Robert Barnes: Israel’s Become a Political Pariah, Republicans Take Note
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – August 12, 2026
Col Douglas Macgregor: Ukraine Russia War, Trump is Toothless
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – August 11, 2026
Don’t Let Hunter Biden Whitewash His Father’s Genocidal Legacy
By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | August 13, 2026
Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, has been making the rounds on the podcast circuit, giving interviews on popular shows such as Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan, the Tucker Carlson show, Candace Owens and the Left Hook with Wajahat Ali.
Throughout these various appearances, Hunter Biden has been accurately taking on Benjamin Netanyahu for the genocide in Gaza.
“If it’s anti-semitic to point out that Bibi Netanyahu is evil incarnate, then I don’t know what to say to people anymore,” Hunter Biden correctly said on the Tucker Carlson podcast, adding, “open your eyes. Open your heart for one minute.”
In his interview with Wajahat Ali referring to the genocide in Gaza, Hunter Biden said, “I will call it a genocide. I don’t know any other definition that fits when one group of people, their stated goal is the extermination of another group of people. I think it’s ridiculous that we continue to debate whether or not it’s a genocide. I think Bibi Netanyahu is evil incarnate,” adding that the Gaza genocide is “unforgivable forever and throughout time”.
While these statements are correct, it is hard not to see this as a way to put the entirety of the burden for the genocide on Benjamin Netanyahu, whitewashing the fact that it could not have been carried out without support from Joe Biden.
This is bolstered by the fact that in his interview with Wajahat Ali, Hunter Biden claimed that his father “believes all the things that I just said” and pretended that Joe Biden put pressure on Netanyahu, adding that Joe Biden “did his best to curtail and to curb the most awful instincts of Netanyahu”.
Hunter Biden’s comments in this context seem more to be part of an effort to whitewash the Democratic Party and Joe Biden’s direct complicity in the Gaza genocide.
The reality is, Joe Biden and his administration hold just as much responsibility for the slaughter in Gaza as Benjamin Netanyahu does.
Brown University’s Cost of war project has calculated that during the first year of the genocide in Gaza, the Biden administration spent $17.9 billion in military funding for Israel and another $3.8 billion in the second year, with an additional $9.65 – $12.07 Billion spent on military campaigns to protect Israel, including the Biden administration’s bombing of Ansar Allah in Yemen for it’s blockade on the Red Sea in an attempt to pressure an end to the Genocide.
While financing the military equipment used to carry out the Genocide in Gaza and bombing resistance groups attempting to stop the genocide, the Biden administration never once pressured Israel to accept a ceasefire.
This was outright admitted by multiple U.S. and Israeli officials on Israeli TV on a special aired on Israel’s Channel 13.
The former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Michael Herzog, in the special admitted, “God did the State of Israel a favor that Biden was the president during this period, because it could have been much worse. We fought for over a year, and the administration never came to us and said, ‘ceasefire now.’ It never did. And that’s not to be taken for granted”.
The former U.S. ambassador to Israel, Thomas Nides, similarly admitted, “At the most significant political peril of Joe Biden’s political career, the easiest thing for Joe Biden would have been, if he was worried about the votes in Michigan, is to basically be a little soft; he refused to do it. There was enormous pressure within the White House on him to change his position. When I hear comments about ‘he wasn’t good enough, or he didn’t have Israel’s back,’ am I disgusted by it? One hundred percent. Is it true? 100 percent no”.
When Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that “soldiers were killed during the war in Gaza from a lack of ammunition due to a partial embargo that was imposed by the Biden administration”, multiple Biden administration officials came out to clarify that they gave unconditional support to Israel’s Holocaust in Gaza.
Amos Hochstein, a top Biden advisor admitted in response, “After more than $20 Billion military support, largest in Israel history, 2 aircraft carriers rushed to the region, deterring a massive regional war, defeating Iran missile/drone attack x2, defending israel at most vulnerable moments, after SAVING countless lives of Israelis – only acceptable response to POTUS Biden and American people is THANK YOU.”
Similarly, the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to the Vice President of the United States, Philip H. Gordon, admitted in response, “Hard to overstate the damage to US-Israel relations done by the sense of entitlement and ingratitude reflected in comments like these and Netanyahu’s own recent statements. Baseless misdirection to suggest that Israeli soldiers’ deaths in Gaza were caused by some phantom US ‘embargo’ (when in fact Biden resisted enormous pressure to condition aid, as required by U.S. law, even as Israel rebuffed calls to facilitate more humanitarian assistance and reduce civilian casualties)”.
The reality is that Joe Biden’s backing of the genocide in Gaza is also “unforgivable forever and throughout time” despite his son’s attempts to whitewash these facts.
Is Israel Planning to Assassinate President Trump?
By W.M. Peterson |
“When you read Jewish law in many places, you might understand that gentiles can be killed freely without any problems.” — Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, Radio Kol Hai (July 2011)
In January 2012, Andrew Adler, the owner and publisher of a small weekly newspaper called the Atlanta Jewish Times, sparked considerable controversy when he penned an article titled ‘What Would You Do?’ in which he put forth three possible responses Israel might pursue if Iran were to acquire a nuclear weapon. The first two — pre-emptive strikes on Hezbollah and Hamas and disobeying the US Secretary of Defense to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities — failed to raise any eyebrows. Adler’s third suggestion, however, would result in his immediate resignation as editor and the subsequent sale of his newspaper:
“Three, give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies. Yes, you read “three” correctly. Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel’s existence. Think about it. If I have thought of this Tom Clancy-type scenario, don’t you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel’s most inner circles?… You have got to believe, like I do, that all options are on the table.“
Almost immediately, the article became headline news around the country forcing major Jewish organizations like the ADL and AJC to feign indignation, and within a week the US Secret Service had launched an ‘investigation’ into the matter while a teary-eyed Adler appeared on the Atlanta Interfaith Broadcasting network’s cable TV show to disavow his column and explain that he actually held a favorable view of President Obama!
Adler’s straight-talk, shocking though it may seem to some, provides crucial insight into the mentality of God’s chosen people and the candor they often use when speaking amongst themselves. Killing a foreign or domestic head of state who presents a perceived obstacle to the preservation of fragile little Israel is not unknown to history, as any reader of Laurent Guyenot’s indispensable book The Unspoken Kennedy Truth or Ronen Bergman’s 2018 bestseller Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations can assure you.
