Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Russian Regret

By Israel Shamir • Unz Review • October 29, 2025

The Russians are disappointed with Trump’s policy towards Russia. They have long given up hoping to partner with the US in building a just world order, and they are now giving up the hope that they might be treated fairly. The last person in Russia (if not in the world) still hoping to get along with Mr Trump is President Putin.

One can understand him. There is a great need for geopolitical and geo-economic cooperation between the US and Russia, both in resolving the Ukrainian crisis (taking into account Russia’s interests) and in interacting throughout the Arctic, Caribbean, Africa and all the other global ‘hot spots’. That would be international cooperation, not American Hegemony, as many US politicians prefer. The US should step away from the abyss of nuclear war, while this is still possible. Last week, the Russians carried out nuclear exercises, of a magnitude never done previously. The exercises involved Russia’s full nuclear triad—land-based, sea-based, and airborne assets, according to the statement reported by Russia’s state RIA news agency on Telegram. During the exercise, a Yars intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was launched from the Plesetsk Cosmodrome and Tu-95MS strategic bombers conducted air-launched cruise missile strikes, the Kremlin said. A strategic submarine cruiser launched a ballistic missile from the Barents Sea. And then there was the launch of Burevestnik, a brand-new cruise missile with nuclear reactor onboard, that can fly anywhere for as long as it takes. The Pentagon has revealed that they are worried about these new developments, and have asked the Russians to show them how they make their new devices, the Burevestnik and Poseidon. It is good that President Putin prefers peace, not war.

However, President Putin is not a free agent. There is a strong demand in Russian politics for a nuclear response to Western provocations, not stopping at the Western border of the Ukraine, but going all the way west. For the present, Putin prevails, but it’s likely to change if the US continues its drift toward war and sanctions. And the US invasion of Venezuela is likely to be met with force. The Russian soldiers of Wagner PDC are supposedly already there.

Such sentiments were recently expressed by Sergey Karaganov (a prominent political scientist and honorary representative of The Council on Foreign and Defence Policy) on TVC television, quoted by a PolitNavigator correspondent:

“Europeans – we are dealing with insane morons, excuse me, these are unpleasant words. Well, brutalised morons. They really are morons – the current generation of degenerate European elites, who have also ceased to fear God… and have lost their fear of death.

This is an animal instinct that needs to be restored; they have nothing else left, because they have no intellectual function, no sense of homeland, no sense of gender or love. Of course, I am exaggerating; there are wonderful people there. But that’s how it is [those who are in the governing circle] — they are the scum of humanity.

There is no leader there yet, figuratively speaking, no ‘Hitler’. But, in principle, they are moving towards this. And they are driving their peoples to slaughter. We must stop this movement – in order to save ourselves and these peoples, by the way. Maybe something will come of them someday, although they are degrading very quickly.

They are now being targeted for a massive confrontation with Russia. By the way, we underestimate this, because total propaganda is turning masses of Europeans into potential cannon fodder.

So, we must save them, and at the same time save the world. This is our historical task, but we must realise this historical task. Moreover, we have no other option. Either we destroy ourselves, then destroy the world, or we win and save humanity.

The program’s host Dmitry Kulikov noted that historically, ‘we act best when we understand that we have no other option.’ This feeling permeates Russian political circles. They more and more often repeat Putin’s words from 2018: We shall go to heaven, and they will just croak.

This is indeed regretful, for Putin and Trump have in common real enemies, namely the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, the European Union and the ultra-liberal stateless intelligentsia. Can it be that a grown man, a US President, falls for flattery of the cheapest kind delivered by the likes of Keith Starmer, Macron, Friedrich Merz et al? Doesn’t he understand that they despise him? What do they want? Do Fritz (German Chancellor Friedrich Merz) and Ursula have good memories of the free Russian soup the Germans were fed by the Russian soldiers in 1945, and perhaps they dream of tasting it again? Does Starmer hope to distract his voters so that they might forget his support for Gaza Genocide and Israeli football hooligans? Does Macron think it better to send Frenchmen to die in the Ukraine so they won’t join the Yellow Vests? Does Swedish Ulf Kristersson think that it’s better to keep up the venerable tradition of hosting the Russian occupation force at least once in a century? Which of these plans fit into Trump’s vision?

We may ask – why would President Trump lift a finger to help Vladimir Zelensky, the man who supported the Democratic Party candidate during the US presidential election and played a role in launching the impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump?

In case Trump forgot, the Russian envoy Dmitriev reminded the American public (in his interview with journalist Lara Logan) that Zelensky campaigned in support of Kamala Harris, who represented the Democratic Party in the 2024 election and was Trump’s main rival. ‘Let’s not forget that,’ he added. Dmitriev then noted that Zelensky was one of the factors that influenced the initiation of the first impeachment process against the then US president.

The investigation that preceded the impeachment of US President Donald Trump began on 24 September 2019 at the initiative of US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The impeachment was sparked by a statement by an anonymous informant (probably Zelensky himself) who claimed that in July 2019, Trump pressured Vladimir Zelensky for personal political gain. According to the anonymous report, Trump demanded that Kiev investigate the activities of Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, in exchange for providing Ukraine with financial and military aid.

After these allegations surfaced, the White House was forced to publish a memorandum containing a transcript of the telephone conversation between Trump and Zelensky. The document showed that Trump did indeed ask the Ukrainian president to ‘look into’ the matter concerning the Biden family. At the same time, a week before the aforementioned conversation, Trump had ordered the suspension of military aid to Ukraine. Representatives of the Democratic Party viewed this decision as a possible attempt to put pressure on Kiev in order to achieve an investigation that would be beneficial to Trump. The president himself was forced to publicly deny these allegations.

On 31 October 2019, the US House of Representatives approved a resolution to formally begin impeachment proceedings. On the 18th of December, the final debates took place, during which two articles of impeachment against Trump were put to a vote: abuse of power and obstruction of a congressional investigation. Both articles were approved, resulting in the president’s impeachment, making him the third head of state in US history to be subject to such a decision by the House of Representatives.

