Oman brokers US-Yemen ceasefire, Israelis in dark regarding deal
Al Mayadeen | May 6, 2025
The Omani Foreign Ministry announced on Tuesday that it had successfully brokered a ceasefire agreement between the United States and the authorities in Sanaa, aimed at achieving mutual de-escalation.
According to a statement from Muscat, the agreement entails a commitment by both sides, Washington and the Sanaa-based government, not to target each other in future military operations.
“The Sultanate thanks both parties for their constructive approach that led to this welcome outcome,” the statement read, emphasizing Oman’s longstanding diplomatic efforts in mediating regional conflicts.
US President Donald Trump had earlier declared an immediate halt to US airstrikes on Yemen, claiming that Yemeni authorities had promised to cease attacks on vessels in the Red Sea.
‘Trump surprised us’
The declaration appears to have caught the Israeli occupation off guard, with Axios journalist Barak Ravid quoting a senior Israeli official saying, “We didn’t know about this. Trump surprised us.”
Despite Trump’s claims of a breakthrough, Ansar Allah denied that any such concession had been made. In an interview with Bloomberg, Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a member of the group’s Political Council, affirmed that military operations in the Red Sea and against “Israel” would continue until the aggression on Gaza ends and the siege on its people is lifted.
Support for Gaza will not cease
While al-Bukhaiti indicated that attacks on US warships may pause if American strikes cease, he stressed that “we will definitely continue our operations in support of Gaza,” underscoring that the movement’s military actions are directly tied to the Israeli regime’s ongoing war on the Gaza Strip.
Ansar Allah “will not stop regardless of the consequences until the end of the aggression on Gaza and blockade on its people,” al-Bukhaiti stressed.
US to halt airstrikes on Yemen
Trump announced on Tuesday that Washington will halt its airstrikes on Yemen, claiming that his administration received a “promise” from Yemeni representatives to stop attacks on vessels in the Red Sea. Trump described the move as “good news” and a step toward de-escalation in the region.
Speaking during a press conference at the White House alongside Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump said his administration trusts the Yemeni assurances despite the absence of a formal agreement. “The Yemenis don’t want to fight, and we’ll stop bombing them. We believe their word that they won’t target ships anymore,” he said.
He emphasized that the decision was made in light of what he described as a “genuine desire for calm” and reiterated that there is “no reason to continue the air raids as long as Yemen holds to its commitment to end naval operations.”
‘Israel’ conducts airstrikes on Yemen
Trump’s remarks came just hours after Israeli warplanes carried out airstrikes on the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, resulting in several casualties and injuries.
According to The Jerusalem Post, the Israeli occupation was not informed in advance about the US decision to halt its aggression on Yemen.
Al Mayadeen’s correspondent confirmed that Sanaa International Airport was targeted by a series of Israeli airstrikes.
Footage shared on social media platforms showed scenes of Israeli airstrikes reportedly targeting Sanaa International Airport.
Do Trump’s Slick Comments Put Iran Talks in Jeopardy?
By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | May 6, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump’s unexpected answer on Sunday to an interviewer’s question has thrown his administration’s nuclear negotiations with Iran into confusion.
Trump has consistently said that negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program are limited to preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon: “You know, it’s not a complicated formula. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.” But in an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, when the interviewer asked Trump, “Is the goal of these talks limiting Iran’s nuclear program or total dismantlement?” Trump answered, “Total disarmament.”
There has been disagreement in the Trump team over, not just the goal of negotiations with Iran, but, more fundamentally, over negotiating with Iran. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz advocated for a military path, while Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Vice President J.D. Vance advocated for caution. Vance urged fully exploring talks before settling for a military solution. Trump sided with the diplomacy camp, believing that “we can make a deal without the attack.”
According to reporting by The Washington Post, Trump fired Waltz as National Security Advisor because he opposed Trump and “wanted to take U.S. policy in a direction Trump wasn’t comfortable with because the U.S. hadn’t attempted a diplomatic solution.” Waltz maintained that “the time was ripe to strike Iran.”
Having agreed on the diplomatic path, there appeared to be confusion over the goal of diplomacy. Waltz said that the U.S. is demanding “full dismantlement,” and Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff said that “a Trump deal” means “Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.” But these statements had been at odds with Trump’s more limited stated goal. Until Sunday.
If there was a lack of clarity in America’s goals in negotiating, there was no ambiguity in Iran’s. Iran wanted a deal that the United States couldn’t walk away from, as they walked away from the previous 2015 JCPOA nuclear agreement, and they wanted negotiations to lead to three things.
The first is that negotiations have to lead to a cessation of U.S. threats of a military solution. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian had made it clear that “the language of threats and coercion is absolutely unacceptable… It is unacceptable for someone to come along and say, ‘Don’t do this, don’t do that, or else.’ I won’t come to negotiate with you.”
The second is that negotiations have to lead to the complete lifting of sanctions.
The third is that, while Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has fully empowered his team to negotiate, he has placed the firm limit that Iran will not negotiate “the full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.”
The American-Iranian talks were showing signs of success. Iran called the first round “constructive” and “respectful.” The U.S. called it “constructive” and “positive.” The first round led to a second, which led to an agreement to begin work on a framework for a potential deal and a third round of talks.
Then a flurry of confusing and contradictory statements made by U.S. officials in the past few days began to derail the talks.
First, Pete Hegseth returned to the language of threats. Referring to Yemen’s Houthi attacking vessels in the Red Sea, Hegseth “warned” Iran, “You know very well what the U.S. Military is capable of… You will pay the CONSEQUENCE at the time and place of our choosing.” From Iran’s perspective, what is the point in negotiating limits on your civilian nuclear program to avoid American bombs if the United States is going to bomb you anyway for another purpose?
Then Trump returned to the threat of sanctions, posting that “Any Country or person who buys ANY AMOUNT of OIL or PETROCHEMICALS from Iran will be subject to, immediately, Secondary Sanctions. They will not be allowed to do business with the United States of America in any way, shape, or form.”
Following those two statements, the fourth round of scheduled talks between the United States and Iran were postponed. They were allegedly postponed “[f]or logistical reasons.” However, a senior Iranian official said that “U.S. sanctions on Iran during the nuclear talks are not helping the sides to resolve the nuclear dispute through diplomacy” and that “[d]epending on the U.S. approach, the date of the next round of talks will be announced.”
Then came the unexpected threat to future talks. Trump told Meet the Press that the talks are not negotiating what the Iranians thought they were negotiating. The United States he said, is not negotiating verifiable limits on Iran’s civilian nuclear program, it is demanding “total dismantlement” of Iran’s nuclear program.