A few months ago I met up for lunch with an old friend who, after years of intransigence, has finally reclaimed his mind from the Zionist propagandists and taken a deeper interest in topics like Israel/Palestine and Jewish influence in American affairs. During the course of our conversation, I casually mentioned the likelihood that Israeli leaders have considered assassinating Donald Trump for the purpose of expanding US involvement in the war with Iran. My friend, visibly stunned by the idea, asked why in the world Israel would do such a thing when Trump is by all appearances Israel’s Top Goy, performing nearly every trick demanded of him by Netanyahu and the Israel Lobby. I responded that it doesn’t matter what Trump does for Israel, the minute he’s deemed more valuable dead than alive the Zionists will begin workshopping a scenario in which the increasingly unpopular ‘leader of the free world’ can be eliminated in such a way that Iran can be blamed and the American military can be dragged deeper into the conflict upon the pretext of revenge. Indeed, Israeli intelligence has been priming the pump for an “Iranian” assassination of Trump since 2024, absurdly trying to link the events in Butler, PA and Ryan Routh’s golf course shenanigans to Tehran. I told my friend that while I believe the chances of an assassination actually happening are low, I do think it’s probable the Jews will develop a plan, if they haven’t already, to have in the back pocket as a last resort. Certainly, there’s no shortage of historical precedent supporting the notion.
My hypothetical took on new life this past week when it was reported in the mainstream media that Israeli intelligence had alerted the US that Iranian agents were planning to shoot down Trump’s plane with shoulder-fired missiles as he departed the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey on July 8. The warning was taken seriously enough that the Secret Service had Trump switch planes twice before finally leaving in the hopes of deceiving any would-be attackers. According to The Times of Israel :
“Israel told the United States about the Iranian assassination threat that prompted the US Secret Service to take President Donald Trump off Air Force One and transfer him in a catering truck to a military plane as he prepared to fly out of Turkey last month, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, citing an unnamed US official.
Later Tuesday, Trump confirmed that he had indeed been smuggled off Air Force One in Ankara because the Secret Service and US military told him to switch planes. Israeli intelligence indicated that Iran was plotting to use shoulder-to-air missiles to take down Trump’s plane, according to the WSJ report. Senior Trump aides, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, remained on the plane despite the threat, the official said. The WSJ reported last month that Israeli intelligence had indicated a new plot was in development to assassinate the US president, but did not provide details. … Trump had flown to the NATO summit in Ankara aboard a newly-renovated Qatari-donated jet. The trip was the first international travel for the new plane, whose speedy upgrades triggered questions over its cost and security, and took place as hostilities escalated with Iran, which borders Turkey.
Before departing the Turkish capital, Trump said he would instead use an older baby blue Air Force One plane “for old time’s sake” to RAF Mildenhall in Britain, while the new Qatari-gifted plane stopped at the same base so US service members stationed there could tour the aircraft. But after Trump boarded the old Air Force One in front of cameras in Ankara, he was secretly shuttled by an airport catering truck to a smaller plane, an Air Force C-32A, the Washington Post revealed Monday.“
Probably not coincidentally, all of this transpired a mere day after Trump and Turkish President Recep Erdogan held a private bilateral meeting during which Trump discussed the possibility of Turkey’s reentry into the F-35 Lightning II program, while also announcing his commitment to lift the CAATSA sanctions placed on Turkey by the US government seven years ago. Originally a co-producer and buyer in the fighter jet program, Turkey was removed in 2020 following its acquisition of the Russian S-400 missile defense system. Trump remarked that his administration is “certainly” considering the sale of F-35s to Turkey and openly praised Erdogan as “a great friend,” telling reporters at the NATO summit: “Turkey has been much more loyal than other countries that we think would be loyal.”
Considering the fact that Turkey is rapidly emerging as one of Israel’s biggest strategic adversaries, these developments likely sent shockwaves through Tel Aviv. An August 10 article on the Quincy Institute’s Responsible Statecraft website points out that:
“Within 72 hours of the Ankara summit, Netanyahu took his objections to three American networks, arguing that Erdogan was ‘not a friend’ and could not be trusted… Israeli leaders, eager to drive a wedge into Ankara’s relationship with Washington, appear determined to cast Turkey as the next Iran.“
It’s possible that at least part of the reason for Trump’s flirtation with Erdogan is to antagonize Israel at a time when the Zionist state is doing almost everything it can to scupper US peace agreements with Iran. It’s just as possible that Israel, by way of retaliation, is seeding the narrative that Iran is striving to help the vainglorious 47th President off this mortal coil as a way of threatening Trump back into line. It should be pointed out that immediately following the great plane switcheroo in Ankara, the US military conducted a heavy wave of airstrikes, hitting 90 targets across Iran. Two days later, the US initiated a bombing campaign that lasted for 13 consecutive nights. If the intent of the “Iranian threat” was to bring Trump back under heel, it would seem he got the message.
While the CIA considers the Iranian threat to Air Force One dubious, the thought of shooting down an aircraft with innocent lives onboard to kill but one man is not a novel one in Israel. On pp. 272-273 of his aforementioned bestseller, Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman describes how Israel’s Minister of Defense Ariel ‘Butcher of Beirut’ Sharon once hatched a plan to shoot down a commercial airliner carrying PLO leader Yasser Arafat:
“When the Mossad reported that Arafat was flying more commercial flights… Sharon decided that one of those would make a legitimate target. He ordered Eitan, the air force, and the operations branch to come up with a plan to shoot down a civilian jetliner.
Sharon sketched out the broad parameters. The flight would have to be shot down over the open sea, far from the coast, so that it would take investigators a long time to find the wreckage and establish whether it had been hit by a missile or had crashed due to engine failure. Deep water would be preferable, to make recovery even more difficult… The air force drew up a detailed plan to shoot down an airliner. Its representatives at the Goldfish forum explained that they had chosen a precise spot on the commercial air route across the Mediterranean, one where there was no continuous radar coverage by any nation and where the sea below was a daunting three miles deep. A salvage operation there would be extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, with the technology of the time. This complex plan set strict parameters for where the Israeli aircraft could shoot down Arafat’s plane undetected, which meant there would be a fairly narrow window of opportunity for executing the attack. … General Gilboa expressed his sharp opposition to these operations time and again. ‘It was clear to me that the air force would execute it as well as could be, and the plane would vanish forever. They do what they are told, and if you give them an order to build a pipeline to move blood from Haifa to the Negev, they’ll do it excellently and won’t for a moment ask whose blood it is…‘”
Whether he knows it or not, Trump, the one-time casino mogul, is dicing with death, playing into the hands of potential Israeli assassins by repeatedly claiming that the US would “completely decimate and destroy” Iran if it ever were to succeed in knocking him off. Quite foolishly, Trump has told journalists he’s “left instructions” to “literally bomb them at levels they’ve never seen before” if such an event were to occur. One can only imagine the frenzied Happy Merchant-style hand-rubbing taking place among members of Netanyahu’s cabinet when they hear remarks like these.
President Donald Trump’s jangled nerves put at ease by the armed and ready Avenger surface-to-air missile system, allowing for a smooth stroke of his 9-Iron.