On 15 January 2020, a vote was held to send the indictment to the Senate, where the articles of impeachment were sent the following day. After reviewing the case, on 5 February 2020, the Senate acquitted Donald Trump on both counts. And now Trump wants to help the man who saddled him with that mess?

Not only that, but Trump’s policy of arming Europe and providing military aid to Ukraine is against US interests. Forcing Europe’s NATO members to increase defence spending to two per cent and then to five per cent will, in the near future, turn the EU into a military monster comparable to the Third Reich. A militarily strong EU would immediately break its economic dependence on the United States, both in terms of oil and gas and technology. And then it would begin to impose its own agenda on other countries, including America itself. Trump’s course towards the militarisation of Europe is suicidal for the future of the United States; it is feeding the crocodile that the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition seemed to have destroyed forever in 1945.

One might understand Trump’s decisions if building up a Ukrainian statelet were a winning move for the West. But it is not. It’s like feeding money to a slot machine in one of the casinos belonging to Trump’s benefactor, Sheldon Adelson. You give it money, and it gives you jolly music, noise, colourful figures move across the screen; then – nothing. Drop more money, you surely will win the next round, says the croupier. A wise man would not throw good money after bad, but a gambler would, down to his last penny. NATO’s Ukrainian morass is like a Kyiv Casino – they tell you that you are about to win big, you just have to invest another hundred billion! Billions have gone down this drain with nothing to show for it except more Miami palaces for Mr Zelensky and his friends.

The Trump’s renovation of the east wing of the White House is not just a random project – the so-called ‘Trump Ballroom’ is just a cover story for the construction of a secret bomb shelter and presidential bunker. But how long would he be able to sit there under a rain of Oreshnik and other fabulous Russian missiles? They will reach the deepest bunker and burn it out.

No, the only salvation for America is an honest alliance with Russia and the transformation of the Ukraine from Europe’s military springboard into a ‘bridge of cooperation’ between the West and the East. Thank God it is still possible.

NATO expansion has never benefited Europe. It was always a way to keep US troops on the job throughout the Cold War. NATO was deliberately expanded to keep up pressure on Russia. It always put Europe at risk, and there was never any corresponding benefit for the average European. Now, with the US about to drastically reduce its troops in Europe, the nations of Europe are on the brink of running NATO by themselves. Does Europe really want to recreate the Cold War and become a testing ground for Russia’s new cruise missiles? Are they really ready to face such an implacable enemy on their doorstep? Does Europe really want to make an enemy of a European country sitting on most of Europe’s natural resources, including its natural gas, oil, coal, palladium, aluminium and iron ore? How could this enmity benefit the average European family?

And President Trump will be remembered for Gaza Genocide that was not stopped by his 3000 years peace (lasted just two days!), for submission to the European clowns and to Bibi Netanyahu; now for leading the US into final Armageddon.

October 29, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Senegal probes French colonial massacre with fresh excavations

Al Mayadeen | October 28, 2025

Archaeologists in Senegal have uncovered new evidence of a French colonial massacre dating back to 1944, as part of a government-led effort to uncover the truth behind the killings of West African soldiers by French forces following World War II.

The Thiaroye military cemetery, located near the capital Dakar, is currently the focus of an extensive archaeological excavation aimed at identifying the remains of soldiers allegedly executed by French colonial troops on December 1, 1944.

The incident occurred after nearly 1,600 soldiers, many of them recently freed from German captivity, were brought to a holding camp in Thiaroye and began protesting unpaid wages and unequal treatment.

French troops opened fire on the men, but the number of casualties and the precise circumstances have long been disputed. Official colonial-era accounts claimed 70 deaths, but Senegalese researchers say the number could be between 300 and 400.

Mass grave evidence emerges

During a recent visit to the cemetery, an AFP team observed disrupted earth, exposed burial containers, and ongoing digs around headstones. The cemetery, created in 1926 by colonial France, holds 202 marked graves, although it remains unclear who is buried in each plot, or whether some markers contain any remains at all.

Archaeologists have excavated seven graves from an initial group of 34, recovering full and partial skeletons. According to archaeologist Moustapha Sall, one of the skeletons was found with a bullet lodged near the heart. Others showed signs of trauma, including missing spines, ribs, and skulls. Some remains were discovered with iron chains around their legs.

“This means they suffered violence,” Sall said. “One hypothesis is that the graves were made after the initial burials, or that it was staged to make it appear they had been properly buried.”

Historical record challenged

Colonel Saliou Ngom, director of Senegal’s army archives and historical heritage, said the work aims to compensate for the historical gaps left by limited access to French colonial archives.

“Making the underground speak is our way of accessing truth,” Ngom said. He added that the October 16 report submitted to President Bassirou Diomaye Faye described the massacre as “premeditated” and “covered up.”

President Faye has since authorized the continuation of excavations at all sites suspected to contain mass graves. He has also reaffirmed Senegal’s commitment to preserving the memory of those killed.

Researchers plan to carry out DNA analysis to identify the origins of the remains, and ballistics experts will examine the materials recovered to establish the type of weapons used. Ground-penetrating radar is also being employed to explore deeper layers of the cemetery’s subsoil.

“The preliminary results do not answer all the questions,” Sall noted. “But they are a very important step in the search for historical truth.”

France acknowledges massacre

In November 2024, as the 80th anniversary of the massacre approached, French President Emmanuel Macron publicly acknowledged for the first time that French colonial troops had carried out a “massacre” in Thiaroye.

While the statement marked a significant shift in France’s official stance, Senegalese officials and historians say much more work remains to be done to fully document the scale of the atrocity and ensure proper recognition for those killed.

“We have been searching for the historical truth for 81 years,” Colonel Ngom said. “If the subsoil provides it, there is nothing more significant.”

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

French General Staff Gearing Up To Send 2,000 Troops To Ukraine – Russian Foreign Intel

Sputnik – 28.10.2025

French Foreign Legion assault troops, currently stationed in Poland, are preparing for redeployment to central Ukraine, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has revealed.

French Foreign Legion assault troops, stationed in Poland’s border regions, are gearing up to be redeployed to central Ukraine, the Russian Foreign Intelligence service (SVR) stated.