“That’s all you’ll accept?” the interviewer clarified. “Yeah, that’s all I’d accept,” Trump confirmed.
The interviewer then, wrongly, suggested that Trump’s statement was inconsistent with Marco Rubio, his Secretary of State’s, suggestion that the U.S. “would accept… a peaceful, civilian nuclear program.”
Trump’s statement is not inconsistent with Rubio’s, though, because Rubio’s statement that Iran can have a civilian nuclear program by importing uranium enriched up to 3.67% but no longer by enriching their own, is consistent with Trump’s statement that Iran would have to dismantle its enrichment capability.
Though Trump’s statement may not be inconsistent with Rubio’s, it did, at this point, become a little confused with itself. Trump suggested that Iran has no need of a civilian nuclear program “to make electricity” because “they have so much oil, what do they need it for.” Trump then, confusingly repeated his earlier formulation, saying, “The only thing they can’t have is a nuclear weapon.” He said, “I think that I would be open to hearing” about a civilian nuclear program to generate energy before seemingly shutting it down again with the observation that “civilian energy often leads to military wars.”
The recent return by Washington to military threats and sanctions are not helping negotiations that seemed to be on a path to possible success. Trump’s latest remark that Iran has to fully dismantle its civilian nuclear program and stop all enrichment appears to take away any motivation for Iran to negotiate. Since Trump has said that “If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing,” it is imperative to clarify the confusion and the positions and get the fourth round of talks back on schedule.
Trump pushes for ‘total dismantlement’ of Iran’s nuclear program
RT | May 5, 2025
US President Donald Trump has said he wants Iran to completely scrap its nuclear program, as negotiations between the two countries have been postponed.
The president was asked by Kristen Welker on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday whether he was aiming to limit or completely abolish Iran’s nuclear program.
“Total dismantlement. Yes, that is all I would accept,” Trump said. He questioned the necessity of the Islamic Republic having nuclear technology for electricity generation.
“They have so much oil – why do they need it? … Civilian [nuclear] energy often leads to military wars. And we don’t want them to have a nuclear weapon. It’s a very simple deal,” he said.
“I just don’t want them to have a nuclear weapon because the world will be destroyed,” Trump added.
He made his remarks after Omani Foreign Minister Badr Al-Busaidi announced that the fourth round of indirect, mediated US-Iran talks, planned for Saturday, had been postponed indefinitely “for logistical reasons.”
The negotiations, previously described by both sides as constructive, have been overshadowed by tensions in Yemen, where the US and Britain have ramped up airstrikes against the Houthi militants.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to retaliate after a Houthi ballistic missile landed near Ben Gurion Airport outside Tel Aviv on Sunday, injuring eight people.
The Houthis said they were aiming for a “comprehensive air blockade” of Israel in solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza. Iran denied directing the attacks, calling such claims “misleading.”
Trump withdrew the US from the 2015 UN-backed deal on Iran’s nuclear program during his first term in office, accusing the Islamic Republic of secretly violating the agreement. Tehran has denied any wrongdoing but has since rolled back its own commitments under the deal and increased its stockpile of enriched uranium.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned last month that the country would resist any “pressure and threat” from the US.
Agent Waltz?
By Daniel McAdams | Ron Paul Institute | May 3, 2025
The Washington Post is reporting today that recently-ousted National Security Advisor Mike Waltz may have been involved in activities even more nefarious than inviting journalists onto highly sensitive Signal group chats. It appears that what really angered President Trump is less Waltz’s incompetence (or worse) in keeping sensitive military communications secure, but rather his taking an active role in doing the bidding of a foreign government.
As the Post reported, in advance of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s February visit to the United States the US National Security Advisor to President Trump…
… appeared to have engaged in intense coordination with Netanyahu about military options against Iran ahead of an Oval Office meeting between the Israeli leader and Trump, the two people said.
That means that Mike Waltz was working with a foreign government to maneuver President Trump into a situation where war seemed the only option left to deal with Iran. That kind of manipulation is a classic neocon move and one that Waltz’s ideological allies managed with great success against President George W. Bush regarding Iraq.
According to one insider quoted in the article, Waltz, “wanted to take U.S. policy in a direction Trump wasn’t comfortable with because the US hadn’t attempted a diplomatic solution.”
That means the former NSA was working with a foreign leader to limit the diplomatic and military options his boss could choose from, i.e. he was working to hobble the United States so as to achieve an objective of a foreign regime.
The WaPo piece continues…
‘If Jim Baker was doing a side deal with the Saudis to subvert George H.W. Bush, you’d be fired,’ a Trump adviser said, referring to Bush’s secretary of state. ‘You can’t do that. You work for the president of your country, not a president of another country.’
To his credit, President Trump recognized that Waltz was blowing Bibi’s smoke at him and rather than bite at the trap sprung for him the President saw through the game and became annoyed possibly at both of them. The fiasco one month later, where Waltz claimed that neocon scribbler Jeffrey Goldberg’s contact information had somehow been “sucked up” into his phone and then presumably spit out again when it came time to invite top Administration officials onto a call to discuss military strikes on Yemen, may have been the straw that broke Trump’s waning patience in the man.
Last month, the Grayzone published leaked audio of Israel lobby AIPAC’s CEO, Elliott Brandt, “describing how his organization has cultivated influence with three top national security officials in the Trump administration – Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Director Mike Waltz, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe – and how it believes it can gain ‘access’ to their internal discussions.”
Was the Waltz/Netanyahu trap for Trump the result of this “cultivated influence” that Brandt is bragging about? And if so, how much deeper does it go?
Whatever the case, it’s lucky for Waltz that he was “only” acting as an agent for our Greatest Ally ™ and Only Democracy in the Middle East ™. Otherwise he’d be soon enjoying the hospitality of Bukele’s All Male B&B rather than the rather more luxurious digs at 50 United Nations Plaza.
Iran says US ‘not serious’ about nuclear talks after Trump imposes new sanctions
The Cradle | May 2, 2025
The Iranian Foreign Ministry affirmed on 2 May that Tehran is committed to continuing the diplomatic process and negotiations regarding its nuclear program but that it “will not accept pressure and threats that violate international law and target the rights of the Iranian people.”
In a statement, the ministry condemned the continued illegal sanctions on Iran and the “pressure on its economic partners,” viewing them as “further evidence that the United States is not serious about adopting a diplomatic approach toward Iran.”
It also stressed that the continuation of these policies “will not change Iran’s firm positions in defending its legitimate rights,” and that “testing failed methods will only lead to a repetition of past failures.”
