Tom Barrack’s imperial tantrum in Beirut: When entitlement speaks
By Tala Alayli | Al Mayadeen | August 26, 2025
Thomas Barrack, Washington’s special envoy, breezed into Beirut today oozing of the usual arrogance, condescension, and the smug self-righteousness that American officials have long mistaken for diplomacy. In what he must have thought was a moment of wit, Barrack dismissed the Lebanese press as “uncivilized,” even likening journalists’ actions to those of animals.
It is telling, of course, that the representative of a country responsible for the post-1991 siege that killed half a million Iraqi children, which former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright described as “worth it”, turning Afghanistan into an endless graveyard, and underwriting the daily massacres in Gaza, would accuse others of lacking civility.
American officials seem to have mastered this peculiar art: bombing entire nations by morning, then lecturing those nations on decorum by afternoon.
Barrack’s performance is not a slip of the tongue, but a look into the imperial psyche. To him, like most of Western society, Lebanon is not a sovereign country with a free press and a tradition of political debate; it is a space to be managed, where we are expected to smile politely while being lectured on democracy and modernity. Arabs are not clever, competent, and equal human beings, but mindless herd societies that must be subjugated.
And what is civility either way? Surely not the baby-killing machine in Gaza, which has been endlessly praised by the United States, the same administration calling us animalistic. Perhaps the definition must be de-Americanized to make sense.
Besides, it is almost comical that Thomas Barrack, a man who once found himself charged with embezzlement and caged in his house on arrest in the United States with a monitor chained to his ankle, now parades around Lebanon as a moral authority. This is the same envoy whose career has been shadowed by allegations of corruption and shady financial dealings.
If anything, Barrack’s legal entanglements reveal a pattern: entitlement is not just a political habit for American officials, it is a personal one. He walks into Lebanon not as a humbled man marked by scandal, but as an imperial messenger who believes that his past sins are irrelevant, that he is owed respect simply because he carries Washington’s seal.
The irony is maddening: an envoy representing an empire that thrives on plunder, brutality, and deceit, scolding journalists for their supposed lack of manners.
Then leave!
Perhaps the most infuriating was Barrack’s sense of self-importance. “Do you think this is fun for us? Do you think it is economically beneficial for Morgan and I to be here, putting up with this insanity? If that’s not how you’d like to operate, we’re gone.”
Does Barrack think it is fun for us to sit and witness his condescension? Or watch “Israel” obliterate our homes with US-made weapons? Or listen to American-Israeli discourse about how to make the region more agreeable to those who want to overtake our resources, our lands, our lives?
Also, if billions in military aid to the mega-maniacal occupiers is economically beneficial, then surely a trip to Beirut at the US’s own discretion is not a bank-shatterer.
If journalists doing their jobs was slightly too overwhelming for a diplomat who is certainly used to press conferences as such, then said diplomat must rethink his competence.
And if decorum and mutual respect are an overload of work, then leave!
What is it about humiliation?
Yet what is most shameful is not only Barrack’s insult. Such condescension is expected from American envoys. His companion, Morgan Ortagus, once strutted into the Baabda Palace and cheerfully applauded the terrorist pager operation that left thousands of citizens, including children, wounded and blind. “Israel”-born Amos Hochstein once got his afternoon coffee from a Starbucks at a moment of peak boycott and gladly allowed a desperate Lebanese bourgeois citizen to pay.
Equally shameful is the silence that followed. A room full of journalists, veterans of a region where press freedom is under constant attack, sat in silence. Not one voice rose to challenge him.
The Lebanese press corps prides itself on resilience. In a country where journalists have been assassinated, bombed, and silenced, surviving in the profession is no small feat. Yet resilience without dignity is hollow.
What good is endurance if it does not sharpen your spine? What meaning does the word “journalist” carry if you cannot call power to account, especially when that power spits in your face?
Thomas Barrack was a temporary guest; he’s on our land, in our home. When the Trump administration leaves office, he will go back to being an irrelevant nobody. He should not have been allowed to shame the people of this country into silence.
By letting his words pass unchecked, today’s journalists failed not only themselves but the very people they claim to represent. Journalism is not stenography. It is not about politely recording the musings of foreign officials, no matter how insulting. It is about holding those officials accountable, about asking uncomfortable questions, about reminding every diplomat and politician that they are guests in this country, not its overlords.
Dignity, unfortunately, cannot be faked. It is not something anyone can claim retroactively, in editorials or late-night debates. It must be demonstrated in the moment. And this is a disease Lebanon has been plagued with. Only a few understand the true meaning of dignity, while others embarrassingly fail to embody it.
Let us be brutally honest: the American envoy insulted Lebanese journalists to their faces and walked away unscathed. Tomorrow, he will fly back to Washington or to whichever embassy compound he calls home, and he will report that Lebanon is pliable, that it can be insulted with impunity, that this country is still a stage for American entitlement.
Potato Potato, Dignity… Delusion
Lebanon is no stranger to foreign interference. From colonial mandates to military occupations to today’s endless meddling, the country has had to endure a parade of foreign “experts” and “envoys” who arrive with prescriptions and leave with nothing but disdain for the very people they claim to advise.
But through it all, Lebanon’s press has often stood as a thorn in the side of power. That tradition is not something to be taken lightly.
Thomas Barrack’s words today were contemptuous, yes, but they were also a test of whether Lebanese journalists still have the fire to defend their dignity, to insist that Lebanon is not an American playground, that its press is not an expendable backdrop for imperial theatrics. That test was failed.
We cannot afford such failures in today’s political climate. With Gaza burning under Israeli bombs, with Western governments spewing propaganda to justify genocide, with Arab sovereignty under constant threat, the role of the press has never been more urgent.
The journalist’s duty is not to play pleasant host to foreign arrogance but to confront it. To expose it. To ridicule it when it deserves ridicule, and to eviscerate it when it crosses the line of civility.