President Emmanuel Macron of France has been itching for military intervention in Ukraine, craving to be remembered as a military leader, the agency said.

“According to information received by the SVR, French President E. Macron is dreaming of a military intervention in Ukraine. Having failed as a politician and despairing of leading the country out of its protracted socio-economic crisis, he has not given up hope of going down in history as a military leader,” the SVR said in a statement.

The General Staff of the French armed forces, on the orders of Macron, is preparing to deploy a military contingent of up to 2,000 soldiers and officers to Ukraine to assist Kiev, the SVR added.

“The backbone of the formation will be French Foreign Legion assault troops, primarily from Latin American countries. The legionnaires are currently deployed in areas of Poland bordering Ukraine, undergoing intensive combat training and receiving weapons and military equipment. Their deployment to central Ukraine is planned for the near future,” the statement read.

France is rapidly creating hundreds of additional hospital beds to accommodate the wounded, the statement added.

“In the event of a leak of information about the planned intervention, Paris intends to state that it is merely a small group of instructors arriving in Ukraine to train mobilized soldiers of Ukrainian armed forces,” the SVR also said.

October 28, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

France must be ready for war with Russia within four years – top general

RT | October 23, 2025

French forces could be at war with Russia by 2028, the country’s newly appointed chief of staff, General Fabien Mandon, has claimed.

Moscow has repeatedly rejected claims that it plans to attack EU countries, saying any such allegations are being used by European politicians to scare the population and justify growing military spending. Russia has also said it is defending itself in the Ukraine conflict, accusing NATO of provoking the hostilities.

Mandon, who became France’s top general in early September, told lawmakers on the National Assembly’s Defense Committee on Wednesday that “Russia is a country that may be tempted to continue the war on our continent.”

“The first objective I had given the armed forces is to be ready in three or four years for a shock that would be a kind of a test [by Moscow],” he claimed. “The test already exists in hybrid forms, but it may become more violent.”

According to the chief of staff, France and other Western European nations must boost defense spending because Russia has a “perception of a collectively weak [Western] Europe.”

NATO countries on the continent “have everything to be sure of ourselves” in terms of economy, demographics, and industry, Mandon claimed. “Russia cannot scare us if we are willing to defend ourselves,” he said.

French Armed Forces Minister Catherine Vautrin previously said that, according to the draft defense budget, military spending in the country will increase to €57.1 billion ($66.3 billion) next year, going up by 13% compared to 2025 and reaching 2.2% of GDP.

President Vladimir Putin said earlier this month that those in the West who keep promoting “nonsense” about alleged aggressive intentions by Moscow are either “incompetent or dishonest.”

“Frankly speaking, one just wants to tell them: calm down, sleep well, finally address your own problems. Look at what is happening on the streets of European cities; what is happening with the economy, industry, European culture, identity; with the huge debts and the growing crisis of the social security system, out-of-control migration, the rise in violence, including political violence,” Putin stressed.

October 23, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Iran confirms UN Resolution 2231 expired, condemns US, E3 violation

Al Mayadeen | October 18, 2025

In a letter addressed to the UN Secretary-General and the Presidency of the Security Council, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi affirmed that UN Security Council Resolution 2231 has expired and fully ceased to be in effect as of today, in accordance with its explicit provisions.

He underscored that the nuclear agreement reflected the international community’s shared belief that diplomacy and multilateral engagement remain the most effective means to resolve conflicts.

Araghchi recalled that Washington initially refrained from fulfilling its commitments before withdrawing from the agreement, reimposing what he described as illegal and unilateral sanctions, and even expanding them. “These coercive measures,” he noted, “constituted a grave violation of international law and the UN Charter, causing severe disruption in the implementation of the agreement.”

In his letter, Araghchi added that the E3 failed to fulfill their obligations and instead imposed additional illegal sanctions on Iranian individuals and institutions. Despite this, he said, Iran demonstrated the utmost restraint in the face of repeated and fundamental violations, making extensive efforts to restore balance and preserve the agreement.

After a full year of Iran’s continued compliance, Araghchi explained, Iran began implementing gradual, proportionate, and reversible compensatory steps in line with its recognized rights under the deal.

‘E3’s snapback attempt lacks legal validity’

Iran’s top diplomat stated that the E3’s attempt to activate the snapback mechanism by directly resorting to the UN Security Council disregarded the dispute settlement process stipulated in the nuclear agreement, stressing that the attempt suffers from procedural flaws and lacks any legal validity or authority.

“No action taken in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 2231 can create any legal obligation upon member states,” Araghchi affirmed, emphasizing that any claim to “revive” or “reimpose” expired resolutions is null and void, lacking legal basis and producing no binding effect.

Araghchi highlighted that the Non-Aligned Movement, during its 19th Meeting of Foreign Ministers, reaffirmed in its final document that Resolution 2231 had expired on its scheduled date. He also referred to the two Security Council voting sessions held on 19 and 26 September 2025, which demonstrated the absence of consensus among Council members regarding the validity of the notification to trigger the “snapback” mechanism.

Iran warns against unauthorized UN Secretariat actions

Araghchi asserted that Resolution 2231 does not grant the Secretary-General or the UN Secretariat any authority or mandate to determine, announce, reactivate, or reinstate resolutions that have expired under operative paragraph 8.

He added that any such action would exceed the legal authority conferred by the UN Charter and contradict the purely administrative and neutral role of the Secretariat. “Any ‘notification of snapback activation’ or ‘confirmation’ issued by the Secretariat is legally void and undermines the credibility of the organization,” he wrote.

Araghchi concluded that no member state, the Secretariat, or any official may take legal action in this regard without a new and explicit resolution from the Security Council.

Earlier last week, Araghchi condemned Trump, accusing him of spreading falsehoods about Iran’s nuclear program and being misled by Israeli deception. His remarks followed an earlier statement by the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which condemned Trump’s address at the Israeli Knesset as “irresponsible and shameful.”

In a post on X, Araghchi said it was “more than clear” that Trump had been “badly fed the fake line” that Iran’s peaceful nuclear program was on the verge of weaponization. He described this claim as a “BIG LIE”, emphasizing that even the US intelligence community had confirmed there was “zero proof” of such allegations.