I’m sure there are many Iranians who would like to see Trump bite the dust. After all, he is responsible for the murder of the country’s military hero General Qasem Soleimani and its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, whose family members were also killed and maimed in the joint US/Israeli airstrikes on his residential compound in February. Trump made these decisions entirely on behalf of Israel and we’re left to wonder whether or not he realizes with the benefit of hindsight that he’s bumbled his way into a carefully laid trap. With Iran’s victory in the war all but assured absent the use of nuclear weapons or a ground invasion by US forces, Israel is getting desperate to increase America’s military presence in the region. Would they go so far as to assassinate a sitting US president for at least the second time in history? I don’t know, but in the words of Andrew Adler: “Think about it. If I have thought of this Tom Clancy-type scenario, don’t you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel’s most inner circles?… You have got to believe, like I do, that all options are on the table.“
British taxpayers unknowingly subsidize therapy for Israeli soldiers: Report
The Cradle | August 14, 2026
UK taxpayers are unknowingly subsidizing “therapeutic healing” and psychological treatment of Israeli soldiers who served in Gaza, Declassified UK reported on 13 August.
The investigation revealed that an undisclosed sum reached the Yahalom Foundation, an Israeli veterans group serving the Israeli military engineering unit, through a British charity, with the government adding a further 25 percent under the Gift Aid scheme.
That additional quarter comes from the British government, which administers Gift Aid through His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC).
Barred as a foreign organization from claiming Gift Aid itself, the foundation instructs its British supporters to send money instead through UK Toremet, a charity registered in Britain.
Emails written by its head of fundraising call Toremet a “registered partner platform” that handles donations on the foundation’s behalf, telling donors that giving this way secures “full tax recognition and enabled Gift Aid.”
The projects put to British donors include a £5,000 (around $6,746) “therapeutic healing journey” for soldiers coming out of Gaza, individual psychological treatments, and a £100,000 (around $134,909) hall commemorating dead Israeli soldiers.
Records from two years earlier show British money also flowed toward equipment for troops still in service, with one fundraising page telling donors their help would buy more specialized kit to supply to the soldiers. Whether Gift Aid was added to those donations is unclear.
The Charity Commission has previously warned that raising funds for a soldier of a foreign military is neither lawful nor acceptable for a charity.
The disclosures deepen the scrutiny already surrounding UK Toremet, which since 2016 has been the subject of three regulatory compliance cases brought by the Charity Commission over its work in occupied Palestine.
The regulator has since opened an inquiry into eight British charities operating in illegal Israeli settlements.
UK-registered charities are promoting programs that send young British Jews into illegal settlements in occupied Palestine and put them through Israeli army training, according to an investigation by Middle East Eye (MEE) published in July.
The United Jewish Israel Appeal (UJIA), whose stated aim is to inspire young Jews to build a relationship with Israel, routes participants into Marva, an army-run course in which they spend weeks living on a military base and undergoing basic training. Bnei Akiva, meanwhile, houses its gap-year students in a West Bank settlement and drills them for military service.
The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) told MEE that the activities breach international law, describing Marva as closer to “pre-enlistment military training” than cultural exchange.
The pattern is not new, with The Guardian reporting in July last year that the Kasner Charitable Trust had moved £5.7 million (around $7.69 million) to a religious school inside the illegal settlement of Susya near Hebron through the conduit charity UK Toremet, in donations made between 2017 and 2021.
The Charity Commission told the outlet that operating in the occupied Palestinian territories is not in itself a criminal offense or a breach of charity law.
Options to Defeat Iran
Tales of the American Empire | August 13, 2026
American foreign policy has supported the Greater Israel project since the 9-11 terror attacks. This would greatly expand the size of Israel and kill or displace millions of Arabs. Iran is not a target for Israeli expansion, but is a powerful nation that supports resistance to the genocidal Greater Israel agenda. When the Trump administration entered office in early 2025, there was news they may fulfill the Zionist dream of attacking and destroying Iran.
Since President Trump ran as an anti-war candidate, war with Iran was irrational because it was risky and unlikely to succeed. A year ago, Tales of the American Empire produced “War with Iran is Foolish”, which is linked in the description. It explains that attacking Iran would fail and lead to an economic disaster. Unfortunately, greedy and insane people have taken control our nation, to include Donald Trump and most US Congressmen.
_______________________________________
Related Tales:
“War with Iran is Foolish”; 
• War with Iran is Foolish
“Why the Strait of Hormuz is Not Irrelevant”; What’s Going on With Shipping?; August 9, 2026; • Why the Strait of Hormuz is Not “Irrelevan…
“The MOST DANGEROUS WARHAWKS in MEDIA /Lt Col Daniel Davis”; Deep Dive; August 3, 2026; • The MOST DANGEROUS WARHAWKS in MEDIA /Lt C…
With Israel Becoming A Pariah State, It’s Seeking To Turn Latin America Into Its Base Of Influence.
By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | August 13, 2026
Becoming more of an international pariah, Israel has been quietly but rapidly expanding its influence across South America, hoping to use it as its new base of international influence and diplomatic protection.
The Israeli newspaper Ynet late last year quoted Israeli foreign minister Gideon Saar saying that “2026 will be ‘the year of Latin America’” for Israel.
The article quoted Amir Ofek, deputy director general for Latin America and the Caribbean at the Foreign Ministry of Israel, saying, “We hope and believe that 2026 will be the year of Latin America, a year that will look different diplomatically, one in which we see a positive change in the relations of the continent’s countries with Israel”.
This was in reference to Israel normalizing ties with the new U.S. backed Bolivian President Rodrigo Paz, a country which under the MAS-led government cut ties with Israel in 2009 over its bombardment of Gaza .
Under the new U.S. backed president Rodrigo Paz, Ynet noted, “Bolivia announced it was canceling its visa requirement for Israelis, a move expected to put the country back on the map for Israeli travelers in the region. After intensive talks … the two foreign ministries agreed on the text of an accord and a joint statement.”
This is just a part of a far larger U.S. backed Israeli plan to turn every South American government into Israeli puppet states.
Using the one million dollars he was given from the Zionist “Genesis Prize for his unwavering support of Israel”, the Israeli-aligned president of Argentina, Javier Milei launched the “Issac Accords”, an initiative “aimed at strengthening political, economic and cultural cooperation between Israel and Latin America”.
The project was launched alongside Genesis Prize Foundation Co-Founder and Chairman Stan Polovets and former US Ambassador to Costa Rica, Fitz Haney.
Hanley boasted to the Jerusalem Post that “Our goals are ambitious but clear: create frameworks for trade, tourism, education, and technology that connect Israel and Latin America’s leading democracies in practical, mutually beneficial ways”.
With Israel becoming more and more of a pariah state internationally, the Isaac Accords are designed to turn South America into Israel’s base of influence.