The Foreign Ministry went on to say that the Iranian negotiating delegation, during the first three rounds, attempted to “reach a fair agreement that guarantees the rights of the Iranian people, within the specified frameworks that allow Tehran to use peaceful nuclear energy.”
Tehran entered indirect negotiations with Washington following US President Donald Trump’s letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, to “resolve a fabricated crisis through diplomacy, based on good faith,” the statement added.
The Ministry’s statement came after Trump announced on Thursday that all purchases of Iranian oil or petrochemical products must stop, warning that any country or individual continuing such trade would face immediate secondary sanctions and be barred from doing business with the US.
“They will not be allowed to do business with the United States of America in any way, shape, or form,” he wrote on Truth Social on Thursday.
Secondary sanctions are a powerful tool for the US because of the size of its economy.
Trump’s comments follow the postponement of the latest US talks with Iran over its nuclear program.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry announced on Thursday that the fourth round of talks, which were due to take place in Rome on Saturday, had been rescheduled at the suggestion of the Sultanate of Oman for “logistical reasons.”
Sources speaking with Al Mayadeen he explained that the postponement came “against the backdrop of the conflicting positions taken by the US administration regarding the talks, and Washington’s efforts to change the general framework for negotiations that had been previously agreed upon.”
In a related development, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio asserted on 1 May that Iran must “walk away” from both uranium enrichment and the development of long-range missiles.
“They have to walk away from sponsoring terrorists, they have to walk away from helping the Houthis (in Yemen), they have to walk away from building long-range missiles that have no purpose to exist other than having nuclear weapons, and they have to walk away from enrichment,” Rubio said in an interview with Fox News.
His comments came as the fourth round of nuclear negotiations between Tehran and Washington, set to take place in Rome on Saturday, were postponed.
An Iranian official cited by Reuters said a new date for the talks would be set “depending on the US approach.”
Tehran has repeatedly affirmed that both its uranium enrichment and its defense capabilities are non-negotiable in the talks with the US.
Ansar Allah triumphant: US facing Red Sea defeat again
By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | May 3, 2025
On April 28th, Western media outlets became abuzz with news that the USS Harry S. Truman – which is leading the Trump administration’s effort to dismantle Ansar Allah’s anti-genocide Red Sea blockade – lost an F/A-18E fighter jet and tow tractor, while executing a hard turn to evade fire from the Resistance group. While a US Navy press release on the incident made no reference to Ansar Allah’s assault, nameless American officials have briefed several mainstream journalists that the losses were Yemen’s doing.
Reporting on the disaster by dependably servile CIA and Pentagon propaganda megaphone CNN was extraordinarily candid. “US Navy loses $60 million jet at sea after it fell overboard from aircraft carrier”, its headline read. The outlet explicitly acknowledged this resulted from an Ansar Allah “drone and missile attack” on USS Harry S. Truman. CNN went on to note the aircraft carrier has “repeatedly been targeted in attacks” by Yemen, while suffering a series of shameful blunders since its deployment to the Red Sea in September 2024.
In December that year, a US fighter jet posted to USS Harry S. Truman was shot down while conducting a refueling mission over the Red Sea in a friendly fire incident. The USS Gettysburg, which was escorting the aircraft carrier, blasted the jet with a missile for reasons unclear. This gross misadventure remains subject to official investigation. Then, on February 12th this year, USS Harry S. Truman was extensively damaged after colliding with a commercial vessel near Egypt’s Port Said, at the Suez Canal’s northern end.
The aircraft carrier returned to service after a period spent in Greece’s Souda Bay for repairs. The US Navy refused to release details about the cost of these repairs, or the total damage USS Harry S. Truman sustained in the collision. Whether further repairs were required was also not clarified. However, the accident was apparently considered so catastrophic within the Pentagon that the carrier’s chief, Dave Snowden, was fired from his post on February 20th, “due to a loss of confidence in his ability to command”.
These humiliating developments were completely ignored by the media. Concurrently, however, mainstream outlets were engaged in a concerted effort to rehabilitate Operation Prosperity Guardian, the embarrassingly failed Biden administration attempt to smash Ansar Allah and end the Resistance group’s righteous Red Sea blockade. Launched with much hype following the Gaza genocide’s eruption, a vast US flotilla led by USS Eisenhower spent nine months getting battered by a relentless barrage of Ansar Allah drones and missiles to no avail, before scurrying back to the US.
‘Defensive Systems’
Throughout Operation Prosperity Guardian, current and former US military and intelligence officials expressed disquiet at the enormous “cost offset” involved in battling Ansar Allah. The US Navy squandered countless difficult-to-replace missiles costing hundreds of thousands of dollars – if not millions – daily to shoot down the Resistance group’s low-cost drones. As Mick Mulroy, a former DOD official and CIA officer, bitterly told Politico :
“[This] quickly becomes a problem because the most benefit, even if we do shoot down their incoming missiles and drones, is in [Yemen’s] favor… We, the US, need to start looking at systems that can defeat these that are more in line with the costs they are expending to attack us.”
There was no sign of this “cost offset” having been remediated by the time Operation Prosperity Guardian fizzled out in July 2024. Official US Navy figures on the “unprecedented” engagement suggest the USS Eisenhower-led carrier group fired a total of 155 standard missiles and 135 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, while accompanying fighter jets and helicopters “expended nearly 60 air-to-air missiles and released 420 air-to-surface weapons” – 770 munitions in total – over the nine-month-long conflict.
Independent analysis suggests these figures are likely to be even higher. Moreover, the US Navy did not provide a breakdown of the costs involved in Operation Prosperity Guardian. Even if one accepts the official figures, a single Tomahawk alone costs around $1.89 million, meaning firing 135 cost a staggering $255,150,000. There is also the enduring question of whether this astonishingly expensive arsenal failed to protect USS Eisenhower from direct Ansar Allah attack.
In February 2024, a cruise missile fired from Yemen penetrated so many layers of the aircraft carrier’s defences it was seconds from impact, forcing USS Eisenhower to employ the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System – its “last line of defense”. It marked the System’s first-ever recorded use in battle. Then in June that year, the USS Eisenhower inexplicably withdrew from its sphere of operations in the Red Sea at maximum speed, immediately after Ansar Allah announced it had successfully struck the carrier.
As Al Mayadeen recorded at the time, multiple Western news reports painted a dire picture of Operation Prosperity Guardian in its aftermath. Associated Press revealed that participating sailors and pilots had found the experience “traumatizing”, as they “weren’t used to being fired on.” Many had repeatedly come within seconds of being struck by “Houthi-launched missiles”, before they were destroyed “by their ship’s defensive systems.” The Pentagon was thus considering providing “counseling and treatment” to thousands of US Navy employees suffering from “post-traumatic stress”, and their families.