“The real bully of the Middle East, Mr. President, is the same parasitic actor that has long been bullying and milking the United States,” Araghchi declared, referring to “Israel”.

October 18, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why western sanctions have failed and become self-defeating

Or are sanctions an end in themselves?

By Ian Proud | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 15, 2025

I recently participated in a debate in London about the effectiveness of sanctions as a tool of foreign policy. I argued that they have proven ineffective as a tool of foreign policy, and kept my remarks focussed on Russia, which is the most sanctioned country on the planet, with over 20,000 sanctions imposed so far.

For good or ill, I argued that sanctions were ineffective from a position of having [personally] authorised around half of the UK sanctions against Russia after war broke out in 2022. I take no great pride in that, but that was my job at the time and I eventually left my career as a British diplomat in 2023, largely out of a sense that UK foreign policy was failing in Ukraine.

Nevertheless, it worries me that so few people appear focused on what we in the UK want the sanctions to achieve, to the point where they have become an end in themselves. Yet, look at the legislation, specifically the Russia Sanctions Regulations of 2019, and the [alleged] purpose is quiet clear:

Encourage Russia to cease actions destablising Ukraine or undermining or threatening the sovereignty or independence of Ukraine.

More than eleven years since the onset of the Ukraine crisis and not far from four years since war broke out, the UK and its allies have manifestly failed to deliver upon that goal.

We have been through eleven years of gradually ramping up sanctions against Russia only to see Russia increase its resistance, and then to launch its so-called Special Military Operation in 2022.

Sanctions did not prevent that. One might argue that they helped to precipitate it.

Ukraine is bankrupt, its cities broken, its energy infrastructure once again subject to nightly bombardment as the winter approaches and people wonder whether they’ll be able to heat their homes.

Sanctions are not preventing this.

Yet at the debate, my opponents somehow advanced the argument that sanctions remain an effective tool of foreign policy, from the comfort of a grand hall, two thousand miles away from the frontline, even further from responsibility, and completely detached from reality.

In my mind, there are two clear reasons why sanctions policy has failed.

Firstly, because even if people in the west consider them to be justified, the Russian State considers them to be unjust.

Ever since the Minsk II peace deal was subordinated to sanctions in March 2015, President Putin has become increasingly convinced that western nations would sanction Russia come what May.

And that has proved to be the case.

Every time an inevitable new package of sanctions is imposed by the UK, Europe or others, it also convinces ordinary Russian people that this is true.

People in the west might hate Putin, but he is far more popular in Russia than Keir Starmer is in Britain, or than Friedrich Merz is in Berlin, or than Emmanuel Macron is in France.

So the idea that sanctions undermine support in Russia for President Putin is deeply misguided.

Likewise, sanctioning British-based Russian billionaires who took their assets out of Russia might play well in the Financial Times but is a meaningless gesture; these figures have no real power in Russia.

The idea that if we sanction Roman Abramovich he might some how rise up and try to unseat Putin together with other oligarchs is a fantasy.

The Russian oligarch Oleg Tinkoff who took to Instagram after the war started to criticise the Russian army, was forced to sell his eponymous bank and yet the UK still sanctioned him.

Why would any wealthy Russian on that basis stand up against President Putin on the west’s behalf only to get sanctioned by us anyway?

Yet, we have sanctioned 2000 individuals and entities, banning them from travel to the UK, even though 92% of them never had [visited] before the war started. These, I’m afraid, are empty gestures.

Sanctions will not stop the war.

And the longer they go on, more Ukrainians will die.

Despite Russia having done everything to adjust to sanctions since 2014, commentators in the west nevertheless try to tell you that, well, maybe we should have imposed more sanctions at the start for a bigger effect.

But on my second point, that denies the political reality of how sanctions are imposed.

While the combined economies of NATO are 27 times bigger than Russia, 32 states cannot coordinate policy quickly enough to take decisive action.

This results in waging war by committee.

Imagine, if you will, a chessboard with President Putin staring across at a team of thirty-two people on the other side, squabbling loudly among themselves for months on end before deciding not to make the best move.

If you believe that Europe is about to become a rapid decision-making body now at a time when its member states are increasingly turning to nationalist political parties who resent the war policy in Brussels, then my message to you is, good luck waiting for that.

Europe has now been debating for over a year whether to expropriate 200 billion in Russian assets housed in Belgium.

Yet that has not been agreed precisely because the Belgian government has blocked it consistently out of a not illegitimate fear that it will shred that’s country’s reputation among international investors at a time when new financial architecture is being constructed in the developing world.

Meanwhile, Russia’s foreign exchange reserves have continued to grow and now stand at over $700 billion for the first time. So even at this late stage if Europe chose to expropriate the assets, Russia could live without them.

Rather than being forced to the negotiating table – the complete fantasy that proponents of this hair-brained idea would tell you – Russia would be so enraged by what it sees as theft that it would keep on fighting.

And more Ukrainians would die.

President Putin is not hemmed in by the need to consult, and western indecision gives him time to adapt.

Since 2014, Russia’s economy has reoriented away from its dependence on the west, precisely to limit the impact of sanctions.

When war broke out in 2022, Russia had been adapting to sanctions for 8 years already.

Even though the scale was unprecedented, Russia had already prepared itself for the onslaught when it happened and has adapted better.

In 2022, with everyone crowing about the crashing rouble, Russia pulled in its biggest ever current account surplus of over $230 billion which, by the way, is bigger than Ukraine’s whole economy.

Despite cutting off gas supplies and bearing down on shadow tankers, Russia to this day continues to pull in hefty trade surpluses each year. It has not been in deficit since 1998.

Lots of people argued that if we had gone all in 2014, then that might have made a difference. But believe we, that was debated in Europe, and no one could agree to it.

And I wonder whether, had it been agreed, Europe would simply have faced the political and economic turmoil which is currently going on now, ten years earlier.

So let’s stop talking about what ifs.

The ugly truth is that sanctions have become an end in themselves. They are not a strategy, but a fig leaf covering the embarrassing fact that the west does not have a strategy.

