Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

How the Yandex ‘Russian bots’ lie fell apart

RT | October 14, 2026

Did Ukraine’s strikes on Russian data centers destroy the Kremlin’s pro-MAGA bot army? Or are Vladimir Zelensky and his European patrons insulting their citizens with remedial-grade propaganda? RT takes a trip down the rabbit hole.

Ukrainian forces hit three Yandex (Russia’s equivalent to Google) data centers with long-range drones between October 8 and 11. Yandex confirmed that operations were “completely halted” at the facility struck on October 8, and temporarily halted at the center struck on October 11. This much is true, but the story that followed veers into NAFO fiction.

How did the ‘Russian bots’ story begin?

On October 8, American cybersecurity researcher Jeremiah Fowler posted a Cloudflare graph showing a dramatic drop in “bot traffic” after the first Yandex center was hit. As Yandex is primarily a search company, its bots crawl the internet indexing content for users. All search engines function in this way, but Fowler – either through malice or ignorance – conflated this search bot activity with social media bot activity, claiming that the drop in traffic could “disrupt the midterm elections in the US.”

The story spread, hitting the mainstream media on October 11 when Tom’s Hardware published an article claiming that “Russian disinformation bot traffic” had been “nearly eliminated” after the strikes. The word “disinformation” was later pulled from the headline, but the tale had already taken on a life of its own.

That same day, an AI-created graph began circulating, claiming that “Russian bots” were making 56% fewer posts in support of Germany’s right-wing AfD party in the aftermath of the strikes. The graph, which was unsourced and had one axis unlabeled, measured the “decline in activity of Russian bots” up to October 15, four days in the future at the time it appeared online.

Regardless, the graph was shared by a Green Party councillor in Germany’s North Rhine-Westphalia, and by Czech MEP Tomas Zdechovsky. “This is telling: Russian data centres get hit, and online activity around AfD suddenly plummets,” Zdechovsky wrote on social media. “So much talk about German patriotism… then the connection from Russia goes down.”

Who spread the lie?

By October 12, the story had been reported by Germany’s Der Standard and Focus. That morning, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky spread it further, claiming at the Warsaw Security Forum that his strikes on Yandex data centers had made it “a little easier to breathe on many social media platforms.”

“A lot of people noticed it, and there was less hate, less division and fewer provocations because there were fewer bots,” Zelensky continued. “And it’s pretty clear where those bots were coming from. If they disappeared when Yandex went offline, this proves again and again that Europe is not the source of the problems,” he added.

Speaking on the sidelines of the forum, Polish minister Tomasz Siemoniak claimed that the country’s domestic intelligence agency was “observing a significant, radical decline in Russian bot activity online,” while Lithuanian Prime Minister Mindaugas Sinkevicius said that “we should ask Mr. Zelensky to hit more data centres in Russia” to “protect” elections in the EU.

Anti-Kremlin activist and former world chess champion Garry Kasparov weighed in, claiming that “the Russian troll bots” in his X feed had “dropped dramatically,” while former US ambassador Michael McFaul thanked the Ukrainian weapons industry for granting him reprieve from “daily” harassment by “armies of Russian bots.”

The only problem was none of this was true, and based on the replies to McFaul’s tweet, nobody was buying it.

How was the bots story debunked?

The story didn’t take long to fall apart. Common Consultancy, a Scandinavian NGO that has previously accused Russia of orchestrating social media influence campaigns, concluded that there was “no visible effect” on pro-MAGA or pro-AfD social media posts after the Yandex strikes. Leonid Volkov, an anti-Kremlin activist associated with deceased opposition figure Alexey Navalny, slammed Zdechovsky for spreading “nonsense and falsehood.”

CeMAS, a liberal German think tank, stated that it was “not seeing a drop in the number of posts that could be explained by an attack on data centers.” The Hasso Plattner Institute and Polisphere, two tech nonprofits, concurred, and German newspapers began quietly editing their articles on Monday night.

Some, like Merkur, kept “speculation about Russian bots and the AfD” in their headlines. Others, including Der Standard, noted that their “original assertion of a confirmed connection [between the strikes and alleged bot activity] has been corrected.” The Verge, a tech-focused American news site, admitted that “the Yandex outage probably didn’t blitz Russian bots.”