‘Supplemental Funds’
Fast forward to February 2025, and Business Insider published a curious article, claiming, based on documents exclusively obtained by the outlet, that in fact the US Navy had successfully “fended off” Ansar Allah’s Red Sea blitzkrieg throughout Operation Prosperity Guardian, “without firing a shot”. Instead, “undefined” and “unspecified” methods and weapons of a “non-kinetic” variety were “successfully” employed to protect “Navy and coalition warships and commercial vessels”. This was, of course, at total odds with literally everything the mainstream media had hitherto reported on the debacle.
With hindsight though, the report’s propaganda utility was clear. It served to rehabilitate the US Navy’s performance in its war on Yemen at a time the Trump administration was preparing to kickstart hostilities against Ansar Allah again. So it was on March 15th, US airstrikes began raining down on Sanaa anew, while the USS Harry S. Truman-led carrier force thrust stridently into the Red Sea. US officials have talked a big game about the fresh assault continuing “indefinitely”, and Trump has bragged that Ansar Allah is “decimated”.
The April 28th loss of an F/A-18E fighter jet due to Yemeni attacks amply demonstrates such boasts to be entirely untrue. In the meantime, on April 4th, the New York Times reported Pentagon officials were “privately” briefing that Trump’s belligerence was failing to graze Ansar Allah, while costing in excess of $1 billion to date. This not only meant “supplemental funds” for the operation needed to be mustered from Congress, but doubts about continued ammunition availability gravely abounded:
“So many precision munitions are being used, especially advanced long-range ones, that some Pentagon contingency planners are growing concerned about overall Navy stocks and implications for any situation in which the United States would have to ward off an attempted invasion of Taiwan by China.”
The New York Times also noted the Trump administration had offered no explanation as to “why it thinks its campaign against [Ansar Allah] will succeed”. Almost a month later, clarity on this crucial point remains unforthcoming. We can perhaps surmise then that the flurry of mainstream interest over the USS Harry S. Truman’s recent troubles is indicative of a determination by the Pentagon to end Washington’s renewed malevolence against Yemen before Ansar Allah inflicts yet another historic defeat on the US Empire.
More Exciting News from the White House
Donald Trump has appointed a Jewish community liaison officer
By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • May 2, 2025
I know that those who read my articles will be interested to learn that President Donald Trump has appointed Martin Marks to be his administration’s liaison to the American Jewish community with the title Special Assistant to the President and Director of Jewish Engagement in the White House Faith Office. Marks, whose mother handbag designer Lana Marks served as US ambassador to South Africa in Trump’s first term, appears to be well qualified for the position as “Before turning to politics, [he] was a writer and owned a yoga studio in Palm Beach.”
To be perfectly honest I was a bit confused by the appointment as the US government already has an Office of the Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Antisemitism and a Office of the Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues actively promoting the Jewish/Israeli line at the State Department and even worldwide. And one might observe Trump’s entire cabinet is unrelentingly Zionist in its inclinations while Congress is discussing the so-called Antisemitism Accountability Act which will turn any criticism of Israel into a crime even more so than it is regarded as such right now, ask any one of the college students who are being deported! How much “liaison” protecting the most wealthy and educated 3% of the population against the curse of perceived perpetual Jewish victimhood is still warranted? And how will such “liaison” differ from the orders delivered directly from Benjamin Netanyahu, the “Chosen” leader, of the Jewish state of Israel to provide Trump and the rest of the US government with their marching orders, just as was the case with Genocide Joe Biden and his merry band of largely Jewish/Zionist cabinet members?
Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University has described the current Donald Trump regime as an “Israel First Administration” packed with Zionists at all levels. The State Department Press Secretary Tammy Bruce has declared that “Anyone who tries to touch Israel will wind up in hell.” But there are some who are still brave enough to go against the tide. The Institute for Historical Review, which is one of the few online publishers and free speech associations that still survive in the good old USA, has been confronting the Israel Lobby for forty-seven years. In an email that appeared last week they discuss another new Jewish appointment and laid out the problem in plain English that even Donald Trump might understand:
“Power, Priorities, and Puppeteers: Who Really Governs America?”: The nomination of Yehuda Kaploun — a Chabad-Lubavitch rabbi, Trump loyalist, and confidant of Republican megadonor Miriam Adelson — as US Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism underscores an uncomfortable reality: Zionist interests wield disproportionate influence over American politics, even as the nation fractures under economic despair. Kaploun’s appointment, framed as a defense against antisemitism, instead reveals a political dynamic that prioritizes the interests of world Jewry over the needs of ordinary Americans. Consider the timing. Household debt has soared to $18.04 trillion, credit card delinquencies hit 14-year highs, and inflation continues to erode wages. Yet policymakers focus on policing campus activism, cracking down on criticism of Israel, while ignoring the collapse of social mobility. Kaploun’s own rhetoric comparing US universities to “1930s Germany” diverts attention from the rising cost of living and the United States’ fraying social fabric. Meanwhile, pro-Israel groups like AIPAC have funneled $100+ million into elections, ensuring bipartisan fealty to policies that prioritize Israeli interests at the expense of America. This is not governance. It’s an occupation by foreign interests.”
The IHR point is well made and applies to Biden, Trump and Congress as well as to the 38 states that require citizens to sign documents or swear oaths pledging themselves not to support any boycotts of Israel if they wish to receive benefits or jobs. To even suggest that Israel and American Jews are some kind of victims who must be protected at a time when they are actively engaged in genocide and complete ethnic cleansing of literally millions of Palestinians.
My principal complaint with the government Jewish agenda is that it creates two classes of people before the rule of law, i.e. those who are Jews and must be protected and the rest of us who, on the contrary, will face the consequences if we so much as criticize Israeli or Jewish behavior. Ironically, we can criticize our own country or any other country in the world, but not Israel. If we are a legal resident or a student on an educational visa who crosses the line we can have that status erased and be deported without any due process. It also means that any encounter with law enforcement or government that has any taint of being critical of Jews can lead to two level justice, as many foreign students in the US are currently discovering.