Right now, the people who sat in that room, deluded by a false sense of dignity, instead of protesting the plain enslavement, have become a laughingstock to those who understand true pride. They have become sitting ducks in front of those who play God.
How disappointing.
The Israeli flag just became the only national flag illegal to burn in the United States
When Criticizing Israel Becomes a Hate Crime: How One Ruling Betrayed the First Amendment
By Shaun King | The North Star | August 16, 2025
The Flag America Protects
This week in Washington, D.C., a federal judge made a ruling so shocking, so unprecedented, that it flips the First Amendment on its head. Judge Trevor N. McFadden declared that the Israeli flag — with the Star of David at its center — is not a political symbol at all, but a racial one.
He ruled that tearing it, grabbing it, desecrating it, even in the heat of protest, is not free expression but racial discrimination.
Think about that. In the United States, you can burn the American flag — the Supreme Court has said so for decades. But now, according to this ruling, burning or tearing the Israeli flag could make you guilty of racial hatred. The one national flag protected in American law today isn’t our own. It’s Israel’s.
You can burn the flags of all 50 states. You can torch the American flag all you want. You can burn the flags of the UK or France or Brazil or China.
But not Israel.
The Supreme Court’s Bedrock Principle
The highest court in the land has spoken clearly: you cannot criminalize burning the American flag. In Texas v. Johnson(1989), Justice William Brennan wrote:
“If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable.”
The following year, in United States v. Eichman (1990), the Court struck down another attempt to ban flag burning, reminding the country that:
“Punishing desecration of the flag dilutes the very freedom that makes this emblem so revered, and worth revering.”
In America, even the Stars and Stripes — the nation’s own sacred symbol — cannot be placed above criticism or protest. That is what freedom means. And yet in 2025, a federal judge just carved out an exception — for a foreign flag.
How the Israeli Flag Was Elevated
The case came from dueling protests in D.C. last fall. Kimmara Sumrall, a pro-Israel activist, draped the Israeli flag around her shoulders as a cape. A pro-Palestinian demonstrator yanked it. A police officer saw it and arrested the woman.
The criminal court acquitted her. But Sumrall filed a civil rights lawsuit, backed by the National Jewish Advocacy Center, arguing that this wasn’t just an assault — it was racial discrimination.
Judge McFadden agreed. In his ruling, he wrote:
“Purposefully yanking on an Israeli flag tied around a Jewish person’s neck… is direct evidence of racial discrimination. The Star of David — emblazoned upon the Israeli flag — symbolizes the Jewish race.”
With that, he collapsed the line between a political symbol and a people’s identity. He went so far as to compare attacking the Israeli flag to using the N-word against a Black person.
No other flag in the world has been granted this kind of protection in an American courtroom. Not Britain’s. Not Canada’s. Not Mexico’s. Not even our own. Only Israel’s.
Civil Rights Law Twisted
To reach this conclusion, McFadden invoked the Civil Rights Act of 1866, written to protect newly freed Black Americans. Later, in 1987, the Supreme Court held that Jews and Arabs were covered as “races” under this law.
But McFadden went further than any court before him. He declared that the flag of Israel itself is a racial symbol — and therefore protected. And in doing so, he turned what was supposed to be a shield for the oppressed into a shield for an oppressive foreign government.
The Global Contrast
Everywhere else in the democratic world, flag burning is understood as a political expression. The European Court of Human Rights has ruled again and again: desecrating a flag, however offensive, is free speech.
It is only authoritarian regimes that conflate their flags with their people, criminalizing dissent in the name of “unity.” Now, America has imported that same authoritarian logic — not to protect our own flag, but to protect Israel’s. It’s wild to see.
The Stakes for Protest
The implications are chilling. If this ruling stands, tearing down or burning an Israeli flag at a protest could be treated as a federal hate crime. Shouting against Zionism near someone draped in the flag could be called racial harassment.
This isn’t about protecting Jewish people from violence. It’s about shielding Israel from protest while it bombs and starves children in Gaza.
One Flag Above All
Let’s be brutally clear. The Israeli flag is now the only national flag that American courts have declared effectively immune from desecration. The Stars and Stripes itself can be burned in the name of protest. Israel’s flag cannot.
That is not constitutional law. That is political favoritism dressed up as civil rights. And it represents a betrayal of the First Amendment.
Shaun King is an American writer & activist.
Netanyahu associate, arrested in Las Vegas child sex sting, escapes without charges
Press TV – August 16, 2025
An Israeli cyber official, who works directly under Benjamin Netanyahu, escaped to the occupied territories after his arrest in a US child sex operation in Nevada, US.
Las Vegas police, working with the FBI, Homeland Security, and Nevada’s Internet Crimes against Children Task Force, announced on Wednesday the arrest of 8 men, including Tom Artiom Alexandrovich.
Alexandrovich, 38, serves as Acting Head of Data & AI at Israel’s so-called National Cyber Directorate.
He is the founder of Israel’s multi-million-dollar “Cyber Dome” initiative. The program is reportedly equipped with AI to detect, neutralize, and repel cyber threats before they reach critical systems.
He has deep access to Israel’s cyber secrets and classified partnerships with foreign powers.
According to Las Vegas authorities, Alexandrovich and others were charged with luring a child with a computer for a sexual act. In Nevada, this felony carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison.
He was in Las Vegas for a professional conference, not as a registered diplomat. He has no diplomatic immunity. Yet US authorities allowed him to board a plane and return to Israeli-occupied territories within days, without trial, bail conditions, or public explanation.
Israeli outlet Ynet reported only that Alexandrovich was “briefly detained for questioning… before his release and return to Israel,” without mentioning the felony charges or the multi-agency child predator sting led by US authorities.
On January 11, Ivor Caplin, another top Israeli official and the head of the Jewish Labor Movement (JLM), was arrested by the Sussex Police for engaging in sexual communication with a child.
He was subsequently released on bail, extended several times, with the most recent extension requiring Caplin to return to answer bail on October 8.
Trump Admin Wants DEI for Jewish Students?!