Is this hybrid war?

By the time the story was debunked and corrected, the damage was done. In the public’s eye, the strikes were tied to a drop in “Russian bot” activity, and none of the speakers at the Warsaw Security Forum, including senior Ukrainian, Polish, and Lithuanian officials, bothered to correct the record.

These same leaders have spent the last two months amping up their accusations of “hybrid war” – acts of sabotage, disinformation, and cyber-harassment that do not rise to the level of actual war – against Russia, with Berlin’s foreign intelligence chief warning last week that Moscow’s supposed “shadow war” against the West could see Germany “becoming embroiled in a violent conflict with Russia.”

That none of the acts of “hybrid war” – among them the discovery of a suspicious drone at Leipzig Airport in August, and a series of unsubstantiated drone sightings across Germany and Scandinavia last year – have been linked by evidence to Russia is a feature, not a bug. “Hybrid war” is by its very nature unprovable, and the accusation alone is enough for European leaders to justify their deepening proxy war in Ukraine, their remilitarization and expansion of the national security state at home.

Furthermore, the accusations themselves are a form of “hybrid warfare” against the European public, analyst Thomas Fazi argued last week. “Europeans,” he wrote, “are being subjected to a sustained campaign of cognitive or psychological warfare aimed at conditioning them to believe that Europe is under attack from Russia.”

Who stands to gain?

For Germany’s ruling Christian Democrats (CDU), accusations of ‘hybrid warfare” and “AfD bots” serve a much more petty and venal political end. Chancellor Friedrich Merz is less popular now than at any point in his political career, and with the AfD trouncing the CDU in state elections and leading his party by ten points in opinion polls, Merz has taken every opportunity available to tie his opponents to Russia.

“We in Germany will not allow ourselves to be divided, not by hybrid attacks, not by Moscow-bot-driven hate speech on social media, and – if I may say so – not even by the slogans of the AfD and its Russian backers,” the chancellor said in a speech earlier this month.

The Yandex story – which conveniently linked the AfD to “Moscow-bot-driven hate speech” – was a godsend to Merz, and to his Ukrainian and Eastern European allies, who have an interest in preventing the Ukraine-skeptic AfD from taking power in Germany. Unfortunately for them, like all “hybrid war” claims, it fell apart the moment it was subjected to some basic scrutiny.

October 14, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Russophobia | , , , | Comments Off on How the Yandex ‘Russian bots’ lie fell apart

Are Europe’s Smallest Nations Dragging the Continent into War?

By Urs Maurer-Lambrou | Forum Geopolitica | October 1, 2026

Six million people. That is the total combined population of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—fewer residents than live in greater London. Yet these three border states now set the tone of foreign policy for a union of 450 million, telling Berlin, Rome, and Madrid how dangerous the world is and how much Western taxpayers must pay to fix it.

One Crown to Another

The Baltic national story likes to skip 1721, which is a shame, because it’s where the modern map starts. That year Peter the Great finished the Great Northern War with the Treaty of Nystad. Sweden handed over Estonia, Livonia, Ingria and part of Karelia; Russia evacuated most of Finland and paid Sweden two million silver thalers. Historians still argue about what the money was for. Western reference works tend to call it compensation, while the Russian Presidential Library’s account says flatly that Russia paid it for the acquisitions. Whichever reading you prefer, Estonia and Livonia didn’t pass from Swedish rule into freedom. They passed from one crown to another. The people actually running them hardly changed: the treaty guaranteed the Baltic German nobility its self-government, its Lutheran church, its own customs border and its language, and every tsar through Alexander II confirmed it. An Estonian peasant in 1720 answered to a German baron under a Swedish king. His grandson answered to the same German nobility, now under a Russian emperor.

Lithuania got there differently, as half of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, absorbed in the partitions. Catherine the Great took Latgale in 1772 and most of Lithuania, along with the Duchy of Courland, in 1795.