A story last week out of Crown Heights Brooklyn illustrates precisely what I mean. Israel’s monstrous Security Chief Itamar Ben-Gvir, who believes in killing all Palestinians if it becomes necessary to remove them, was in town being cheered on by a large crowd of the indigenous Ultra Orthodox Jews. A local resident, a woman in her thirties, wondered what all of the noise was about and went out to take a look. She was immediately set upon by a large crowd of roughly one hundred, which screamed at her that she was a “Palestinian demonstrator,” which was not true. She “feared for her life as she was chased, kicked, spit at and pelted with objects by [the] mob of Orthodox Jewish men. She recalled how ‘They were shouting at me, threatening to rape me, chanting death to Arabs. I thought the police would protect me from the mob, but they did nothing to intervene.’ As the chants grew in intensity, a lone police officer who had joined her sought to escort her to safety back towards her apartment. They were followed for blocks by hundreds of men and boys jeering in Hebrew and English. Video shows two of the men kicking her in the back, another hurling a traffic cone into her head and a fourth pushing a trash can into her. She was beaten and kicked and even had a large garbage can thrown on top of her.” The woman later recalled how “I felt sheer terror. I realized at that point that I couldn’t lead this mob of men to my home. I had nowhere to go. I didn’t know what to do. I was just terrified.” After several blocks, the officer moved the woman into a police vehicle which prompted one assailant to yell, “Get her!” but the crowd erupted then in cheers as she was driven away. Interestingly, there were many police officers in the immediate area, presumably to protect all the rioting Jews from attacks by antisemites, but they had not intervened while the woman was being pursued apart from the one officer who came to her assistance.
The entire episode was filmed by bystanders and one would think that the Jews who had beaten the woman would face some consequences, but as is always the case when it is Jews/Israelis who are committing crimes there is the presumption of antisemitism at play and nothing happens. I could find nothing in the subsequent press coverage that suggests that anyone was arrested or even detained. I have previously suggested that this has also been the pattern connected to the past year’s demonstrations over the slaughter in Gaza. The universities and local police are quick to detain those normally peaceful demonstrators regarded as pro-Palestinians but when those individuals are in turn physically attacked by Jewish organized groups the Jews are not subjected to the same standard of law enforcement. To put it mildly, there is absolutely no mandate to protect Palestinians or ordinary Americans who become victims in the violent counterattacks on peace encampments staged by local Jews and, reportedly, including some Israeli army veterans in incidents at both Columbia University and the University of California at Los Angeles. Have any violent Israelis been arrested or deported? No? Apparently, the US “justice system” is focused on serving Israel at the expense of the US Constitution’s protection of free speech and free association.
The “Jewish Exemption” that is in practice at all levels of US and local government is readily discernible nearly everywhere to include the media coverage of Israeli atrocities. Israel, has, for example, its own completely illegal nuclear arsenal obtained through theft and deception from the United States, but nobody in the US government is allowed to mention that and it rarely comes up in the press. And no one is permitted to enforce American laws if they impact on Israel, like the Leahy Law which forbids military assistance to any country that violates human rights “with impunity.” Israel clearly is qualified to be sanctioned by that standard, but no US Administration has dared to enforce the law for fear that the powerful Israel Lobby will retaliate.
My point is that every time one turns around currently the government is doing something to exempt Jews or Israel from the consequences of their own behavior while at the same time the folks who criticize that behavior are being punished with denial of free speech and crippling penalties that will in some cases diminish their prospects for the rest of their lives. This has got to stop and all Americans must be treated the same under law. Jews are the most protected and coddled tribe that goes to make up what we Americans call a “country” but they are not the only ones here. It is time that the corrupted political class in this nation begin to realize that.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
From loans to crypto, the US financial siege of Hezbollah
The Cradle | May 2, 2025
In its relentless campaign to weaken the Lebanese resistance, Washington has launched a comprehensive financial and economic offensive against Hezbollah, aimed at isolating the group and eroding its post-war influence.
This effort is part of a wider US regional agenda to neutralize Israel’s enemies and ensure that Hezbollah plays no role in Lebanon’s recovery, in order to weaken its standing among both supporters and the broader population.
The US playbook draws from its standard regime-change toolkit – blockades, sanctions, institutional sabotage – but now with furious intensity, bolstered by the regional fallout of Syria’s unraveling and Washington’s increasing grip on Lebanese institutions.
A major component of this pressure campaign is the US’s direct and increased involvement in the day-to-day operations of Lebanese state agencies, particularly around ports, airports, and financial networks.
Despite this, Hezbollah has managed to mobilize close to $1 billion in aid since the ineffective ceasefire agreement five months ago – supporting displaced civilians and initiating early-phase reconstruction in the country’s south, Bekaa region, and southern suburbs of Beirut.
Sealing off Lebanon: Borders, skies, and ports
The late, martyred Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah never shied away from publicly acknowledging Iran as the group’s primary financial backer. In response, the US and Israel have worked aggressively to sever that link – most notably by targeting direct flights between Beirut and Tehran.
Following direct Israeli threats against Beirut-Rafic Hariri International Airport and intense US diplomatic and security pressure, Lebanon’s government under western-backed President Joseph Aoun moved to block Iranian aircraft from landing or taking off in Beirut. The goal: severing physical currency flows and cutting off high-value transfers via air.
These measures were followed by a sweeping overhaul of airport security. Electronic surveillance initiated under the Najib Mikati government and Transportation Minister Ali Hamieh – viewed as close to Hezbollah – was expanded.
Inspections were tightened, and dozens of staff were removed or reassigned based on religious, familial, or political affiliations. Control over airport security was consolidated under Brigadier General Kfoury, with American officials closely monitoring implementation.
The aim is clear: Eliminate cash transfers through travelers. In one case back in February, authorities seized $2.5 million from a passenger arriving from Turkiye, which the Higher Islamic Shia Council claimed as its own – though opponents alleged the funds belonged to Hezbollah.
Surveillance now targets passengers arriving from Turkiye, the UAE, Iraq, and African states, especially frequent fliers with little or no luggage, suspected of being couriers.
The US has also ramped up pressure on Turkiye, Iraq, and Qatar to monitor Lebanon-bound financial flows, leveraging their ties with the Islamic Republic. Border inspections across West Asian airports have intensified dramatically.
At Beirut Port, similar efforts are underway. Inspection protocols have been revamped, and staff purged to prevent Hezbollah from using shipping containers for cash smuggling. Israeli officials and Lebanese political adversaries have spotlighted the port – still reeling from the devastating 2020 blast – as a supposed smuggling hub, pushing for stricter measures.
On Lebanon’s eastern border with Syria, pressure is being reinforced militarily. Syrian army operations near the Qusayr region – adjacent to Lebanon’s Hermel – appear coordinated with US and Israeli demands to close off land routes Hezbollah once used to move funds and arms.
Syria’s President and former Al-Qaeda leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa, has reportedly informed US and European interlocutors that his government is actively disrupting Hezbollah supply channels. Meanwhile, Israeli drones conduct routine surveillance of the border, striking suspected transfers at will.