Hanley and Polovets told the Jerusalem Post, “Unfortunately, too many traditional allies are dealing with internal divisions and rising public antisemitism that make open support for Israel politically difficult. Meanwhile, Latin America is part of the emerging Global South, which is demanding a stronger voice internationally. It represents a quarter of that bloc’s countries and 10 per cent of its population. Engaging Latin America isn’t about replacing Europe – it’s about expanding Israel’s circle of friends. These are democracies that admire Israel’s innovation and resilience”.
The initiative did not simply include making inroads with governments in South America, but overthrowing governments in solidarity with Palestine, and replacing them with pro-Israel ones.
Ynet boasted that in Honduras, President Nasry ‘Tito’ Asfura has “declared an intention to warm relations with Israel”.
Nasry ‘Tito’ Asfura was effectively installed as president of Honduras by Donald Trump shortly after he pardoned the former president of Honduras and convicted drug trafficker, Juan Orlando Hernández.
As the outlet Canal RED reported:
Hours before the November 30, 2025 elections, President Donald Trump announced through his social network that he would pardon Juan Orlando Hernández, sentenced in 2024 to 45 years in prison for conspiring to import cocaine to the United States and for having received money from ‘Chapo’ Guzmán to finance electoral fraud. New York prosecutors had described Honduras as a “narco-state” during his term, while Juan Orlando was syndicated for accepting millions in bribes from cartels to protect them from the law.
In that same announcement, Trump explicitly supported the candidate of the National Party of Honduras, Nasry “Tito” Asfura, threatening to cut off aid if he was not elected. What seemed like political support covered up a more sinister agreement: the return of Juan Orlando for economic and military control of Honduras
Leaked phone calls show that this was all part of an organized plot, with financing from Israel, to eventually have Nasry Asfura, give power over to Juan Orlando Hernández.
Juan Orlando Hernández is heard on a leaked phone call telling Nasry Asfura “The pardon money … came out of a council of rabbis, and of a people who supported Israel,” adding, “I want to think that you are not going to make a side of me because, thanks to me, you are sitting in that chair. President, it will be me. And I look forward to your support. Because that’s what we talked about with President Trump”.
He added, “The Prime Minister of Israel is going to give us support. We are very grateful to him, they had a lot to do with them. They had everything to do, in fact, they with my departure and negotiation”.
Last week, Honduras “restored full ambassadorial representation with Israel, marking a major diplomatic”.
In April of this year, Israel, the United States, and Argentina officially announced the Issac Accords long planned by Javier Milei, in an official announcement calling to “strengthening cooperation between Argentina, Israel and like-minded partners in the Western Hemisphere”.
Like in Honduras, the Issac Accords include running propaganda campaigns against governments in South America that do not go along with Israeli demands.
Leaked phone calls show that “Argentine President Javier Milei would have contributed 350,000 dollars to form a regional communication team aimed at launching a media campaign against the presidents of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, and Colombia, Gustavo Petro, according to the audio recording of a conversation held between the former president of Honduras Juan Orlando Hernández and the current Honduran authorities” and that “In one of the sound files, Hernández stated ‘that as part of that group’ or continental entity, Milei’s role is important, because he contributes thousands of dollars for the construction of those fake news sources”.
Along with Javier Milei, Trump also openly interfered in the Colombian election, openly favouring current president Abelardo de la Espriella, openly saying that he “would be tremendously successful in leading Colombia to grow the Economy, Create Jobs, Promote Trade, Stop Illegal Immigration, Crack Down on Crime and Drugs, and Restore LAW AND ORDER.”
This interference has certainly paid off for Israel, with Colombia becoming “only the second country, after the US, to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the occupied Golan, which Israel seized from Syria in 1967 and annexed in 1981 in a move the UN Security Council declared void. The reversal came from Colombia’s new right-wing president Abelardo de la Espriella, backed by Trump, who is rapidly undoing the pro-Palestinian policies of leftist predecessor Gustavo Petro: restoring ties, planning a Jerusalem embassy, and quitting South Africa’s ICJ genocide case”, as Drop Site News reported.
This context, as well as other recent developments, adds new context to Trump’s kidnapping of Venezuelan president Nicholas Maduro.
Israel wanted regime change in Venezuela because, as the Miriam Adelson-funded Israel Hayom newspaper explained, “Since Hugo Chávez’s rise to power, Venezuela has become one of the most hostile countries to Israel and Zionism in Latin America. Chávez … severed diplomatic relations with Israel during Operation Cast Lead in 2009, accused Israel of ‘genocide against the Palestinian people’ and compared its policies to Nazi conduct. His successor (Maudro) continued the anti-Israeli line with even more intensity. Thus, Venezuela, which previously maintained warm relations with Israel and even purchased security technologies from it, became a center of hostile propaganda toward Zionism and the Jewish state”.
The U.S. installed successor to Nicolas Maduro, Delcy Rodriguez, has reversed this after Israel sent IDF militants to Venezuela under the guise of helping with recovering from the earthquake.
Since this, the Venezuelan government led by Delcy Rodriguez released a statement saying:
The Governments of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the State of Israel announce that, following the visit of the Israeli humanitarian delegation to Venezuela in response to the double earthquake that occurred on June 24, and in follow-up to discussions held between high-ranking officials of both countries, the two nations have agreed to allow the continuation of bilateral technical cooperation stemming from the emergency and recovery efforts following the double earthquake. Furthermore, the two nations agree to establish a coordination mechanism to facilitate the provision of consular services to their respective citizens residing in the other country, as needed. Both governments recognize the importance of the bond between the State of Israel and the Jewish community residing in Venezuela, which constitutes a significant historical bridge of friendship between the two countries.
Israel, along with the United States and Argentina, will continue to support right- wing Zionist governments in South America to expand Israel’s influence.
Trump wants to talk to Hezbollah. Will they pick up the phone?
By Ali Rizk | Responsible Statecraft | August 13, 2026
For decades, U.S. policy in Lebanon has focused on the elimination of Hezbollah, or at least its military wing. But the Trump administration has taken this effort to new heights.
The State Department is sponsoring the first ever direct talks between Lebanon and Israel since the Madrid peace talks, with the disarmament of Hezbollah being a central objective of those talks.
Washington has also taken the unprecedented step of sanctioning individuals from outside the party whom it accuses of undermining the campaign against Hezbollah, including members of Lebanon’s state security apparatus. Meanwhile, the U.S. and Israel are engaged in an unprecedented financial crackdown on Hezbollah, as the New York Times reported this week.
Ironically, however, Donald Trump is also the first sitting American president to express a willingness to hold direct talks with the Lebanese Shiite movement.
“I would speak to Hezbollah. I speak to everybody. I’ll speak to people that a lot of people think I shouldn’t be speaking to, and things work out,” Trump told reporters during an oval office meeting with his Lebanese counterpart Joseph Aoun last month.
While it would be easy to dismiss these remarks as typical Trumpian grandstanding, there appears to be more to the story.
Multiple reports have recently emerged indicating that serious attempts have been made to open direct channels between Washington and Hezbollah.
According to the Middle East Eye, Trump told Beirut’s ambassador to Washington last May that he wanted to talk to the group in a bid to salvage a shaky ceasefire with Israel. The Lebanese presidency reportedly turned down the request over concerns that holding such talks would undermine Aoun by bypassing the Lebanese government.
That same report quotes senior Lebanese officials saying that both the Trump administration and some of its predecessors have attempted to open direct channels with Hezbollah, but the group rejected these advances.
Another recent report by the Lebanese daily Aljoumhouria revealed that senior Iraqi officials told a visiting Hezbollah delegation that Iraq was ready to sponsor and host direct talks between Washington and the Lebanese Shiite movement. The offer, the report noted, was made shortly before Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s recent visit to Washington, only to be turned down by Hezbollah.
Sources from within the Lebanese Shiite movement confirm that there has been a recent push to establish direct channels between the two sides. “The Americans have made several attempts through a number of intermediaries to engage directly with Hezbollah,” a Hezbollah source explained to RS. “It’s true that al-Zaidi pursued such efforts, but certainly not at our request.”
Interestingly, however, senior Hezbollah officials refused to clarify the group’s stance on the issue despite media reports that it had flatly rejected such offers. “Hezbollah wants to keep its stance concerning this issue out of the media, without giving any indication as to how it will respond to such initiatives,” a political official in the Lebanese Shiite movement told RS. “Our policy is to not reveal how we intend to approach this issue”.
This suggests that Hezbollah is not necessarily rejecting dialogue with Washington out of hand. Talks “will happen if there is an opportunity that presents itself,” said Muhanad Hage Ali, deputy director for research at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.
“But there will be an ambiguity because the organization basically tries to avoid acknowledging that they’re discussing anything with the ‘Great Satan,’” Hage Ali said, referencing a term Iran and its allies use to label the United States.
According to Hage Ali, who has authored numerous publications about Hezbollah, the group stands to benefit from such dialogue in more ways than one. “Direct contact between the U.S. and Hezbollah would eventually undermine the Lebanese government track,” he explained, in reference to the direct talks Lebanon’s government is holding with Israel. “This is useful for Hezbollah.”
Hezbollah could also use talks with Washington to make a deal under which any measures related to its weapons and military activities would be conditioned on amending Lebanon’s constitutional system to “grant Lebanese Shiites a bigger share of power,” Hage Ali said.
Still, it is difficult to see Hezbollah negotiating away its weapons absent an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory and a genuine guarantee that Israel will permanently end military operations in Lebanon. This stems from the fact that the group was founded as a resistance movement against Israel back in the early 1980s, long before it became a political party in 1992.
Meanwhile there is little to suggest that Israel is willing to take any steps that would encourage Hezbollah to take a more flexible stance.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly told a recent cabinet meeting that he will not succumb to American demands to withdraw troops from Lebanon. Israel’s Foreign Ministry even published a map where parts of southern Lebanon appeared incorporated into Israel. The map, which Israel posted on X, stirred an uproar in Lebanon before it was taken down. (Israeli officials described the controversial map as the result of “an artificial intelligence error.”)
There is also the issue of Iran which has only doubled down on its support for its Lebanese ally. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mujtaba Khamenei has framed support for Hezbollah as a “strategic mandate” for the Islamic Republic, while underscoring that any deal with the United States is contingent on respecting Lebanon’s territorial integrity and an end to Israeli military operations in the country.
That Khamenei cast his country’s support for Hezbollah in strategic terms — and not merely as an ideological obligation — supports the notion that the Iranian leadership believes supporting the group has become a greater necessity in the wake of the recent conflicts, not least given how Israel has directly attacked Iran in these wars. In other words, rather than weakening the bonds between Tehran and Hezbollah, Israeli attacks on Iran have apparently strengthened these bonds, giving them a stronger strategic rationale.
Against this backdrop, it is far more plausible that, at least for now, Hezbollah is pinning its hopes on what comes out of a potential agreement between Washington and Tehran, as opposed to riskier paths like direct talks with the Trump administration.
“The objective behind the American attempts to establish direct channels with us is to remove Lebanon and Hezbollah specifically from the Islamabad talks,” explained the first Hezbollah source, referencing U.S.-Iran negotiations in Pakistan.
Holding talks with the United States as a separate track from Islamabad would place Hezbollah in a weaker position, he argued, while being part of a framework with Iran which “hold strong cards” means that any agreement reached “will have guarantees.”
Ali Rizk is a security analyst with a Masters Degree in Counterterrorism from Australia’s Macquarie University. Rizk is a contributor to the American Conservative, and his work has appeared in the National Interest, Middle East Eye, and the Australian Institute for International Affairs.
The Mecca pact and the limits of a ‘Muslim NATO’
Divergent threats, US ties, and economic interests leave the collective-defense pact’s real purpose open to dispute.
By F.M. Shakil | The Cradle | August 13, 2026
The oil-rich Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, nuclear-armed Pakistan, and Turkiye, which commands NATO’s second-largest army, signed the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement on Friday, 7 August. The accord arrived as fighting again intensified in Yemen. Days later, the Ansarallah-aligned Yemeni armed forces (YAF) launched ballistic missiles at Marib and the Red Sea port of Mokha, the latest escalation against Saudi-backed forces.
Iran noted the turn toward regional security arrangements, saying it showed a growing recognition that security cannot be guaranteed by foreign powers. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said the accord reflected a rapidly changing understanding of security across the region.
Pakistan welcomed the accord and said the Mecca agreement stipulates that an attack on any member will be treated as an attack on all. Islamabad described it as a major step toward stronger strategic relations, regional security, and cooperation in mutual defense.
Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar called the accord a defensive document that does not target any one country. Posting on X on 9 August, Dar said it remained open to any regional state willing to commit to its founding principles.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan went further, insisting that neither Iran nor any other country was the pact’s designated target. In an online discussion, he also expressed hope that Egypt would eventually join.
Veteran Pakistani diplomat Riffat Masood offered a narrower reading. In a discussion with Saudi-American researcher Dr Hamza al-Kanani, Pakistan’s former ambassador to Iran and Norway said the phrase “an attack on one is an attack on all” applies specifically to external threats.
“It does not have any regional implications, which means that this clause would apply whenever any country signing this agreement came under attack from Israel, the US, or any external force,” she claimed.
Masood added that the article does not cover intra-regional rivalries involving Iran or the YAF.
Egypt was conspicuous by its absence from the Mecca signing ceremony, despite taking part in months of foreign minister-level consultations with the grouping.
Cairo’s apparent disenchantment rests on the belief that the military agreement is driven more by political alignment than deployable defense capability. Egypt retains positive bilateral relations with the three signatories, but is wary of joining a Saudi-led bloc that could narrow its room for maneuver across the region.
“I expect more countries will join this alliance in the future. The alliance may expand beyond the military sphere to encompass economic and strategic dimensions in the future,” Sajjad Azhar, an Islamabad-based analyst, tells The Cradle.
Riyadh looks beyond Washington
Saudi Arabia’s security partnership with Washington dates to the closing years of World War II, when oil and strategic access became bound up with US protection. But Washington’s shift toward competition with China, coupled with its uneven responses to attacks on Persian Gulf partners, has pushed Riyadh to look for additional options.
The September 2019 attack on Abqaiq and Khurais, claimed by the YAF, temporarily knocked out around half of Saudi oil production. Washington did not retaliate militarily, despite US and Saudi accusations that Iran was responsible. For Riyadh, the episode exposed the limits of the US security umbrella.
The Hamas-led Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October 2023, and the regional war that followed added to Saudi concerns. Those concerns deepened after Israel’s September 2025 attack on Doha, which targeted Hamas negotiators in the capital of a US-allied Gulf state. Eight days later, Riyadh signed a bilateral defense pact with Pakistan.
The US-Israeli war on Iran launched on 28 February 2026 further exposed Arab states to retaliation without providing them with any clear say over Washington’s war aims. According to Azhar, the conflict reinforced the sense that reliance on a single external guarantor had become increasingly dangerous:
“The attacks launched by Tehran and its allies, including the Houthis [YAF] and Iraqi Shia armed organizations [PMU], against Saudi Arabia changed the situation. In this perspective, an end to recurring Iranian threats seems to have been the main strategic purpose behind the new alliance.”
Collective defense, undefined obligations
At the signing ceremony, the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan displayed copies of the Mecca agreement, but its full provisions have not been made public. Beyond the collective-defense formula contained in the joint statement, analysts still lack details on command structures, activation procedures, force commitments, and the geographical reach of the pact.
Dr Muqtedar Khan, a US-based analyst and professor at the University of Delaware, tells The Cradle that the pact rests on two pillars: a collective-defense commitment and joint deterrence and defense cooperation. The first treats an armed attack against one of the three states as an attack against all three.
“This sets up a mutual-defense duty that is similar to NATO’s Article 5, but the details about how quickly and strongly they will respond are mostly unclear,” he says. The second pillar, he adds, resembles the bilateral Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement signed by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan last year.
Khan says the Mecca accord marks an important step in the region’s security evolution, showing how middle powers are seeking greater autonomy and a wider range of partnerships instead of relying almost entirely on the US:
“While it is premature to label it a fully fledged ‘Muslim NATO,’ the pact creates a new framework for collective deterrence and defense cooperation among three of the most consequential Sunni-majority states.”
Its durability and effectiveness, he says, will ultimately depend on how the parties define an “attack,” what each is prepared to do when the commitment is tested, and whether other countries join.
“For now, it functions as both a political signal of reduced dependence on external patrons and a practical platform for deeper military collaboration,” Khan says.
A pact made with Washington’s blessing?
Washington’s public response to the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement has been notably restrained.
For some observers, the pact signals that US partners want to diversify their security arrangements after a succession of regional crises exposed the limits of depending on one external guarantor.
Others argue that, if the agreement produces stronger missile defense, maritime patrols, and a wider sharing of regional security burdens, it could advance Washington’s stated goals rather than threaten them.
The pact may therefore loosen exclusive dependence on the US without displacing the vast American military architecture already embedded in the region.
Retired Pakistani diplomat Abdul Basit, who served as high commissioner to India and as Foreign Office spokesperson, argued in a television interview that the trilateral agreement had Washington’s backing.
“Without US consent, these three regional actors could not succeed in creating a trilateral defense mechanism that challenges the US’s hegemonic security apparatus in the region,” he argued.
Other analysts likewise see an implicit US role in the creation of a large regional force whose likely purpose is not confrontation with Israel but containment of Iranian influence.
Imtiaz Gul, executive director of the Islamabad-based Center for Research and Security Studies (CRSS), tells The Cradle that Washington’s lack of opposition suggests the coalition was formed with at least tacit US approval and a clear assurance that it would not be directed against Israel:
“This alliance doesn’t significantly deter Iran from attacking US bases in Saudi Arabia. Iran is not attacking these countries but only hitting the US bases wherever they exist. As long as these bases remain there, Iran will continue targeting them in one way or another.”
Three states, three threat maps
The pact is also burdened by conflicting threat perceptions. Pakistan and Turkiye are unlikely to enter a direct clash with Israel while maintaining close strategic ties with Washington. This has fed suspicions that the bloc was established with US backing precisely because it does not challenge the regional red lines enforced by Washington.
Gul says the alliance is no uncomplicated marriage. Its central ambiguity remains unresolved: is it primarily a political declaration, or does it impose binding military obligations on its members?
“The three countries have different threat assessments and priorities. Pakistan’s focus is mostly on India and Afghanistan, but Turkiye or Saudi Arabia will not build deterrence for Israel or India due to their strategic and commercial interests. For Saudi Arabia, the emphasis is on maintaining stability in the Gulf area and promoting economic diversification. Turkiye is seeking to sell its military hardware, even though it has obligations as a NATO member.”
Pakistan and Turkiye also stand to gain financially from the pact as both manage strained economies. Turkiye has found a lucrative regional market for drones and aircraft, while Pakistan secures badly needed Saudi financing.
In August 2023, Saudi Arabia signed a record $3 billion deal with the Turkish defense firm Baykar to procure Bayraktar Akinci unmanned combat aerial vehicles (drones).
Saudi Arabia also committed a fresh $3 billion support package to Pakistan. The funding came in addition to $5 billion in Saudi deposits previously placed with Pakistan and extended through 2028. The new support helped Islamabad repay roughly $3.5 billion owed to the UAE later that month.
“The public relations advantages for Pakistan are evident, but only time will reveal whether the alliance will yield any financial benefits that trickle down to the poor masses,” Gul remarks.
For now, the Mecca pact’s signatories have announced collective defense without revealing who would command it, which threats would activate it, or what each capital would actually risk for the others.
Until those questions are answered, the Mecca pact remains more a declaration of intent than a functioning military alliance.
The Caspian Sea: America’s New Eurasian Containment Arena
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – August 13, 2026
The Caspian Sea — for thirty years a backwater of great-power politics — has quietly become a battlespace, and most of the world is still treating it as a footnote.
In late July, Iranian officials confirmed that a US strike had damaged the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Seyyed al-Shuhada naval facility in Zibakenar, in Iran’s Caspian province of Gilan — the first time in the current war that Washington has reached into Iran’s Caspian coastline. Days earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced that Kyiv’s drones had struck several vessels in the Caspian more than 1,000 kilometers from Ukrainian-held territory, including a ship reportedly ferrying military cargo from Iran toward Russia. Iran, however, said one of the vessels hit was carrying iron ore from Astrakhan to the Iranian port of Anzali and summoned Ukraine’s chargé d’affaires in protest.