Glenn Greenwald | August 2, 2025
This is a clip from our show SYSTEM UPDATE, now airing every weeknight at 7pm ET on Rumble.
You can watch the full episode for FREE here: https://rumble.com/v6x01gs-system-upd…
Now available as a podcast! Find full episodes here: https://linktr.ee/systemupdate_
Join us LIVE on Rumble, weeknights at 7pm ET: https://rumble.com/c/GGreenwald
Is Europe pushing for Palestinian statehood or Palestinian surrender?
By Malek al-Khoury | The Cradle | July 28, 2025
Since its inception in 1948, Israel has never operated within fixed borders. Expansion has always been its doctrine – not constrained by law, but propelled by force and endorsed by unwavering western support. Israel has refused to define its boundaries for almost eight decades because its very identity is rooted in a colonial ambition that has never truly ended.
From the Nakba (Catastrophe) to the Naksa (Setback), from territorial invasions to the annexation of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank, the occupation state has continued to redraw its borders according to power, not legitimacy.
This expansionist project has only grown stronger with the rise of the messianic-nationalist current inside Israel, which sees full control over “Greater Israel” as a historical right that cannot be compromised.
Today, 77 years since the Nakba, Israel has advanced to full-throttle expansion mode – dispossessing Palestinians, destroying entire towns and villages, entrenching illegal Jewish settlements, and enforcing apartheid. Yet paradoxically, European states like France and the UK are preparing to recognize a “Palestinian state” precisely when Palestinian political geography is at its most fragmented, and when the Zionist project is at its most aggressive.
So what does this recognition actually mean? Is it a strategic achievement for Palestinians, or a diplomatic ruse that rebrands surrender as success?
A state without borders, a project without restraint
The 1917 Balfour Declaration marked the formal launch of a settler-colonial project in Palestine. What followed was not immigration but calculated dispossession – from British-facilitated land seizures and massacres, to the mass expulsions of the 1948 Nakba, which ethnically cleansed over 750,000 Palestinians.
This was not mere colonialism. It was ethnic replacement: Land was seized under imperial protection, then militarily conquered. This campaign never ended. It continued with the occupation of Gaza, Jerusalem, and the West Bank, and escalated after 1967. Israel’s goal has never been coexistence. It has always been Jewish supremacy.
The 1947 UN Partition Plan (Resolution 181) granted over 55 percent of historic Palestine to the Zionist movement, despite Jews owning just six percent of the land. The Zionist movement accepted this on paper to gain international legitimacy, then immediately violated its terms, occupying 78 percent of the territory by force.
To this day, the occupation state has not adopted a formal constitution, and the reason is that basing itself on the Partition Plan would have constrained its expansionist ambitions. The Zionist doctrine never recognized final borders, instead establishing a state with no official frontiers – because its ambitions stretch beyond Palestinian geography to include parts of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt.
The internal debate in Israel over declaring a “Jewish state” is not merely a legal argument, but an attempt to solidify an exclusionary and replacement-based identity – one that legally enshrines racial discrimination and denies Palestinians their status as an indigenous people.
Resistance realignment: 7 October and the Two-State shift
The earthquake triggered by Operation Al-Aqsa Flood shook not only Israel but also the political discourse of the Palestinian movement. Strikingly, Palestinian factions – including Hamas – have begun explicitly voicing support for the “Two-State Solution” after years of insisting on liberating historic Palestine in its entirety.
In an unprecedented statement, senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya said in May 2024:
“We are ready to engage positively with any serious initiative for a two-state solution, provided it entails a real Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital and without settlements.”
This tactical adaptation signals a significant shift. Key Palestinian actors are now openly considering a truncated state. Is this a reflection of changing power dynamics? Or an imposed realignment under regional and international duress?
Recognition as Leverage: France, Saudi Arabia, and normalization
Last week, in a post on X, French President Emmanuel Macron said:
“Consistent with its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine. I will make this solemn announcement before the United Nations General Assembly this coming September … We need an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages, and massive humanitarian aid for the people of Gaza. We must also ensure the demilitarization of Hamas, secure and rebuild Gaza. And finally, we must build the State of Palestine, guarantee its viability, and ensure that by accepting its demilitarization and fully recognizing Israel, it contributes to the security of all in the region. There is no alternative.”
France’s anticipated recognition of a Palestinian state in September is not driven by principle, but is a hard, cold geopolitical maneuver. It would appear that Paris is seeking closer ties with Riyadh, which has tethered normalization with Tel Aviv to progress on the Palestinian file. French recognition is thus a calculated signal to Saudi Arabia – not a gesture of solidarity with Palestinians.
In this equation, Palestine becomes currency. Its statehood is not affirmed as a right, but dangled as a precondition in normalization deals between Arab monarchies and the occupation state.
Strategic alignments: The Ankara–London Axis
With a third of MPs calling on British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to recognize Palestine, pressure is also piling on London.
In a statement, Starmer said:
“Alongside our closest allies, I am working on a pathway to peace in the region, focused on the practical solutions that will make a real difference to the lives of those that are suffering in this war. That pathway will set out the concrete steps needed to turn the ceasefire so desperately needed, into a lasting peace. Recognition of a Palestinian state has to be one of those steps. I am unequivocal about that.”
Britain, too, is not moving toward recognition out of moral clarity, but to reinforce its post-Brexit strategic axis with Turkiye. Ankara, a key trading partner of Israel and political backer of Hamas, views the recognition of Palestine as a tool to elevate its regional stature and energy leverage. For London, deepening ties with Turkiye promises economic and geopolitical dividends. The result is a converging Paris–Riyadh and Ankara–London recognition track.
Thus, two informal axes are forming: Paris–Riyadh and Ankara–London, both converging on the recognition of a Palestinian state. Yet neither axis approaches it from a principled belief in Palestinian rights, but rather through the lens of power, influence, and realpolitik.