Financial asphyxiation through the banks
With smuggling routes under siege, Washington is escalating efforts to choke Hezbollah via the banking and commercial sectors. All financial activity – from remittances to basic commerce – is now under microscopic scrutiny to ensure the group is cut off at every node.
The recent appointment of Lebanon’s Central Bank Governor Karim Saeed has further solidified US influence over Lebanon’s financial system. While his predecessor Wassim Mansouri (aligned with the Amal Movement) took initial steps that constrained Hezbollah’s financial networks, Saeed has expanded on this approach further, taking an increasingly hostile stance toward Hezbollah – helping enforce Washington’s dictates within Lebanon’s banking institutions.
Measures include arbitrary account closures, frozen transfers, and heightened scrutiny of routine transactions suspected of even peripheral links to Hezbollah. While designed to stifle the group, these policies have ensnared countless ordinary Lebanese – especially Shia populations and those from opposition-aligned backgrounds – trapping them in a banking system that now functions as a US-enforced surveillance and punishment mechanism.
Currency exchange offices are also under fire. Hefty fines have been levied under both Mansouri and Saeed for dealing with individuals flagged by Washington – often baselessly – as Hezbollah affiliates. Ostensibly part of a campaign to dry up Lebanon’s cash-based economy, the deeper objective is political: Make Hezbollah’s support base pay the price of resistance, and sow dissent among Shia communities.
Even cryptocurrency has not escaped notice. Though harder to track inside blockchain systems, US authorities are targeting the fiat-to-crypto entry point, focusing on how individuals acquire digital currency before it moves beyond the reach of formal oversight.
The assault on Al-Qard al-Hassan
In addition to economic warfare, Israel has militarily targeted Hezbollah-linked institutions – chief among them, the Al-Qard al-Hassan Association. During the war, several of the loan institution’s branches were bombed. But the campaign against this financial cooperative extends far beyond airstrikes.
Washington and Tel Aviv are determined to dismantle Al-Qard al-Hassan, viewing it as a pillar of Hezbollah’s socioeconomic infrastructure and a symbol of grassroots resistance. The US is pressuring Lebanon’s central bank to shut the institution down altogether. Although Governor Saeed has publicly denied plans to do so, political insiders widely believe dismantling the cooperative is one of his key tasks.
Unlike traditional banks, Al-Qard al-Hassan operates as a solidarity-based financial institution. Its mission is to provide accessible services to underserved communities – many of whom have lost trust in Lebanon’s scandal-ridden private banking sector. This alternative model undermines the profit-driven logic of western financial institutions, making it a strategic target for elimination.
The campaign to vilify the cooperative has gained momentum in recent years. Claims have surfaced of a past hacking incident that allegedly exposed highly sensitive client data – names, transactions, and account details.
If true, it would hand Washington a sanctions hit list and serve as a deterrent to anyone considering using the institution. The goal is to isolate Al-Qard al-Hassan, destroy public trust in it, and neutralize its utility to the resistance.
Strategic sabotage by another name
Washington is banking on these combined tactics – air, land, financial, and digital – to bear fruit ahead of Lebanon’s next parliamentary elections.
The underlying calculation is blunt: Cut off Hezbollah’s resources, weaken its institutions, and its base will either abstain or swing toward rival factions. Such an outcome could shift the balance of power in the Lebanese parliament, eroding both Hezbollah’s share and that of its primary ally, the Amal Movement.
It is a strategy not of persuasion, but of attrition – waged not on the battlefield, but through bureaucracies, banks, and surveillance networks. The US hopes that a starved resistance will become a subdued resistance – and, eventually, no resistance at all.
U.S. Continues Strikes on Yemen: Objectives, Criticism, and Alternatives
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – May 1, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump has confirmed that the United States will continue missile strikes on Yemen until the Houthis cease their attacks on Israel and ships in the Red Sea.
American officials have baselessly insisted that the attacks, which began on March 15, 2025, have achieved significant success. They claim to have allegedly destroyed personnel linked to the Houthis’ missile capabilities, as well as missile sites and weapons depots. However, many observers doubt the effectiveness of this campaign. While the Trump administration’s strikes have been less restrained than the bombings carried out under Biden, they have failed to eliminate Houthi leaders or undermine their missile production capabilities. Meanwhile, the Houthis continue to strike Israel and Israel-affiliated vessels, clearly demonstrating the limited effectiveness of the U.S. operation in achieving its stated goals.
Risks of Escalation and Humanitarian Consequences
Many analysts argue that the U.S. should intensify its operation by targeting critical infrastructure tied to the Houthis’ military potential. The recent barbaric bombing of the port of Ras Isa, which killed over 80 civilians, including rescue workers, may signal the start of a new phase. But experts doubt the U.S. can sustain such an operation, which has faced bipartisan criticism for lacking strategic results and for its financial cost—estimated at $1 billion in just two weeks. Some Democratic and Republican lawmakers have also stated that the Yemen operation violates the War Powers Act, which prohibits prolonged overseas military deployments without congressional approval.
Pentagon officials have also expressed concerns over U.S. Central Command’s (CENTCOM) heavy use of long-range Tomahawk missiles in Yemen, warning that this could deplete U.S. stockpiles in the event of a future military confrontation with China.
For their part, the Houthis have a decade of experience enduring massive and sustained bombings—whether from the Saudi-led coalition since 2015 or directly from the U.S. under Biden. Neither side has achieved its primary strategic objectives. Moreover, prolonged strikes could create political pressure on the U.S. due to civilian casualties amid Yemen’s worsening humanitarian crisis. Since the beginning of the month, Trump administration strikes on Yemen have killed at least 160 civilians, including many children.
A Failed Military Approach and Pressure for Quick Results
The military setbacks, combined with pressure on Washington to deliver quick results, point to another possibility—turning to the Yemeni army. In theory, local ground forces could engage the Houthis on multiple fronts, particularly in coastal provinces, with the goal of degrading the Houthis’ military capabilities in the region and securing Red Sea shipping lanes, including vessels carrying critical supplies for aggressive Israel.
Earlier this month, the Yemeni army’s chief of staff met with the commander of U.S. CENTCOM to discuss joint military objectives and efforts to counter the Houthis. CNN, citing regional diplomatic sources, reported that a ground operation against the Houthis is being prepared in southern Yemen. The coordinated attack would be supported by Saudi and U.S. naval forces and aim to push the Houthis out of the critical port of Hodeidah. According to Yemeni sources, up to 80,000 troops have been mobilized for this purpose.