Neither strike, on its own, would rewrite anyone’s map. Together, they are a signal. For the first time, the US and US-backed Ukraine have demonstrated that they have the will and the reach to hit targets on a sea that geography, more than strategy, had long kept insulated from direct confrontation. The Caspian’s basin states — Russia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan — built an entire diplomatic architecture, including a 2018 legal convention on the sea’s status, around the premise that outside militaries would stay out. That premise no longer holds.
What is emerging is not a contest for territory in the traditional sense. It is a contest over connectivity: over the ports, rail lines, pipelines, and shipping lanes that allow Russia, Iran, and, at one remove, China to function as an integrated economic and strategic space rather than three isolated, sanctioned, or otherwise constrained powers. Call it America’s New Eurasian Containment: a strategy that treats infrastructure, not territory, as the terrain worth contesting.
Severing the Connective Tissue
The clearest evidence of this shift sits not on the Caspian’s water but on its shores, in two projects Washington has spent the past year reshaping.
The first is the International North-South Transport Corridor, a roughly 7,200-kilometer multimodal freight route agreed upon by Russia, Iran, and India in 2000 that links the Indian Ocean, through Iran, across the Caspian, to Russian rail networks and on to Europe. Long stalled by under-investment, the corridor has become a priority for Moscow since 2022, precisely because it offers a way around Western sanctions. Its central artery is the Caspian crossing between the Iranian port of Bandar-e Anzali and the Russian port of Astrakhan. More importantly, it is the same stretch of water where Ukrainian drones struck in July and where Israeli forces had already hit Iranian naval and port assets at Anzali back in March, according to regional shipping trackers. A degraded, contested Caspian corridor is a direct blow to the one overland route that lets Moscow and Tehran trade around US and European sanctions. These attacks are, therefore, not about the US war on Iran; they are about reshaping the very geography of trade passing through the Eurasian landscape.
The second is the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, or TRIPP — the transit corridor Washington brokered in August 2025 between Armenia and Azerbaijan, granting a US-led consortium a 99-year lease to build and manage rail, energy, and fiber-optic links through Armenia’s Syunik province. The deal ended a decades-old territorial dispute, but its geopolitical function is narrower and sharper. It places Iran’s only land border with Armenia under American-supervised transit control, cutting off Tehran’s most direct overland access into the South Caucasus and, by extension, into a region Russia has treated as its own backyard since the Soviet collapse. Whatever the deal’s stated humanitarian purpose, it functions as a wedge driven into Eurasian connective tissue.
Neither project was designed with the other in mind. But together with the Caspian strikes, they describe a single logic: deny Russia and Iran the infrastructure that lets their January 2025 Comprehensive Strategic Partnership — a 20-year treaty covering defense, energy, finance, and counterterrorism cooperation — translate into real economic integration rather than a document signed in Moscow. China, meanwhile, watches from the margins. Beijing has no naval presence on the Caspian and is not a party to any of these strikes or corridors, but its own westward trade ambitions run through the same chokepoints, i.e., the Middle Corridor via the South Caucasus, and Iranian ports as a Belt and Road terminus. A Washington-controlled TRIPP and a contested Caspian complicate China’s overland options as a side effect, even if Beijing was never the intended target.
A Frontier Without a Front Line
The danger in this strategy is precisely that it has no clean edges. Containment during the Cold War had defined lines — the Fulda Gap, the Elbe, the 38th parallel — and a doctrine that most parties understood. Infrastructure containment has none of that. A drone strike on a cargo ship, an airstrike on a naval depot, and a 99-year land lease branded with a president’s name: each is individually deniable, incremental, and justifiable in its own narrow terms, even as the cumulative effect reshapes the strategic map of an entire region. That ambiguity is a feature for Washington, which can advance the strategy without ever declaring it. But it is also a source of volatility because affected countries are left to infer intent from actions rather than respond to a stated policy. And, inferences, in a region this armed and this aggrieved, tend toward worst-case assumptions.
The more durable question is what happens once the corridors themselves become targets, not just prizes. Pipelines, rail lines, and undersea cables may now be legitimate objects of great-power coercion. If so, the Caspian will not be the last “peripheral” space pulled into contested geography. The Arctic shipping lanes, the Malacca chokepoint, and the fibre-optic seabed of the Indian Ocean are all candidates for the same treatment. In this environment, the states that thrive will not be the ones with the largest militaries. They will be the ones that make their infrastructure redundant, diversified, and defensible: multiple routes, multiple partners, no single artery whose loss is fatal. Iran and Russia have bet heavily on a small number of chokepoints. Their partnership may keep deepening going forward. But the deeper it goes, the more attacks it will face and endure.
Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of international relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
Israel Fabricated Iranian Assassination Threat Against Trump In Attempt To Ramp Up Iran War
The CIA Has Accused Israel Of Fabricating Iranian Assassination Threat
By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | August 13, 2026
Last month, “intelligence” was relayed by Israel that Iran was supposedly planning on assassinating Trump, which resulted in him “secretly flying out of Turkey in an alternate military aircraft”.
But the claims of an Iranian assassination attempt against Trump relayed by Israel were deemed to be bogus even by U.S. intelligence.
The Washington Post reported that “The assassination threat was relayed by the Israeli government to the CIA, where analysts did not view the intelligence as compelling and conveyed that skepticism to Trump administration officials”.
The article added, “Another official called the reports of threats against Trump’s life ‘Israeli-derived, not U.S.-generated, and viewed as low confidence.’”
The article added, “Some U.S. intelligence officials saw Israel’s sharing of the warning about threats to Trump’s life as designed less to inform than to influence the president’s decision-making and U.S. policy in the region, a current and a former U.S. official said” with the report quoting one official saying it “fit a broader pattern of Israeli intelligence reporting that some officials see as designed as much to shape presidential decision-making as to inform it”.
Indeed, fabricated claims of Iran planning to assassinate Donald Trump seem to have been Israel’s most successful deception deployed to get Trump to carry out its preferred policy on Iran.
Journalists Max Blumenthal and Ken Silva have documented how the FBI recruited Pakistani national Asif Merchant to take part in a sting operation supposedly surrounding an Iranian plot to assassinate Donald Trump, in what Ken Silvia called “at the very least… a highly controlled FBI sting operation that never posed a threat to Trump” if not “a case totally fabricated by the undercover agents”.
Since then, Benjamin Netanyahu has repeated baseless claims of Iran trying to assassinate Trump in an attempt to get him to go to war with Iran.