They are a weak alternative to war or peace that serve no purpose other than to prolong the war in Ukraine.

Western nations have shown themselves unwilling to contemplate diplomacy. Talking to Putin is dismissed as a prize that will take him out of international isolation; even though he only appears isolated by western nations. Yet diplomacy isn’t about talking to your friends, despite the never ending round of backslapping summits our leaders attend. Diplomacy is about talking to the people with whom you most disagree. We have refused to talk to Russia and continue to avoid diplomacy at all costs to this day.

Neither do we want war, Britain’s army today has 73,000 soldiers, 2,000 fewer than 2 years ago. Russia has 600,000 troops in Ukraine, apparently. We couldn’t even agree to send 10,000 troops as part of a so-called reassurance force although, to be honest, that idea didn’t reassure me at all.

Russia is outstripping us in the production of munitions, tanks and naval warships. And it has 6,000 nuclear warheads.

So I’m glad we don’t want war either.

But as we continue to pursue ever diminishing packages of sanctions, Ukraine will remain stuck in the middle, devastated and depopulated, as Europe deindustrialises and falls into the embrace of nationalism at an accelerating rate.

Meanwhile, despite obvious headwinds, Russia’s economy appears in better shape than ours. It would be impossible to claim that there had been no economic impacts on the Russian economy from sanctions. Yet with economic links to the West now all but destroyed, sanctions relief is less important to Russia than it is to Europe.

In Budapest recently I got talking to a member of the House of Lords and former Diplomatic Service colleague who is a close friend of Boris Johnson. During his speech he remarked that sanctions on Russia have had no impact at all.

Later over drinks we discussed this and he agreed with the arguments that I have put forward today. But then he paused, and said ‘ah, but you just can’t say that in Britain though’.

It’s time to wake up and realise the terrible mess we have got ourselves into through sanctions. Sanctions have failed to the great detriment of Ukraine. It’s time, finally, to get back to diplomacy.

October 15, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

West weaponizing laws to silence pro-Palestine activism: Study

Al Mayadeen | October 14, 2025

The right to protest is facing increasing restrictions across the West, The Guardian reported on Monday, citing a new study by the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), which accuses governments of criminalizing pro-Palestine activism and using counter-terrorism and antisemitism laws to stifle dissent.

The report focuses on the UK, US, France, and Germany, accusing authorities in these countries of “weaponizing” national security and anti-hate legislation to silence criticism of “Israel” and suppress demonstrations supporting Palestinian rights in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

“This trend reflects a worrying shift towards the normalization of exceptional measures in dealing with dissenting voices,” Yosra Frawes, head of FIDH’s Maghreb and Middle East desk, told The Guardian.

Compiled from open-source data, witness accounts, and institutional reports gathered between October 2023 and September 2025, the study was released just one day after a US-brokered Gaza ceasefire that secured the release of all living Israeli captives and around 2,000 Palestinian detainees.

According to FIDH, restrictions on speech and assembly have extended beyond protests, impacting journalists, academics, and public officials who express solidarity with Palestinians.

In the United Kingdom, the organization found that protest rights have eroded under both Conservative and Labour administrations. The report points to the 2024 anti-protest law introduced by the Conservatives, later deemed unlawful, and to what it calls the Labour government’s continuation of “official narratives” justifying support for “Israel”.

It highlights former Home Secretary Suella Braverman‘s branding of pro-Palestine rallies as “hate marches”, arguing that this rhetoric “stigmatized support for Palestine and Palestinian resistance movements” and “worked to discriminate against Muslims and other racialized groups in the UK.”

FIDH says the change in government in July 2024 “did little to change official government narratives,” claiming Labour has linked criticism of “Israel” with “violent antisemitism” while continuing to target Muslim and racialized communities.

The tensions have been further inflamed by the Labour government’s ban on the activist network Palestine Action and its proposal to expand police powers at protests.

FIDH draws parallels across the Atlantic, where US authorities have detained demonstrators and pursued legal actions against individuals expressing solidarity with Palestine. In France, the government has faced criticism for banning pro-Palestine demonstrations in several cities and for dissolving the rights group Urgence Palestine.

Meanwhile, in Germany, protests have drawn thousands, but police tactics and restrictions on slogans deemed antisemitic, for the mere criticism of “Israel”, have been widely condemned as excessive. The report argues that Germany’s actions reflect a “collective discomfort” in balancing free expression with its postwar responsibility to combat what it classifies as “antisemitism”.

Freedom crisis

The federation recommends that the UK establish an independent oversight body for policing demonstrations and amend key legislation, Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and Section 11 of the Public Order Act 2023, to protect political speech and prevent arbitrary searches.

“Ultimately, the crackdown on solidarity with Palestinians reveals a profound crisis, not only of human rights in the occupied territories but of freedom itself, in societies that claim to be democratic,” the report concludes.

FIDH says that while legal frameworks vary among the UK, US, France, and Germany, the trend toward restricting Palestinian solidarity movements represents a global pattern of shrinking civic space, one that calls into question the credibility of Western nations as defenders of democratic freedoms.

October 14, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

No ground for negotiations with E3 anymore: Iran FM

Al Mayadeen | October 11, 2025

Tehran no longer sees a basis for nuclear talks with the E3 countries, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi stated on Saturday evening, adding that the country is not seeking it either.

Speaking to the Iranian state TV, Araghchi revealed that Washington had asked to hold direct talks with Tehran on the sidelines of the UN meetings, a message conveyed by US envoy Steve Witkoff. Iran, according to Araghchi, expressed readiness to engage, but only on the condition that representatives from the E3 countries and the IAEA Director, Rafael Grossi, be present, which the latter refused.

In this context, the top Iranian diplomat revealed that “the United States has always sought to integrate regional issues into nuclear negotiations, but we have never allowed that,” describing Washington’s positions as “constantly changing”.

Iran’s interests are red line

Regarding Tehran’s red lines, Araghchi confirmed that the interests of the Iranian people are paramount, emphasizing that while Iran will never give up its right to enrich uranium, it is willing to provide the international community with assurances, if need be, about the peaceful nature of its nuclear program.