So far, there has been no official confirmation that a U.S.-backed Yemeni army offensive is in the works. In reality, this option comes with several practical challenges, not least of which are structural issues within the military apparatus of Yemen’s internationally recognized government.
While the official Yemeni army has received significant military support in training and equipment since 2015, including the formation of local militias, it remains weak and ineffective due to outdated pre-war weaponry, limited air defense capabilities, ammunition shortages, and insufficient training and maintenance. Other problems include pay disparities among soldiers from different factions and the prevalence of “ghost soldiers”—names added to payrolls for embezzlement purposes.
The Yemeni army is deeply fragmented, composed not of individual conscripts but of political and tribal factions that often hold conflicting regional, ideological, political, and even foreign allegiances. This is the main reason for poor coordination and the lack of a unified command. A joint security and defense committee was established years ago to reorganize and centralize the armed forces, but key factions—particularly the Southern Transitional Council (STC)—have resisted such efforts, preferring to maintain autonomy.
The situation is further complicated by infighting within the Presidential Leadership Council, lingering separatist sentiments in the STC, and Yemen’s economic devastation after years of civil war. These issues would not only hinder a military campaign against the Houthis but could also derail the UN-backed peace process. Even setting aside these concerns, overcoming structural problems would require extensive military and financial support from regional and international forces, long-term training and equipping, and measures to address gaps in the sanctions regime.
Diplomatic Alternatives
Reports suggest that U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations also touch on Iran’s role in the Middle East. In this context, Washington may pressure Tehran to convince the Houthis to halt attacks on Israel and Israel-linked ships in the Red Sea. This approach depends on Iran’s level of influence over the Houthis on one hand and progress on other issues—such as Iran’s nuclear program, missile capabilities, and sanctions—on the other.
A deal would benefit both sides. Iran wants to avoid a war that could cost it much of its remaining power and influence—especially after losing most of its military allies in the region—and could potentially lead to regime collapse. The U.S. wants to avoid further draining its military resources in the Middle East, preferring to conserve them for a prolonged conflict with China, which remains the current administration’s top priority. Still, the prospects of a negotiated solution to the Houthi problem remain uncertain, given its entanglement with other critical issues.
Each of the three options discussed has major drawbacks—yet none can be ruled out. The failure of one could lead to another, or two approaches could be pursued simultaneously. In the long run, Houthi attacks will likely stop. The question is how, under what terms, and what impact this will have on Yemen’s broader crisis.
If the Houthis are forced to halt due to a ground offensive, it would strengthen Yemen’s legitimate government, either compelling the Houthis to engage in peace talks or ousting them from Sanaa and restoring the official government. Conversely, if the Houthis relent due to a deal with Iran, it would solidify their control over northern Yemen.
The outcome hinges on whether the U.S. can break the Houthis or force them into peace on American-Israeli terms.
Viktor Mikhin, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Middle East Expert
Who and what was behind the purge of Pentagon officers?
If Americans Knew | April 30, 2025
As is often the case, it appears that Israel partisans were behind this, as revealed by Col. Douglas Macgregor in this interview with Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis. Macgregor is a decorated combat veteran, author of five books, a PhD, and a defense and foreign policy consultant. In 2020 he was appointed Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Defense by President Trump. In 28 years of service Macgregor taught at West Point; commanded the 1st Squadron, 4th Cavalry; served as the Director of the Joint Operations Center at SHAPE in 1999; and was awarded the Defense Superior Service medal. – https://www.douglasmacgregor.com/about
Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow and military expert at Defense Priorities. Davis retired from the U.S. Army as a Lt. Col. after 21 years of active service. He was deployed into combat zones four times in his career, beginning with Operation Desert Storm in 1991, and then to Iraq in 2009 and Afghanistan twice (2005, 2011). He was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for Valor at the Battle of 73 Easting in 1991, and awarded a Bronze Star Medal in Afghanistan in 2011. He is the author of The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America. – https://www.defensepriorities.org/peo…
The full Tucker Carlson interview with Dan Caldwell is here: https://tuckercarlson.com/tucker-show…
This video is excerpted from the “Daniel Davis / Deep Dive” interview with Col. Macgregor on April 22, 2025. View it at 
• Col Doug Macgregor: Defense Sec Hegse…
To learn more about If Americans Knew, an American nonprofit organization, go here: https://ifamericansknew.org/
‘Prepare to face consequences’: Yemen warns UK after attacks on Sanaa
The Cradle | April 30, 2025
The Yemeni government issued a statement on 30 April warning the UK against its continued participation in the US campaign of deadly airstrikes against Yemen that began last month.
“In a display of typical British arrogance, the UK Ministry of Defense announced participation in a joint military operation with the US enemy against our country, targeting areas south of Sanaa … The Government affirms that the British enemy must carefully consider the consequences of its involvement and be prepared to face the repercussions,” the Sanaa government said.
“While we pledge to respond to this unlawful and unjustified aggression, we stress that this attack is part of ongoing Anglo-American efforts to support the Israeli enemy by attempting to block Yemen’s support for Palestine – enabling the Israeli enemy to continue its genocide in Gaza,” it added.
The government statement also said Yemen will stand against the “trio of evil,” referring to the US, UK, and Israel, as well as “those who orbit around them.”
The statement came hours after the UK announced its first joint attack against Yemen with Washington since US President Donald Trump entered office this year.
The UK Defense Ministry claimed the strikes targeted a “cluster of buildings” used by the Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) and Ansarallah movement for storing drones, adding that the attack came after “very careful planning” to avoid civilian casualties.
London played a primary role in the initial campaign against Yemen, launched in January 2024 by the former US administration of Joe Biden.
Yemeni forces targeted UK vessels in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden a number of times last year in response.
The UK announcement came after at least six US airstrikes struck the Sanaa governorate on 29 April.
Two days ago, around 70 African migrants were killed in US strikes on a detention center in Saada governorate. Dozens of others were injured.
The Interior Ministry of the Sanaa government said the shelter, located in Saada’s reserve prison, was supervised by the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Red Cross.
In response, the YAF said it targeted the USS Harry Truman in the Red Sea with missiles and drones, adding that it forced the aircraft carrier to retreat northward. It also said it targeted a “vital” Israeli site in the city of Ashkelon.
US warplanes have been launching deadly attacks against Yemen every day since 15 March, when Trump intensified the campaign that was started by the former administration last year.
The bombing campaign comes in response to Yemen’s reimposition of a ban on Israeli shipping in the Red Sea and elsewhere, as well as its renewal of drone and missile attacks on Israel after Tel Aviv restarted the war on Gaza last month.