The Palestinian state: Recognition without sovereignty
Even if every European country were to recognize Palestine, it would amount to little more than symbolism without enforcement. There would be no defined borders for the state, no control over its own territory, and no halt to the settlement expansion or annexation policies pursued by the occupation state.
Tel Aviv rejects the premise entirely. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that any future Palestinian state would be “a platform to destroy Israel,” and that sovereign security control must remain with Israel. He has repeatedly ruled out a return to the conditions that existed prior to 7 October.
The reality is that 68 percent of the West Bank, classified as Area C, remains under full Israeli control. More than 750,000 settlers are embedded across that territory, under the full protection of the occupation army. How can a state exist on occupied, fragmented land, under constant siege, and without sovereignty?
“I’ve just returned from a lecture tour around the world, and I can confidently say Israel’s global image and position are at their lowest point in history,” writes Israeli journalist Ben-Dror Yemini.
Yet despite this, Netanyahu’s far-right government is doubling down – pushing for full annexation of the occupied West Bank, eyeing new territorial footholds in Sinai, southern Syria, even Jordan, while maintaining military positions in south Lebanon.
Israel’s global brand may be eroding, but its strategic project is advancing.
If Israel is expanding and entrenching, while the Palestinian movement scales back demands and regional states normalize ties, what exactly has been achieved?
Resistance factions that once rejected Tel Aviv’s existence now propose statehood on its terms. European recognition comes with no teeth. Settlements grow. Displacement continues. This is not liberation. It is the burial of the dream under the guise of diplomacy.
The interim solution will become the final arrangement. The Palestinian “state” becomes a diplomatic euphemism – an empty structure praised in speeches, but denied on the ground.
Absurdity on Steroids
By Nahida Exiled Palestinian | June 5, 2025
Over the past 77 years, we Palestinians have faced an absurd type of multilayered injustice, unspeakable barbarity, chronic brutality, and compounded oppression with a twist.
* We are the only oppressed group who are vilified, condemned and labelled as terrorists, for merely existing.
We are the wronged, named as oppressors, the scorned named as haters, the slaughtered named as criminals, the dispossessed named as villains, we are the murdered named as the killers.
* We are the only oppressed group who are not allowed to identify or name their oppressor.
* We are the only oppressed group who are manipulated to grief for and bemoan the alleged suffering of their oppressor before their own, otherwise we are shunned and blacklisted as “holocaust deniers”
Our persistent suffering is secondary, diminished by the “eternal victimhood“ of our occupiers. Our pain is peripheral, dwarfed in comparison to theirs and validated only by the magnitude of our reverence to the “unique suffering“ of our oppressors
* We are the only oppressed group who are demanded to:– Gracefully lay down their only means of survival, their resistance
– Obediently protect the security of those from whom they saw nothing but savagery and barbarity
– Humbly guarantee a permanent presence and a prosperous future for those whose very ideology views the other with utter contempt as mere “animals, created only to serve them” and calls for their annihilation.
* We are the only oppressed group who are forbidden to discuss or ask questions about the ideology of their oppressors who claim to be the “chosen” above all others and that “God gave them the land”.
As if all that is not enough, even as we get slaughtered, maimed, starved and eradicated, with our babies shredded to pieces we are still expected to watch our words and not to ever offend or hurt the feelings of our oppressors otherwise we are defamed as “hateful antisemites”.
Is it any wonder that our Nakba is still raging, eight decades and counting!
Behind Closed Doors: Bilderberg’s Secret Summits Are a Threat to Democracy
By Paul Anthony Taylor | Dr. Rath Health Foundation | July 11, 2025
Accompanied by only the bare minimum of publicity, a group of powerful politicians, corporate titans, tech billionaires, and military chiefs recently retreated behind a tight wall of secrecy for the 71st Bilderberg Meeting. Held in Stockholm’s luxurious Grand Hotel, some of the most influential decision-makers on Earth had four days of discussions in a forum that prides itself on being unaccountable to the billions of citizens whose lives are shaped by its decisions. As the Dr. Rath Health Foundation has long warned, when unelected elites meet in the shadows to set the world’s direction, it is democracy and the rights of ordinary people that are sacrificed first.
A glance at this year’s Bilderberg participant list is enough to quickly expose the lie that this was just a harmless “networking event.” NATO’s new Secretary General Mark Rutte sat down with the heads of the US Indo-Pacific Command and Europe’s top military brass, while defense contractors like Saab, Palantir and Thales stood by ready to profit from conflict. CEOs from Big Tech and the pharma industry – Microsoft, Spotify and Pfizer – were there too, rubbing shoulders with former Google chief and Bilderberg board member Eric Schmidt, a man who has openly warned that whoever wins the race for super-intelligent AI will hold “the keys to control the entire world.”
How can such a gathering, convened with no oversight and no minutes published, claim to serve the common good? The organizers hide behind the excuse that secrecy allows “free discussion,” but it is the freedom of the global public that is undermined when vital decisions about war, energy, technology, and economic policy are hashed out in private by an unelected few.
Consider some of this year’s discussion topics: the Ukraine conflict, nuclear proliferation, AI weapons, the “authoritarian axis” of China and Russia, the geopolitics of energy and critical minerals, and even depopulation and migration. These are not idle cocktail gossip subjects; they are major issues that touch the lives and livelihoods of billions of people across the entire world. Yet there is supposedly no record of what is said behind Bilderberg’s closed doors – only the vague reassurance that there is “no desired outcome.”
Profiting from the crises they help perpetuate
AI and military conflict were closely related themes at this year’s meeting. While some at Bilderberg paint AI as the next industrial revolution, others describe it as the “cavalry” that will save civilization from itself. But save whom, exactly? Powerful insiders like Peter Thiel and Eric Schmidt have invested heavily in AI-driven drone warfare and mass data collection – technologies that promise ever-greater profits for the few and unprecedented surveillance and control for the rest of us.
Meanwhile, those pushing this agenda are the same people who stand to profit most from the very conflicts they claim to manage. As the Dr. Rath Health Foundation has repeatedly exposed over the years, the interlocking interests of multinational corporations and their senior executives frequently feed off the very crises they help perpetuate.
And what about health? While the public is told to trust in official narratives, those who sit around the Bilderberg table include the heads of pharmaceutical giants like Pfizer and major financial houses like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup – institutions that have thrived under a global economic model that prioritizes profits and costly chronic disease management over preventive and science-based natural health approaches. With AI now poised to become the next trillion-dollar bonanza, these same interests gather to protect their future dominance – while the public remains uninformed and voiceless.
The point here is that for decades, the Bilderbergers have presented themselves as guardians of the so-called “rules-based order.” But the truth is that secrecy and accountability cannot coexist. Real democracy demands informed consent, not enforced compliance. When power is concentrated in hidden networks that answer to no one, trust evaporates and corruption thrives. Worse, secrecy fuels public disillusionment and suspicion – precisely because the participants make transparency impossible. If the Bilderbergers have nothing to hide, why do they hide at all?
The world needs transparency not secrecy
There is no place for this outdated cloak-and-dagger elitism in the 21st century. Humanity faces profound challenges: war and peace, food and energy security, the survival of natural health freedom, and the need to put people before corporate profits. These are not decisions to be made by billionaires and generals behind police barricades. They belong to us all. And the only way to ensure they serve humanity is to drag them out of the shadows and into the daylight.
The Dr. Rath Health Foundation has always supported the right of people to shape their own destinies through knowledge and empowerment. We strongly reject the notion that the future of our health, our economies, and our freedoms should be decided by unaccountable elites. Whether it is the Pharma Cartel’s stranglehold on healthcare or the global race to develop super-intelligent AI, our message remains the same: people must come before profit, and transparency must triumph over secrecy.
Bilderberg is not a harmless talking shop. It is a symbol of how far the unelected few will go to keep us shut out of decisions that affect every aspect of our lives. This secrecy is not a harmless tradition; it is a threat to democracy itself. The world does not need more secret summits – it needs open, democratic debate, rooted in human rights and the health and well-being of all.
If the Bilderberg participants truly believe they are acting in our best interest, they should have nothing to fear from transparency. Until they throw open their doors, allow cameras into their meetings, publish transcripts, and let the people they claim to serve see exactly what they are planning, the rest of us have every right – indeed, every duty – to question what they are doing.
In the fight for a healthier, freer, and fairer world, secrecy is our enemy. The time has therefore come to shine a bright light on the hidden corridors of power and insist that our future is not something to be traded behind closed doors, but built in the open, by and for the people.
Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paul Anthony Taylor is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings. You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor
How Israeli propaganda mills recycled fabricated claims of intercepting Iranian missiles
By Ivan Kesic | Press TV – July 5, 2025
For the third time, the Israeli regime has declared an implausible success rate in intercepting Iranian ballistic missiles, this time touting a fanciful figure of 86 percent, a claim parroted with little scrutiny by much of the Western mainstream media.
This week, Israeli media outlets relayed statements from the regime’s war ministry claiming that 86 percent of Iranian missiles and 99 percent of drones were intercepted during the June 2025 Israeli war against Iran.
The figures, they said, were drawn from 12 days of the war, during which Iran launched 532 ballistic missiles in approximately 42 barrages targeting the occupied Palestinian territories. According to the same sources, about 300 missiles landed in “open areas,” while 200 were allegedly intercepted by Israeli and American air defense systems.
The interception systems credited include Israel’s David’s Sling, Arrow 2 and 3, along with the US-supplied THAAD and Aegis systems, altogether costing around 5 billion shekels, or nearly $1.5 billion.
In a triumphant assessment, the Israeli war ministry claimed their interception prevented over $15 billion in potential property damage and “saved countless lives.”
Some Zionist officials went even further, asserting that only 25 to 31 Iranian ballistic missiles actually struck targets within the occupied territories.
Despite the glaring inconsistencies in these numbers, and their defiance of both available evidence and basic mathematics, Western media repeated the claims almost reverently, offering little in the way of critical examination.
A pattern of fabricated success
This is not a one-off occurrence. It marks the third time the Israeli regime has released clearly falsified data on interception success rates, only to see these narratives absorbed uncritically into Western discourse.
After Iran’s Operation True Promise 1 and 2 in April and October last year, Israeli regime officials boasted a now-familiar “99 percent” interception rate. In the second operation alone, they claimed 200 Iranian ballistic missiles were launched, implying that only two managed to bypass Israeli defenses.
Yet satellite imagery tells a vastly different story. At Nevatim Airbase, one of the three key Iranian targets (alongside Tel Nof Airbase and Mossad headquarters), 33 Iranian missiles made direct contact, 26 of which caused severe structural damage, including to five hangars.
These figures alone debunk Israel’s exaggerated claims, as does independent footage from civilian sources, which recorded dozens of strikes, far more than the “three” the regime was willing to admit.
Tel Nof Airbase saw direct hits that triggered secondary explosions among stored munitions. At least two missiles impacted areas near Mossad’s headquarters. In total, over 40 Iranian missiles successfully penetrated much-hyped Israeli defenses during Operation True Promise 2, twenty times more than Israeli officials conceded.
Their missile launch count was also exaggerated. Visual evidence confirms that 53 missiles were launched in three waves: 25 from Kermanshah, 18 from Tabriz, and 10 from Shiraz. This suggests that over 75 percent of Iranian missiles struck their intended targets, an accuracy rate far closer to Iranian estimates of 90 percent than the Israeli claim of 1 percent success.
The same distortions appeared after Operation True Promise 1, with Israel again insisting it intercepted “99 percent of 300 missiles and drones”—a figure clearly contradicted by publicly available footage capturing numerous impacts.
Latest round of deception
As with the previous two retaliatory operations, the latest Israeli claims, of an 86 percent interception rate, 300 harmless impacts in open areas, and only 30 successful Iranian strikes, lack any verifiable evidence.
Most Iranian retaliatory strikes and Israeli interception attempts occurred at night and were recorded in numerous public videos. These show luminous streaks of incoming missiles, and often, impact explosions, across the occupied territories.
All Israeli systems engaged, David’s Sling, Arrow 2/3, and THAAD use hit-to-kill technology, designed to intercept missiles at long ranges and high altitudes. When successful, these intercepts generate massive hypersonic collisions that produce blinding explosions visible across the region.
If Israel had indeed intercepted 200 ballistic missiles, as claimed, there would be a flood of corroborating footage from personal and security cameras, all time- and date-stamped.
But such evidence is conspicuously absent. Even the Israeli military, known for showcasing its “successes,” has failed to release convincing proof.
Nor is there any physical evidence of widespread missile debris in Iraq or Jordan, which should exist if large numbers of missiles had been intercepted in those areas.
Conversely, hundreds of videos document Iranian missiles piercing Israeli defenses and detonating across the occupied territories. If most Iranian missiles were truly falling into uninhabited open zones, as claimed, the regime would be eager to release images proving it. Instead, photo and video censorship has been rigorously enforced.
In fact, the scale of destruction suggests widespread strikes on Israeli military infrastructure, not craters in farmland. Israeli media themselves have pegged total damage at $12 billion, with projections reaching $20 billion when indirect costs are counted.
These staggering figures are inconsistent with the claim that only 25–31 missiles hit, unless one believes each missile inflicted $500, 800 million in damage, an implausible notion.
The official 86 percent success rate also contradicts a statement by a senior Israeli intelligence officer to American media, who admitted that by the seventh day of fighting, only 65 percent of Iranian missiles were being intercepted.
He attributed this drop in effectiveness to Iran’s deployment of faster, more maneuverable, and more sophisticated missiles.
Initially, Iran had used older liquid-fueled ballistic missiles, such as Shahab-3, known for their slow speed and predictable trajectories, making them easier to intercept. However, these outdated models were paired with decoys, confusing air defense systems and draining interceptor stockpiles.
Despite the extensive documentation of missile attacks, no comprehensive analysis has yet detailed how many Iranian missiles and Israeli interceptors were deployed, or what the true interception rate was.
Open-source analysts have attempted estimates using nighttime footage from Jordanian photographer Zaid M. al-Abbadi, but his recordings cover only a fraction of the conflict, nighttime only, with limited geographical and vertical scope.
Nonetheless, they point to a clear trend: Iranian missiles breached Israeli air defenses far more often than official figures admit, and did so with a frequency higher than the number of interceptors deployed.
Diversions and disinformation
In addition to exaggerating interception figures, the Israeli regime employs a range of propaganda tactics to conceal its failures and downplay Iranian achievements.
During Operation True Promise 1, iconic images of glowing Iranian missiles above Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock in occupied Jerusalem al-Quds stunned the world, symbolizing Iran’s reach and resolve.
In response, Israeli regime officials, most notably UN ambassador Gilad Erdan, offered the bizarre narrative that Israel was “protecting Al-Aqsa from Iranian missiles,” attempting to sow discord between Iran and the wider Muslim world.
In truth, those missiles were aimed at Nevatim Airbase, located 65 kilometers south of occupied Jerusalem al-Quds.
Similarly, during Operation True Promise 3, Israeli propagandists claimed Iran had deliberately struck the Al-Jarina Mosque in Haifa. In reality, a missile hit the Sail Tower regime building complex 50 meters southeast, with the mosque sustaining only minor facade damage from shockwaves.
Israel also falsely alleged Iranian attacks on schools and homes. But released images show damage consistent not with Iranian warheads, but with malfunctioning Israeli interceptors.
Perhaps the most egregious example was the claim that Iran targeted Soroka Hospital. In fact, the damage was from a strike on a nearby C4I military intelligence HQ. The regime routinely positions military infrastructure adjacent to civilian areas, then manipulates resulting collateral damage as evidence of Iranian wrongdoing.
Facilities like the Kirya military base in Tel Aviv and the military-linked Weizmann Institute are presented as “civilian” in official narratives. Moreover, videos of Iranian missile strikes on these sites are heavily censored, and sharing such footage risks severe legal punishment.
Finally, Israeli propaganda claims that missile victims are mostly “non-Israelis”—while failing to mention that non-Jewish residents are often banned from entering bomb shelters.
During the recent war, Palestinians, Chinese workers, and Turkish journalists all testified to being denied shelter access, highlighting both systemic discrimination and the hypocrisy of Israeli victimhood narratives.
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.
From Betar to Shomrim, re-emergence of Zionist private militias in the West
By David Miller | Press TV | May 25, 2025
In April of this year, anti-Zionist Jewish writer Alon Mizrahi claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his network of international Zionists are working to establish a policing force with powers surpassing those of national law enforcement agencies.
Mizrahi described this as the beginning of overt Jewish-Zionist policing of Western societies.
He was referring specifically to the ever more egregious statements from Betar in the US, an ultra-Zionist group affiliated with the far-right Revisionist Zionist movement founded by Vladimir Jabotinsky.
They have threatened to compile lists of Jews to be banned by the Zionist entity across North and South America, as well as Britain and France.
Mizrahi warned, “They start with Jews as a deception: all of you are next.”
However, the situation may already be far worse than what Mizrahi suggests.
Since its founding in 1923, Betar has trained as a paramilitary force. The photo below shows Menachem Begin wearing a Betar uniform in Poland in 1932.
Below it is another photo from Berlin in 1936, taken after the Nazis enacted laws outlawing other political groups in 1933.
Betar was so closely aligned with the Nazis and Mussolini’s fascists that they were regarded as collaborators. By 1934, Jabotinsky and his Betar youth movement had reportedly “allied with Il Duce,” establishing a naval base north of Rome.
Late that year, Mussolini reportedly expressed support for Zionism and Jabotinsky in particular, stating: “For Zionism to succeed, you need to have a Jewish State with a Jewish flag, and Jewish language. The person who understands that is your fascist, Jabotinsky.”