He further criticized Europe, stating it has demonstrated a lack of independence, and indicated that Iran remains open to studying any new, fair plan from Washington as long as it respects the interests of the Iranian people, expressing a willingness to engage in dialogue.

On the topic of the Cairo Agreement, Araghchi stated, “It is currently frozen, and our cooperation with the Agency is only conducted within the framework of the Iranian parliament’s law and through the Supreme National Security Council.”

Araghchi addressed the prospect of renewed war with “Israel”, disclosing that, following an exchange between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu several days ago, Russian officials subsequently informed the Iranian ambassador in Moscow that Netanyahu has no interest in returning to a state of war with Iran.

Gaza ceasefire solely a Palestinian Resistance matter

Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi addressed the ceasefire agreement in Gaza, denying that any discussions had taken place with Steve Witkoff concerning it, while affirming Iran’s support for any plan that would halt what he described as Israeli crimes.

Araghchi said Trump shared his view on Iran’s statement about the Gaza deal, but no messages were exchanged with Washington, adding that only the Palestinian Resistance and people can decide on a ceasefire, and no one else.

He stressed that “Israel” is not trustworthy, citing past experiences like Lebanon, which is clear proof that the entity does not honor its commitments, based on which Iran raised its concerns and issued the necessary warnings. He added that while Washington has made positive promises regarding the Gaza deal, there are doubts about its seriousness in fulfilling them, as these promises are constantly shifting.

Araghchi also noted that most foreign ministers in the region are skeptical about the future of the subsequent phases of the Gaza agreement.

On the issue of the normalization agreements, Iran’s FM noted that “these deals intrinsically constitute a sinister plan to deprive the Palestinian people of their rights,” adding that Iran’s position on such agreements is clear: “it will never join them.”

Regarding the trade war imposed by Washington, Araghchi stated that Iran would reciprocate in kind if its commercial ships were obstructed in any way under the pretext of sanctions, affirming that escalating tensions is not in anyone’s interest.

October 12, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why are so many eager for war with Russia? /Lt Col Daniel Davis & Glenn Diesen

Glenn Diesen | October 8, 2025

The discussion centers on Russia’s next moves in the Ukraine war and the West’s potential responses. Russia views NATO’s continual expansion and Western escalation as provocations it must eventually answer. Putin’s recent speech referencing “Novorossiya” (a broader region beyond Donbas) signals that Moscow’s ambitions may soon expand to include all historically Russian-speaking and industrial parts of southern and eastern Ukraine—essentially the Black Sea coast from Kharkiv to Odesa. The analysis suggests Russia’s likely to pursue this expansion after Ukraine’s army becomes too depleted to resist. Western promises of future NATO membership for Kyiv only make Russia more determined to seize strategic territory permanently.

October 9, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia, Video | , , , , | Leave a comment

French PM resigns hours after proposing new cabinet

RT | October 6, 2025

French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu has announced his resignation less than 12 hours after appointing a new cabinet. The French parliament is deeply divided over efforts to pass a new budget that would tackle rising debt.

A former defense minister, Lecornu was the seventh prime minister appointed by French President Emmanuel Macron and the fifth in two years. His sudden resignation less than a month after entering the role makes him the shortest-lived prime minister in modern French history.

A long-time Macron loyalist, Lecornu faced fierce criticism from both sides of the political aisle on Sunday after unveiling his new cabinet which was largely unchanged from the previous government of Francois Bayrou. Parties across the National Assembly threatened to vote it down.

Following the announcement, several political parties have called for snap parliamentary elections. The National Rally party stated on X that “Macronism is dead on its feet,” and called on Macron to choose between the dissolution of the National Assembly or resignation.

Jean-Luc Melenchon, the leader of the left-wing La France Insoumise (LFI) party, has also called to introduce a motion to remove Macron from office.

Shortly after the news of Lecornu’s resignation broke, the Paris stock market dropped 12%, making it the worst-performing index in Europe. The euro has also seen a drop of 0.7% on the back of political instability.

France’s public finances have been under mounting strain, with the deficit reaching 5.8% of GDP in 2024 and public debt climbing to 113%, far above the 60% ceiling set by EU rules. The government has been seeking to push through an austerity budget aimed at curbing spending and stabilizing the debt ratio, but divisions in the National Assembly have made agreement difficult.

The political deadlock stems from last year’s snap parliamentary elections, which left France without a clear majority. The lower house is now split between three blocs — Macron’s centrist alliance, the left-wing New Popular Front, and the National Rally — none of which can govern alone. As a result, Macron’s governments have repeatedly struggled to secure votes on key legislation.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Iran declares Cairo deal with IAEA ‘defunct’

The Cradle | October 5, 2025

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed on 5 October that the Cairo deal signed with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last month is no longer active or valid due to European ‘snapback’ sanctions on Tehran.

“Experience has shown that there is no solution to Iran’s nuclear issue other than a diplomatic and negotiated one,” Araghchi said.

“The three European countries thought they could achieve results through the snapback mechanism, but that tool was ineffective and only made diplomacy more complicated. Diplomacy will always continue, but the form and the parties involved in negotiations have now changed. Undoubtedly, the role of the European countries in the upcoming talks has diminished, and their diplomatic justification for participating has weakened,” he added.

“In recent months, our discussions have been focused solely on the nuclear issue, conducted either directly or indirectly with the American side. In these exchanges, our proposals were completely transparent. Had they been taken seriously … reaching a negotiated and diplomatic solution would not have been out of reach. Even now, if the [opposing] parties act in good faith and consider mutual interests, the continuation of negotiations is possible.”

“Nevertheless, the situation following the military attack and the activation of the snapback mechanism has changed, and the upcoming negotiations will certainly be different from before,” he went on to say, adding that both the US-Israeli attacks on Iran in June and the activation of the ‘snapback’ mechanism have complicated matters.

“After several rounds of talks, this agreement was reached in Cairo. However, the Cairo Agreement no longer suffices under the new circumstances, including the activation of the snapback mechanism, and new decisions will be made.”