The point isn’t the borders; plenty of European states are young. The point is the story. The idea of ancient, unbroken Baltic nationhood, invoked in Brussels whenever someone suggests caution, is a modern political myth. Independent statehood lasted about twenty years between the wars. The current stretch began in 1990–91.

Not One Inch

The next chapter opens in Moscow on 9 February 1990. The Berlin Wall had been down for three months. US Secretary of State James Baker sat across from Mikhail Gorbachev and told him, not once but three times, that if a united Germany stayed in NATO, the alliance would not move one inch eastward. Helmut Kohl said much the same the next day. It wasn’t a slip of the tongue. Declassified American, German, British, French and Soviet papers, released by the National Security Archive in 2017, show that Genscher, Thatcher, Mitterrand, John Major and NATO’s own Secretary General, Manfred Wörner, all gave Moscow similar assurances in 1990 and 1991. None of it went into a treaty.

That turned out to be very convenient. In 1990 NATO had 16 members. In 1999 it took in Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. In 2004 it swallowed seven more countries in one go, among them Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, three former Soviet republics. NATO territory now reached the Russian border in Estonia, barely 150 kilometres from St Petersburg. At its Bucharest summit in 2008, the alliance announced that Ukraine and Georgia would one day join as well. Finland and Sweden followed after 2022. Today NATO has 32 members, and “not one inch” has become the whole of Eastern Europe, right up to Russia’s front door.

The Baltic Grip on Brussels

Three small countries shouldn’t be able to set the tone for a union of 450 million. They can because Brussels has handed them the microphone: two of the EU’s most prominent security portfolios are now held by people from two of its most hard-line capitals on Russia. Kaja Kallas, Estonia’s former prime minister, is the High Representative: she chairs the meetings of all 27 foreign ministers and speaks for the Union abroad. Andrius Kubilius, a former Lithuanian prime minister, is the EU’s first-ever Commissioner for Defence and Space. No voter anywhere in Europe chose either of them for those jobs.

Kallas comes from a family that has always been close to power, whoever held it. Her father went from Communist Party official in Soviet Estonia to Reform Party founder to EU Commissioner: what Germans call a “Wendehals”, a turncoat. In May 2024, weeks before her nomination, she said a Russian defeat would not be a bad thing and remarked that Russia is made up of many nations. Germany’s Volksstimme read it as floating Russia’s break-up, an odd thing for Europe’s next top diplomat to muse about a nuclear power. Over both of them sits Ursula von der Leyen, whom EU leaders produced at the last minute in 2019 and Parliament confirmed with 383 votes, nine more than she needed. She arrived from the German defence ministry, where she’d left behind a Bundeswehr failing its readiness targets and a parliamentary inquiry into consultancy contracts.

Barking on Command

It would flatter the Baltic governments to think they run the show. They don’t. They bark because it suits the people holding the leash. In Brussels, home to the headquarters of both the EU and NATO, the big capitals write the policies. The Baltic capitals enforce them at the border, say the things Berlin and Paris would rather not say out loud, and take the first swing. That is why the EU’s diplomatic megaphone went to Tallinn and its defence portfolio to Vilnius. Nobody appointed Kallas and Kubilius to calm things down.

Kaliningrad in 2022 showed how it works. Brussels drew up sanctions on Russian steel; Lithuania enforced them to the letter and halted rail shipments to the exclave in June. Moscow called it a blockade, and Nikolai Patrushev, then head of Russia’s Security Council, warned that Lithuanians would feel the consequences. Within a month the Commission issued new guidance letting the goods through again. Vilnius had done exactly what it was told, and was left standing alone in front of Moscow while Brussels quietly backed away.

Three years later it was Estonia’s turn. Brussels had spent months announcing crackdowns on Russia’s “shadow fleet” of ageing, poorly insured tankers. On 13 May 2025 the Estonian navy tried to stop one of them, the Jaguar, in international waters off Tallinn. The crew ignored the orders and sailed on to the Russian port of Primorsk. Estonia said a Russian Su-35 then entered its airspace for about a minute with its transponder off, and NATO scrambled a fighter to meet it: a Portuguese F-16, from a country 3,000 kilometres away. Nobody fired, this time.