This remark was made “during a private conversation with Nahum Goldman, founder of the World Jewish Congress, in November 1934,” as reported by Lenni Brenner in Zionism in the Age of Dictators.
Many senior Betar members served in the collaborationist police overseeing the Vilna Ghetto in Lithuania and were involved in betraying Jews in hiding to the Nazis.
One such member, Lotek Salzwasser, was eliminated by Jewish partisans in 1943 for his collaboration, according to Israeli press reports.
Betar and military training
One of the seven core principles of the Betar “Oath” is Magen, meaning “Protection.”
One of Betar’s ideological principles is military preparedness. Betar demands that all its members complete military seminars and know how to use weapons, in order to be ready at any time and to respond personally to a call for defense.
Betar has functioned as a militia since its inception. Here is a film of one of the French branches recorded in 2014 conducting paramilitary training exercises.
In the UK, Betar operated as a registered charity (Brit Tumbledor of Great Britain – Betar) between 1984 and 2004. It was closed down by the Charity Commission in 2004, on the grounds that it had been “Registered in error.”
In March 2025, Betar threatened to murder UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese. On the very same day, the group relaunched its UK branch with a post on Instagram, claiming London “has become, with the time, an epicenter for radical Islam, for hate, for terror.” Their proposed solution?
Today, after more than 30 years, a bunch of strong young leaders stand up to say HERE WE ARE, to defend the Jewish population and to tell them that now we have a solution for the current situation, JEWS ARE NOT AFRAID ANYMORE!
Make no mistake – these threats are part of a deliberate effort to revive Jewish supremacist militias in the UK and the US.
Magen Am
The term Magen also appears in the name of a US-based private Zionist militia called Magen Am, which is currently active in Los Angeles, Orange County, and Phoenix.
Magen Am played a notably violent role in attempts to dismantle the student encampment at UCLA. The group frequently boasts about its close ties to the LAPD, sharing numerous photos of friendly interactions with police officers.
Reports indicate that Magen Am has collaborated directly with law enforcement, including working closely with the LAPD to intimidate and attack student protesters on the UCLA campus.
Magen Am, of course, recruits veterans of the occupation forces’ Lone Soldier programme and some then return to “serve” in the genocide as they proudly boast.
Magen Am was founded in 2017 by Yossi Eilfort, an MMA fighter-turned-Chabad rabbi. The flag of the genocidal Chabad cult was flown by the attackers on campus in Los Angeles.
Chabad has many followers in the so-called Hilltop Youth in occupied Palestine, which the Zionist intelligence agency Shin Bet says are responsible for the overwhelming majority of so-called ‘price-tag’ revenge attacks on Palestinians.
The rise of Jewish supremacism in Western societies is becoming increasingly visible, though many continue to deny or downplay its existence.
While Zionist militias and private security firms openly collaborate to suppress student protests in the US, there is a more subtle infiltration of police forces by Zionist Jewish supremacists.
Shomrim: The Private Jewish Patrol
Shomrim is a private Jewish police force operating in parts of the US, UK, Australia, and Belgium. It is reported that “over 20 Shomrim organisations exist worldwide.”
In London, the Shomrim North West Community Patrol operates in the Borough of Barnet. Founded in 2008 by Gary Ost as a registered charity, it acts as a “mobile neighbourhood watch” and acts as eyes and ears for the Metropolitan Police.
Shomrim claims that all “Volunteers have completed training from the Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Command (SO15) in assisting to identify potential security threats and suspicious activity. “
One blogger notes that the genocidal cult Chabad also has a ‘nasty tendency to normalize sexual abuse and protect serial sexual predators in its ranks.” But it’s not only Chabad; there is a similar tendency throughout the Zionist movement.
No surprise, then, to find that the founder of Shomrim in London has been implicated in this.
In 2013 Police dropped their investigation into Ost, who had been arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice in relation to an investigation of an alleged child sexual abuser, Rabbi Chaim Halpern.
Indeed, charges against the alleged sexual predator were dropped back then, too. Yet new allegations against Rabbi Halpern have resurfaced a decade later, and the trial for these offences is still pending.
Shomrim abuses
In New York, Shomrim has faced criticism for “using excessive force against non-Jewish suspects.”
In 2014, two Shomrim members were charged as part of a group of five Hasidic men for assaulting 22-year-old Black student Taj Patterson as he walked home from a party.
Additionally, Shomrim organizers in New York have reportedly withheld information on suspected Jewish criminals. The NYPD has openly criticized the group for not always notifying police when calls come in, raising concerns about accountability and cooperation.
Given Shomrim’s protected status with law enforcement and the documented culture of sexual abuse in some ultra-Orthodox communities, credible allegations of abuse within these groups are unsurprising.
On October 11, 2023, the United States Department of Justice issued a press release that Jacob Daskal, former head of the Boro Park Shomrim Society—a private Orthodox Jewish crime-patrol group associated with the NYPD—was sentenced to 210 months in prison and fined $250,000 for transporting a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.
Daskal pleaded guilty to the charge in July 2023. As part of the sentence, Daskal is required to register as a sex offender.” The statement notes that Daskal was introduced to a 15 year old girl “as a result of his position with the Shomrim”, who he then “groomed” for sexual abuse. According to the Department of Justice statement:
“Throughout the abuse, Daskal instructed the victim to delete their communications and warned her not to tell anyone about their sexual relationship. He also used his position as a community leader to silence the victim, bragging about his law enforcement connections and warning her that disclosure would ruin her life. The victim was expelled from her religious school after revealing the relationship to the school principal.”
This case raises troubling questions: How many other abusive situations are currently unfolding within Shomrim and other Jewish militia groups?
Shomrim protects genocide
What is it that Shomrim are protecting? One illustrative example is the Crown Heights Shomrim branch, which in January this year provided security protection for the genocidal President of Israel, Yitzchak Herzog and for the leadership of the genocidal cult Chabad, as shown in the image below.
If Shomrim really wants to protect Jews in the US and UK, they should start by apprehending the entire leadership of Chabad and members of the genocidal Zionist regime.
Police reluctance toward Shomrim in the UK
Initially, UK police were resistant to Shomrim’s activities. In 2008, Chief Superintendent Steve Bending, then Hackney’s borough commander, stated, “I do not support the concept of any community having its own form of patrol service. There is a risk of other communities feeling intimidated by this course of action.”
As late as 2015, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe expressed his preference that Shomrim volunteers avoid uniforms resembling those of official officers.
Shomrim, however, rejected this, saying “its volunteers should not drive marked cars or wear uniforms similar to those of the police.” Gary Ost, chief executive of Shomrim in Golders Green, north-west London, stated, “Our uniforms look nothing like the police and are marked from every angle with clear wording saying ‘Shomrim’.”
Yet a glance at their uniforms and liveried vehicles often gives a very different impression.
But the penetration of the police is now much more advanced and cooperation is the name of the game. There are numerous examples of apparent cordial relations between the two on the internet.
Shomrim members even posed outside Peel House, the headquarters of the Metropolitan Police.
Below is a photo of a prize giving for Shomrim members commended for their “bravery” and “exemplary service to the community” in 2020.
Shomrim chief executive Gary Ost, the one arrested in 2013, is one of the three.
Shomrim plays a key role in shaping the narrative around the widespread antisemitism claims that Israel relies on to justify its genocidal actions.
The pressing question is: What happens when members of Shomrim break the law or commit wrongdoing? Would the police be able—or even willing—to enforce the law against them?
Alon Mizrahi, whom we cited earlier, shared his perspective in a conversation with me:
“They are pretending to be defending themselves in the most friendly country to Jews in history. While committing genocide. In a country that is so hateful of Jews that we need a private police force for Jews only in the US.
“And I have no doubt that if they can normalise this, with the kind of status that Zionist Jews have managed to create for themselves in the US; If this Jewish police force uses violence against black people, black organisers in communities who oppose the genocide, or other migrant groups or any other group, are American police going to be able to charge them?
“To use the law against them? I don’t think so. If you are in the American system, if you have a role in any part of the American system of government, in the police or any other agency, I think that at this point it is clear to you that Zionist Jews are above the law.
“The law doesn’t apply to them. So they don’t have the philosophical or legal means to deal with this. And the Zionists know this.”
Given the current climate, his assessment may well be accurate.
Featured Video
10 MINUTES COVID MADNESS
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Why Hitler Declared War on the United States
By John Wear | Inconvenient History | 2017-08-31
Establishment historians state that Adolf Hitler made a mistake when he declared war on the United States. For example, British historian Andrew Roberts wrote:[1]
“It seems an unimaginably stupid thing to have done in retrospect, a suicidally hubristic act less than six months after attacking the Soviet Union. America was an uninvadable land mass of gigantic productive capacity and her intervention in 1917-18 had sealed Germany’s fate in the Great War.”
Historian Martin Gilbert wrote in regard to Germany’s declaration of war on the United States:[2]
“It was perhaps the greatest error, and certainly the single most decisive act, of the Second World War.”
In this article I will explain why Hitler was forced to declare war on the United States. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Russia warns Ukraine expanding ‘terrorist activities’ beyond Europe
- US use of Italian military bases in the conflict with Iran shows lack of autonomy
- The synthesis of regional conflicts into WWIII has begun
- Is the Department of War Covering Up the True Extent of US Casualties?
- Is Peter Mandelson a Russian or a Zionist asset?
- German arms exports to Israel surge sharply amid Gaza genocide
- Massie says the US has been ‘significantly weakened’ by war on Iran
- Zelensky: North Korea, Iran and China Backing Russia’s War in Ukraine
- Saudi oil loading volumes drop 40 percent at Red Sea port amid Yemeni blockade
- US Can’t Come to Saudi Arabia’s Rescue in Bab el-Mandeb Without Risking Overstretch – Expert
- If Americans Knew
- Why did Bari Weiss fire Cecilia Vargas?
- Rescue teams recover remains of 99 Palestinians from one home in Gaza – Daily Update
- Patrick Bet-David sells wealth building, but the real product is Zionist shilling
- The Last-Minute Million-Dollar Ad Spend Against Will Lawrence Is Coming From a Major Pro-Israel Group
- Five decades of Israeli covert strategy to push US, Iran into confrontation
- ‘We want to see blood’: Israeli political leadership and settler groups call for revenge against Palestinians
- The Spark in Tell: How a Village Resistance Disrupted Israel’s West Bank Strategy
- The Eighth Front: Inside Israel’s $1 Billion Influence Campaign
- UNESCO adds West Bank site and Lebanese castles to World Heritage List despite Israeli objections
- Born too soon: Premature babies fight for survival in Gaza
- No Tricks Zone
- ECMWF Models Throwing Cold Water On Extreme Germany Heat Wave Forecast Next Week
- Greenland’s Ice Sheet Was Supposed To Be Rapidly Melting Away. It Hasn’t Been.
- Global Temperature Trend Has Cooled Over The Past 6500 Years, Scientists Have Found
- Wind Energy Means Going Back To The Middle Ages, Says German Professor Horst-Joachim Lüdecke
- New Study: A 40-Fold Increase In Earth’s Main Greenhouse Gas Contributes To Cooling The Ocean
- New Study Highlights The ‘Dominant Role’ Of Aerosol/Cloud Interactions In Shaping Climate
- Munich’s First-Ever Green Party Mayor Declares First Ever City Water Use Restrictions… Fines Up to 50,000 €!
- Experimental Lab Research: The Climate Sensitivity To A 400-Fold Increase In CO2 Is 0.1°C
- Fatal Snobbery: In France, It’s Better To Die From A Heatwave Than To Do As Americans
- New Study: NASA’s Models Wildly Underestimate The Capacity Of Clouds To Alter Solar Radiation
Aletho News 