“To prove the peaceful nature of its nuclear program and its goodwill, the Islamic Republic of Iran has exhausted all diplomatic avenues, pursued consultations and cooperation, and presented constructive and balanced proposals. There is now no excuse left for Western countries to prevent Iran from cooperation or dialogue. Iran’s positions are fully legitimate and reasonable, and it is ready to pursue any solution that leads to confidence-building.”

The snapback sanctions took effect on 28 September. Washington welcomed the European decision.

Iran had previously warned that activating the sanctions would jeopardize the Cairo deal, reached on 9 September after Tehran resumed cooperation with the IAEA following a brief suspension as a result of the war.

Negotiations to prevent the return of the sanctions failed after the UN Security Council (UNSC) rejected a draft resolution to permanently lift sanctions against Iran. Russia, China, Pakistan, and Algeria voted to prevent the reintroduction of sanctions, while nine Security Council members voted against sanctions relief. Two countries abstained.

Tehran has recalled its envoys from Germany, France, and Italy.

The EU has continued to hold Iran to the terms of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), despite Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the deal in 2018 and its policy of maximum pressure against Iran.

Tehran is insisting on its right to maintain peaceful uranium enrichment.

Nuclear talks between Tehran and Washington have been halted since the US-backed Israeli war against Iran started on 13 June.

The US was aware that Israel was set to attack while continuing to pretend it was negotiating with Iran. In late June, Washington joined the war with a bunker-buster attack on Iranian nuclear sites.

Israel has publicly threatened to restart the war against Iran. Tehran has vowed to respond more harshly to any new attack.

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

UK Digital ID Scheme Faces Backlash Over Surveillance Fears — Is a Similar Plan Coming to the U.S.?

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender |October 2, 2025

The U.K. plans to introduce a nationwide digital ID scheme that will require citizens and non-citizens to obtain a “BritCard” to work in the U.K., which includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Government officials say the plan, to take effect no later than August 2029, will help combat illegal immigration.

But critics like U.K. activist and campaigner Montgomery Toms said the scheme, “far from being a tool for progress,” is instead a “gateway to mass surveillance, control and ultimately the rollout of a centralised social credit system.”

The plan faces broad opposition in the U.K., according to Nigel Utton, a U.K.-based board member of the World Freedom Alliance, who said, “the feeling against the government here is enormous.”

A poll last week found that 47% of respondents opposed digital ID, while 27% supported the ID system and 26% were neutral. The poll was conducted by Electoral Calculus and Find Out Now, on behalf of GB News.

A petition on the U.K. Parliament’s website opposing plans to introduce digital ID may force a parliamentary debate. As of today, the petition has over 2.73 million signatures.

According to The Guardian, petitions with 100,000 signatures or more are considered for debate in the U.K. parliament.

As opposition mounts, there are signs the BritCard may not be a done deal. According to the BBC, a three-month consultation will take place, and legislation will likely be introduced to Parliament in early 2026.

However, U.K. Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said the government may push through its digital ID plans without going through the House of Commons or the House of Lords.

Protesters plan to gather Oct. 18 in central London.

Digital ID will ‘offer ordinary citizens countless benefits,’ U.K. officials say

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the digital ID scheme last week in a speech at the Global Progress Action Summit in London.

“A secure border and controlled migration are reasonable demands, and this government is listening and delivering,” Starmer said. “Digital ID is an enormous opportunity for the U.K. It will make it tougher to work illegally in this country, making our borders more secure.

The plan “will also offer ordinary citizens countless benefits, like being able to prove your identity to access key services swiftly,” Starmer said.

According to The Guardian, digital ID eventually may be used for driver’s licenses, welfare benefits, access to tax records, and the provision of childcare and other public services.

Darren Jones, chief secretary to Starmer, suggested it may become “the bedrock of the modern state,” the BBC reported.

Supporters of the plan include the Labour Together think tank, which is closely aligned with the Labour Party and which published a report in June calling for the introduction of the BritCard.

Two days before Starmer’s announcement, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, led by Labour Party member and former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, published a report, “Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works.”

Blair tried to introduce digital ID two decades ago as a means of fighting terrorism and fraud, but the plan failed amid public opposition. According to the BBC, Starmer recently claimed the world has “moved on in the last 20 years,” as “we all carry a lot more digital ID now than we did.”

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Blair endorsed a global digital vaccine passport, the Good Health Pass, launched by ID2020 with the support of Facebook, Mastercard and the World Economic Forum.

According to Sky News, French President Emmanuel Macron welcomed the BritCard for its ability to help fight illegal immigration into the U.K., much of which originates from France.

Critics: Digital ID marks ‘gateway to mass surveillance’

The BritCard, which would live on people’s phones, will use technology similar to digital wallets. People will not be required to carry their digital ID or be asked to produce it, except for employment purposes, the government said.

According to the BBC, BritCard will likely include a person’s name, photo, date of birth and nationality or residency status.

Digital wallets, which include documents such as driver’s licenses and health certificates, have been introduced in several countries, including the U.S.

Nandy said the U.K. government has “no intention of pursuing a dystopian mess” with its introduction of digital ID.

However, the plan has opened up a “civil liberties row” in the U.K., according to The Guardian, with critics warning it will lead to unprecedented surveillance and control over citizens.

“Digital ID systems are not designed to secure borders,” said Seamus Bruner, author of “Controligarchs: Exposing the Billionaire Class, their Secret Deals, and the Globalist Plot to Dominate Your Life” and director of research at the Government Accountability Institute. “They’re designed to expand bureaucratic control of the masses.”

Bruner told The Defender :

“All attempts to roll out digital ID follow a familiar pattern: corporate and political elites wield crises — such as mass migration, crime, or tech disruptions — as a pretext to expand their control … over private citizens’ identities, finances and movements into a suffocating regime.

“Once rolled out, these systems expand quietly, shifting from access tools to enforcement mechanisms. Yesterday it was vaccine passports and lockdowns; tomorrow it is 15-minute cities and the ‘universal basic income’ dependency trap. ‘Voluntary’ today becomes mandatory tomorrow.”