In June of 2025, Benjamin Netanyahu baselessly claimed that Iran was behind the assassination attempts against Trump by Thomas Crooks in Butler, Pennsylvania, and by Ryan Routh at Mar-a-Lago, claiming that Iran “tried to assassinate President Trump twice”.
This deception seems to have influenced Trump’s decision to bomb Iran for Israel in June of last year, with the White House tweeting “I was the hunted- now I’m the hunter” in reference to the bombing.
Fabricated claims of Iran trying to assassinate Trump were also a large part of Israel’s campaign to get Trump to enter a full-scale war on Iran this year.
According to Reuters, before the bombing, “Netanyahu, determined to move forward with an operation he had urged for decades, argued that there might never be a better chance to kill Khamenei and to avenge previous Iranian efforts to assassinate Trump”.
It was also a key talking point of the late Neo-con Zionist senator Lindsay Graham, who joined Benjamin Netanyahu is lobbying Trump for the war.
According to the Wall Street Journal, “Graham likened Iran’s leader to Adolf Hitler and told Trump that Iran was in a historically weak position. They talked about the regime’s efforts to assassinate Trump in 2024. ‘If you think Trump forgets stuff, you’d be mistaken,’ Graham said.”
Yet again, Israel has fabricated claims of Iran trying to assassinate Trump in an attempt to get him to ramp up the Iran war.
Misleading intelligence is worse than fake news: Araghchi warns US
Al Mayadeen | August 13, 2026
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has warned US officials that misleading intelligence can be more dangerous than false news, pointing to Washington’s record of strategic miscalculations.
In an English-language post, Araghchi called on US officials to “beware,” arguing that intelligence failures have repeatedly contributed to major US miscalculations.
He said the United States has “long made miscalculations due to shortcomings in intelligence,” citing the war on Iran as a prominent example.
Araghchi also identified the Strait of Hormuz as “an even bigger miscalculation”; he argued that Washington was making a major mistake in thinking that it can control the key waterway.
Araghchi warns Washington over intelligence failures
Araghchi’s warning comes amid continued scrutiny of intelligence assessments surrounding the US-Israeli war on Iran.
The Iranian foreign minister’s argument centers on the consequences of intelligence failures when they become the basis for military and foreign-policy decisions.
An inaccurate assessment can extend beyond the intelligence community, shaping decisions over military operations, diplomatic pressure, sanctions, and escalation.
The warning also comes as questions have emerged in Washington over intelligence supplied by “Israel”.
Israeli intelligence raises questions in Washington
According to a report by The Washington Post, cited in the source material, the Israeli government informed the CIA about an alleged threat to assassinate US President Donald Trump in Turkey.
The newspaper reported that US analysts did not find the information convincing. American intelligence officials were also reportedly skeptical of Israeli information concerning an alleged Iranian threat.
A US official cited by the newspaper reportedly said that reports concerning threats to Trump’s life originated with “Israel” rather than US intelligence and described them as “low credibility.”
US intelligence officials reportedly told The Washington Post that “the Israeli warning was aimed at influencing US policy in the region,” raising questions over whether the warning was primarily intended to protect Trump or influence Washington’s regional calculations.
Hormuz becomes a central point of confrontation
Araghchi’s warning also directly addressed the Strait of Hormuz, as Tehran’s ability to leverage its geographic control of the vital waterway continues to undermine trust in Washington’s war plans.
Iran has emphasized its authority over the strategic waterway and maintains that its reopening depends on the United States fulfilling Iranian conditions.
The strait’s importance extends far beyond the immediate confrontation. It is a critical maritime passage for global energy supplies, making developments surrounding it consequential for regional security and international markets.
For Iran, control over the waterway represents a significant strategic lever as US military pressure continues. For Washington, efforts to compel its reopening carry broader geopolitical and economic implications.
US Says “It’s the Middle of the Game” in Iran /Lt Col Daniel Davis & Brian McGlinchey
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – August 12, 2026
Featured Video
Iran & Its Allies Are Threatening Every Route for Saudi Oil
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
A short history of British torture
ICC | December 2005
When the House of Commons was debating how much to increase the time limit for detention without trial the question of torture came up. Officially this was limited to the nice considerations of whether it was all right to send people to places where torture is used and whether Britain can use information collected by the use of torture in other countries. This discussion gave an impression of democratic Britain as the home of civilised behaviour where the very idea of torture is repugnant to our legislators – unlike, say, the US with its secret CIA jails… In reality, the British state has a long history of using and developing a whole range of torture techniques. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- NATO-backed Kosovo separatist ‘responsible for war crimes’
- US destroying international space law
- SCO Calls for Binding Global Deal to Prevent Arms Race in Space
- Iran & Its Allies Are Threatening Every Route for Saudi Oil
- ‘40,000 tons of bombs’: Report shows Trump planning ‘largest bomb transfer in modern US history’ to Israel
- Amazon says cloud infrastructure in Bahrain, UAE ‘beyond saving’
- How Europe became an accessory to CIA torture
- Trump says Iran urgently seeks deal, Tehran sets conditions for talks
- The Andean Shadow Army
- Russia Wants to End Ukraine Conflict – Lavrov
- If Americans Knew
- Trump administration plans to send 40,000 tons of bombs to Israel: report
- Sanctions Target Iran’s Government, But Kill Hospitalized 23-Year-Old Woman
- An alternative view on the book “Israel’s Lobby: America in the Grip of a Foreign Power”
- Ed Sheeran’s band Beoga, other opening acts quit tour after Macklemore was dropped over his pro-Palestinian comments
- The assassination attempt on President Trump in Butler and the various Israeli connections to it
- “We Want That the Whole Land Be Jewish”
- BREAKING: Building collapse in Gaza kills at least 20 as they sleep – Daily Update
- ‘School is Life’: 1.5 Million Palestinian Children Face Fourth Year of Shattered Education
- Pentagon admits Iran war caused ammunition shortages, cost US $33.4bn
- 37 Palestinian journalists held in Israeli jails, rights group says
- No Tricks Zone
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
- Energy Crisis: Germany Enters Heating Season With Historically Low Gas Reserve Fill Levels
- New Study: The Antarctic Ice Sheet Gained Mass From 2020-2024 Due To Staggering Snow And Ice Accumulation
- Study: Ocean Heating Rates From Thousands Of Years Ago ‘Dwarf’ Modern Ocean Heating Rates
- Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany!
- New Study: Antarctic Ice Melt Has Contributed Less Than 1 Centimeter To Sea Level Rise In The Last 30 Years
- Fear Of Debate: Alarmist German Climate Scientist Calls On Mainstream Media To Discredit Skeptic Voices
- End-Of-August Arctic Sea Ice Extent Hasn’t Fallen In 20 Years, Official Data Show!
- News-Making Nepal Region Has Had As-Warm Or Warmer Periods Than The 2000s In The 1600s, 1700s, 1800s
Aletho News 