Yemen has repeatedly targeted US aircraft carriers in response to Washington’s campaign, which has cost around $1 billion and has depleted weapons stocks, while failing to significantly impact the YAF and Ansarallah.
Iran: French threat to reimpose sanctions is ‘economic blackmail’
Press TV – April 30, 2025
Iran’s ambassador to the UN has lambasted the French foreign minister’s open threat to reimpose sanctions lifted under a 2015 deal on Tehran’s nuclear program.
“Resorting to threats and economic blackmail is entirely unacceptable and represents a clear breach of the principles enshrined in the UN Charter,” Amir Saeid Iravani wrote in letters to UN chief General Antonio Guterres and Security Council head Jérôme Bonnafont.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said on Monday that his government along with Germany and Britain “will not hesitate for a single second to reapply all the sanctions” lifted a decade ago if European security is threatened by Iran’s nuclear activities.
Iravani said France’s threat to trigger the so-called snapback mechanism despite its own failure to honor its commitments contradicts the fundamental principles of international law that preclude a party from claiming rights under an agreement while simultaneously failing to fulfill its obligations.
“Such an action is legally and procedurally flawed, unacceptable, and invalid, and would undermine the credibility of the Security Council,” he added.
The snapback mechanism is triggered simply by the assertion of significant non-compliance on the part of a participating state, a prerogative the West might abuse based on its accusations.
Iravani further reaffirmed Iran’s commitment to diplomacy and constructive engagement, but “genuine diplomacy cannot be conducted under threats or pressure”.
“If France and its partners are truly interested in a diplomatic resolution, they must abandon coercion and respect the sovereign rights of States under international law.”
Iravani said France’s credibility on non-proliferation is fundamentally undermined by its own record as it continues to modernize and expand its nuclear arsenal, remains silent about, and is complicit in the Israeli regime’s undeclared nuclear weapons program.
France has also yet to fulfill its disarmament obligations under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), he added.
The ambassador rejected the French foreign minister’s accusations that Iran sought to acquire nuclear weapons,
“Allegations that Iran is ‘on the cusp’ of developing nuclear weapons are entirely unfounded and politically irresponsible. The Islamic Republic of Iran has never pursued nuclear weapons, and its defensive doctrine has not been changed,” Iravani said.
“Iran unequivocally rejects all weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), including nuclear arms,” he said. “As a founding member of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), Iran remains fully committed to its obligations under the treaty.”
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), he said, “continues to monitor and verify the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program. Its reports have consistently verified that there has been no diversion of nuclear material for non-peaceful purposes.”
Barrot’s allegations about Tehran’s peaceful nuclear program reflect either a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate distortion of Iran’s legal rights under international law, Iravani said.
The claims also demonstrate a selective interpretation of facts and exemplifies a persistent pattern of double standards by a country that bears specific responsibilities as a permanent member of the Security Council, he added.
Featured Video
Israeli Military Medics Are Training On Dead Americans
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
A decade of lies: The US-funded biolab denial saga
RT | May 15, 2026
Russia’s allegations that the US funded clandestine biological laboratories near its borders – claims denied until recently by Washington – have remained a persistent flashpoint in the steadily deteriorating relationship between Russia and the West for nearly a decade.
The biolabs affair was revealed in a 2017 exposé by RT that questioned a shady US military tender seeking the genetic material of living Russians. Over the years, Moscow has raised allegations against Washington of conducting clandestine bio-research, including potential WMD development and illicit human testing, in a network of labs located across multiple nations, the bulk of which operated in Ukraine. The claims were met with a blanket denial in the West, which repeatedly dismissed them as “Russian propaganda.”
This abruptly changed the past week when US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said that her department had identified more than 120 US-funded biological laboratories in 30 countries, with over a third of them located in Ukraine. The agency is now working to “identify where these labs are, what pathogens they contain, and what ‘research’ is being conducted to end dangerous gain-of-function research that threatens the health and wellbeing of the American people and the world,” according to Gabbard.
RT looks back at the timeline of the biolabs saga and the US denial of its existence until now. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- US’s war of choice on Iran imposed avoidable costs on Americans: FM
- Russia-West Confrontation Fast Approaching /Dmitry Polyanskiy
- Intelligence Agency Investigating CIA Whistleblower Allegations, Official Confirms
- AIPAC Favorite Ed Gallrein Wants to Bring Back the Draft
- A decade of lies: The US-funded biolab denial saga
- Mainstream US media complicit in selling Gaza genocide, sweeping new analysis finds
- US Overseas Biolabs Probe Aims to Rein in ‘Deep State’ Bureaucracy
- ‘Death to Arabs’: Settler mobs storm Jerusalem’s Muslim, Christian quarters for ‘Flag March’
- China’s position on Iran, Hormuz remains unchanged
- Israeli Military Medics Are Training On Dead Americans
- If Americans Knew
- We Can’t Curb Nuclear Proliferation If We Don’t Acknowledge Israel’s Nukes
- 43,000 people in Gaza suffered life-changing injuries since October 2023: WHO
- Israel’s 7 October narrative under fresh scrutiny after army accused of deleting footage
- Ex-CENTCOM chief headlines lavish Israeli-American Council gala
- Israel’s 7 October rape hoax gets a 300-page reboot
- Chants of ‘death to Arabs,’ calls for destruction of Al-Aqsa Mosque in racist Jerusalem Day march
- What Fuels My Revolutionary Optimism This Nakba Day
- Gaza elders who survived the Nakba reflect on being displaced by Israel again, 78 years later
- Israel (with US assistance) perpetuates the Nakba; Palestinians remain resilient – Daily Update
- Microsoft fires head of Israeli subsidiary and other managers over surveillance of Palestinians
- No Tricks Zone
- German Expert: “No Climate Crisis” …”Warming Generally Better For Humanity”
- New Paleo Research: Modern ‘Climate Change’ Has Had No Apparent Impact On Precipitation Patterns
- 90% Subsidized… Bielefeld Germany’s €7 Million Hydrogen Garbage Truck Fleet Sits Idle
- New Study: Declining Trends In 1980-2023 Tropical Cyclone Frequency, Accumulated Energy
- 46 IPCC Scientists Break Rank, Publicly Challenge Long-Standing Dogmatic Climate Claims
- Another Study Links Warming To Cloud Forcing, Shortwave Radiation, Natural Atmospheric Circulation
- Wind Energy Is Toxic, Hazardous To Human Health, Scientific Review Shows
- Oversupply Of Volatile Solar Energy Leads To Record NEGATIVE Prices!
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
Aletho News 