Tim Hinchliffe, editor of The Sociable, said digital ID is “not about tackling illegal immigration, it has nothing to do with job security and it definitely won’t protect young people online. Digital ID is all about surveillance and control through coercion and force.”

Hinchliffe said:

“Illegal immigration is just one excuse to bring it all online. Be vigilant for other excuses like climate change, cybersecurity, convenience, conflict, refugees, healthcare, war, famine, poverty, welfare benefits. Anything can be used to usher in digital ID.”

Twila Brase, co-founder and president of the Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom, said governments favor digital ID because it allows unprecedented surveillance.

The ID system “notifies the government every time an identity card is used, giving it a bird’s-eye view of where, when and to whom people are showing their identity,” she said.

According to Toms, “A digital ID system gives governments the ability to monitor, restrict, and ultimately punish citizens who do not comply with state directives. It centralises power in a way that is extremely dangerous to liberty.”

Experts disputed claims that digital ID is necessary to improve public services.

“The ‘improved efficiency’ argument is a technocratic fantasy used to seduce a public obsessed with convenience,” said attorney Greg Glaser. “Governments have managed to provide services for centuries without a digital panopticon. This is not about efficiency. It is about creating an immutable, unforgeable link between every individual and the state.”

Digital ID technology may create ‘an enormous hacking target’

London-based author and political analyst Evans Agelissopoulos said major global investment firms, including BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street, could combine their financial might with the power of digital ID.

“BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street are on a mission to buy properties to rent to people. Digital ID could be used against people they deem unfit to rent to,” he said.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the same firms supported digital vaccine passports in major corporations in which they are among the top shareholders. Some experts suggested digital ID may institutionalize a vaccine passport regime and central bank digital currencies.

“Digital identity is the linchpin to every dystopian nightmare under the sun,” Hinchliffe said. “Without it, there can be no programmable digital currencies, there can be no carbon footprint trackers, no social credit system.”

Other experts suggested that a centralized database containing the data of all citizens could be monetized. “By centralizing everything, they will have access to health, criminal, financial records. This data can be sold,” Agelissopoulos said.

According to Brase, those who will benefit from the centralization of this data include:

“Anybody who’s going to be the third-party administrator, academia and companies who are building biometric systems and what they call ‘augmented authentication systems’ that provide the cameras, the back system operations for biometric identification and for digital systems.”

Several major information technology (IT), defense and accounting firms, including Deloitte and BAE Systems, have received U.K. government contracts totaling 100 million British pounds ($134.7 million) for the development and rollout of BritCard.

U.S. tech companies, including Palantir, Nvidia and OpenAI, “have also been circling the UK government,” The Guardian reported.

Digital ID also raises security concerns, with IT experts describing the U.K.’s plan as “an enormous hacking target,” citing recent large-scale breaches involving digital ID databases in some countries, including Estonia.

“Government databases are frequently hacked — from healthcare systems to tax records,” Toms said. “Centralizing sensitive personal data into a single mandatory digital ID is a disaster waiting to happen.”

The public may also directly bear the cost of these systems. Italy’s largest digital ID provider, Poste Italiane, recently floated plans to levy a 5 euro ($5.87) annual fee for users.

Switzerland to roll out digital ID next year, amid controversy

In a referendum held on Sunday, voters in Switzerland narrowly approved the introduction of a voluntary national digital ID in their country.

According to the BBC, 50.4% of voters approved the proposal. Biometric Update noted that the proposal received a majority in only eight of the country’s 26 cantons, though the country’s government campaigned in favor of the proposal.

Digital ID in Switzerland is expected to be rolled out next year.

Swiss health professional George Deliyanidis said he “does not see any benefits for the public” from the plan. Instead, he sees “a loss of personal freedom.”

“There are suspicions of election fraud,” he added.

In a letter sent Tuesday to the Swiss government, a copy of which was reviewed by The Defender, the Mouvement Fédératif Romand cited “significant statistical disparities” in the referendum’s results and called for a recount.

In 2021, Swiss voters rejected a proposal on digital ID under which data would have been held by private providers, the BBC reported. Under the current proposal, data will remain with the state.

According to the Manchester Evening News, countries that have introduced nationwide digital ID include Australia, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Estonia, India, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Ukraine and the United Arab Emirates. Other countries with similar systems include France, Finland and Norway.

In July, Vietnam introduced digital ID for foreigners living in the country. In August, the Vietnamese government helped neighboring Laos launch digital ID.

The New York Times reported that, in 2024, China added an “internet ID” to its digital ID system, “to track citizens’ online usage.”

Bill Gates has supported the rollout of digital ID in several countries, including India.

The European Union plans to launch its Digital Identity Wallet by the end of 2026.

“When you see a nearly simultaneous worldwide push, like this digital ID agenda, people in all nations need to expect to be impacted to some extent,” said James F. Holderman III, director of special investigations for Stand for Health Freedom.

Is national digital ID coming to the U.S.?

Although the U.S. does not have a national identification card, the U.K. did not have one either — until digital ID was introduced. The U.K. scrapped national ID in 1952.

In May, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) began Real ID enforcement for domestic air travelers in the U.S. In the months before, TSA engaged in a push to encourage U.S. citizens to acquire Real ID-compliant documents, such as driver’s licenses. Full enforcement will begin in 2027.

The REAL ID Act of 2005 established security standards for state-issued ID cards in response to the 9/11 attacks and the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. In the intervening years, its implementation was repeatedly delayed.

Last year, then-President Joe Biden issued an executive order for federal and state governments to speed up the adoption of digital ID.

Brase said Real ID “is really a national ID system for America, currently disguised as a state driver’s license with a star. The American people really have no idea that what’s in their pocket is a national ID and they have no idea that the [Department of Motor Vehicles offices] are planning to digitize them.”

Hinchliffe said 193 countries, including the U.S., accepted digital ID last year when they approved the United Nations’ Pact for the Future.

Earlier this month, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced the Safeguarding Personal Information Act of 2025 (S 2769), a bill to repeal the REAL ID Act of 2005.

“If digital ID is allowed to spread globally, future generations will never know freedom,” Hinchliffe said.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 4, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »