allowed to “have a say in the outcome” of this process, the Democratic Party and the “elites known and unknown” now opted to meddle in this process and “will be selecting who their candidate will be for the presidency in the 2024 elections,” which is “not the way it’s supposed to be,” he noted.
“America is in a crisis, a crisis of democracy, a crisis of identity. And it doesn’t look like we have a solution because for the most part, the American people have been confused and misled and manipulated by the mainstream media into somehow thinking that this is normal,” Ritter lamented.