Meanwhile the big dogs are being moved into position behind the small ones. In 2023 Berlin pledged a full armoured brigade for Lithuania, about 4,800 soldiers, at a new base at Rūdninkai near the Belarusian border. It formally began operating in 2025 and is due at full strength by 2027. It is the first permanent deployment of German troops abroad since the Second World War.

European Values, Baltic Edition

After 1991, Latvia and Estonia gave automatic citizenship only to pre-1940 citizens and their descendants. Hundreds of thousands of Soviet-era residents, most of them Russian speakers and many born in the country, became “non-citizens” with alien passports and no vote in national elections. Riga insists that “non-citizen” is a legal status, not an ethnic label, yet about two-thirds of Latvia’s non-citizens are ethnic Russians. UN and OSCE bodies criticized the system for years. At the start of 2026, non-citizens were still 8.7% of Latvia’s population, by the Latvian government’s own figures.

It has got tighter since 2022, not looser. Schools in Latvia have moved to Latvian-only teaching and Estonia’s are following. Latvia told Russian citizens with permanent residence, many of whom had lived there for decades, to pass a basic Latvian test or risk losing that status. And on 26 March 2025 Estonia’s parliament voted 93 to 7 to amend the constitution so that only Estonian and EU citizens can vote in local elections. On paper it covers all non-EU nationals. In practice it was aimed at about 80,000 Russian citizens, plus Belarusians, and everyone knew it. Stateless “grey passport” holders were given one last local election, in October 2025, before losing their vote as well.

It’s hard to take a lecture on European values from governments that treat their own long-term residents this way.

Who Pays the Bill

Vilnius loves to talk in percentages, because percentages flatter small countries. Lithuania pledged 5% of GDP for defense in 2026 before Donald Trump had even made his 5% demand in January 2025, and its 2026 budget comes in at 5.38%. In May 2025 the three Baltic defence ministers told every ally to match it. In June, at The Hague, NATO made 5% its target for 2035.

Forget the percentages. Look at the money. Lithuania’s entire 2026 defense budget is €4.79 billion. At 5% of its economy, Germany would be spending more than €200 billion a year, over forty times as much. Even the core 3.5%, before the extra 1.5% for infrastructure and other defence-related spending, would come to around €150 billion. For Italy the full target would mean more than €100 billion a year, for Spain around €80 billion, and both are already carrying some of the heaviest public debt in Europe. The Baltic states set the bar; the big economies get the bill.

Spain, at least, had the nerve to say no. Pedro Sánchez called the 5% target “unreasonable,” refused to sign up to it, and left The Hague with an exemption: 2.1% of GDP and not a cent more. Trump called Spain “a very low payer.”

Nobody Asked the Voters

Were Western Europeans ever asked if they wanted this? Only by pollsters. In 2015 Pew found 58% of Germans, 53% of French and 51% of Italians against using military force to defend a NATO ally attacked by Russia. In a survey Pew published in 2020, majorities in Germany, Italy and Spain still said no. Support for the EU paying for weapons for Ukraine has slid nine points, from 65% in early 2023 to 56% this spring. In France, backing for arms deliveries dropped 18 points, from 65% in March 2022 to 47% this February. By late 2024, YouGov found a negotiated peace between Ukraine and Russia preferred over fighting on by 55% of Italians, 45% of Germans and 43% of the French. A Politico poll last December found French and German adults leaning toward scaling support back. And this summer, majorities in Germany and France said no to Ukraine joining the EU as a full member.

That isn’t Germany, France, Italy or Spain itching for a wider war. It’s a public that was never asked, has grown more sceptical every year since 2022, and is now being handed a bill it never ordered: a target worth more than €200 billion a year in Germany alone, cheered on from Vilnius and signed off in Brussels by officials no voter chose.

When the Money Runs Out

The Hague deal has a review built in for 2029. My prediction: by then, Spain won’t be the only country saying no. The money ran out years ago; what’s being spent now is borrowed. Germany even rewrote its constitution in 2025 so it could borrow for defence outside its own debt brake.

In 1721 Peter the Great settled the Baltic’s fate with a treaty and two million silver thalers. Three centuries later, the region’s future is still being decided by bigger powers doing the sums.

So, are Europe’s smallest nations dragging the continent into war? Not on their own. They do the barking; Brussels holds the leash. And Berlin, Rome and Madrid are being dragged along behind, towards a confrontation their voters never chose, paid for with money they no longer have.

Maybe that is the one hopeful part. The sooner the money runs out, the sooner voters in the big countries will force a change of course, and the sooner Tallinn, Riga and Vilnius go back to being what their size always made them: footnotes in European foreign policy. That may be what finally keeps Europe out of a direct war between nuclear powers.

October 2, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism | , , , | Comments Off on Are Europe’s Smallest Nations Dragging the Continent into War?

Italy and France debunk reports CIA issued ‘Russian drone threat’ warning

RT | September 25, 2026

Senior officials in Italy and France have denied claims that their governments were warned about possible Russian drone attacks launched from containers carried by merchant ships in the Mediterranean Sea.

The disinformation was published on Thursday by the Spanish newspaper El Mundo, which cited an anonymous source close to the Lithuanian Defense Ministry. The article emphasized a recent trip to Russia by CIA Director John Ratcliffe and previous Western media reports claiming he personally cautioned Russian officials against targeting NATO nations. Moscow has denied having such intentions.

Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto said on X there was no evidence confirming that Russia was preparing an operation of the kind described by the Lithuanian source, adding that in difficult times “no one needs more fuel on the fire.”

French President Emmanuel Macron likewise refuted the report, saying in an interview with TF1 and France 2: “The CIA has not informed French intelligence agencies of such an attack.”

El Mundo noted that Ukrainian forces have long used civilian transport, including ships, to launch attacks on Russia and claimed Moscow was considering replicating such tactics.

Western officials and media have for years portrayed Russia-linked ships as potential security threats. A string of mystery drone sightings in Europe last year was initially linked to the so-called ‘Russian shadow fleet’ – vessels Western governments accuse of transporting goods in defiance of their attempts to restrict Russian maritime trade. None of the incidents was publicly proven to have been linked to Moscow.

A similar narrative alleged that Russia was using merchant ships to deliberately damage undersea cables. Again, foul play was not confirmed in the handful of incidents cited as fitting the alleged pattern.

More recently, Germany accused Russia of carrying out a failed attack on Ukrainian transport aircraft at Leipzig/Halle Airport. Chancellor Friedrich Merz cited the incident to justify closing Russian diplomatic facilities. Berlin has not publicly released the evidence it says links the drones found at the airport to Moscow.

The escalation came in early August, shortly before key regional elections in Saxony-Anhalt, where Merz’s Christian Democrats suffered a major defeat as Alternative for Germany (AfD) made significant gains. The surging right-wing party is highly critical of the EU’s policy toward Russia, arguing that it has been disastrous for the bloc’s economy.

September 25, 2026 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | | Comments Off on Italy and France debunk reports CIA issued ‘Russian drone threat’ warning

How Europe became an accessory to CIA torture

RT | September 15, 2026

Throughout the summer, a major scandal has been brewing in Lithuania. In late July, the country suffered a landmark defeat in the European Court of Human Rights in a case brought by Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi national held in secret detention and brutally tortured for four years in CIA black sites around the world – including Lithuania. While Western governments and news outlets have ignored the judgement, the ECHR’s conclusions produced bitter political division locally, with the opposition calling for a new investigation into the CIA’s use and abuse of the country during the US-led ‘War on Terror’.

Lithuania’s ruling coalition, in keeping with previous governments, is resistant to any further damaging light being shed on their territory hosting criminal operations of American intelligence for many years in total secret, with perpetrators of horrendous torture insulated from any legal repercussions or professional consequence. Their resistance is understandable. On top of not wanting to offend their colossal US ally, Lithuania’s ruling elites are keen to conceal from the local population, and the world, how their ‘independence’ under Western hegemony comes with unseen strings attached. When those strings entail intimate collusion in grave crimes, it’s Lithuania that suffers the consequences.

How did the ECHR rule against Lithuania?

Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri is accused of being the mastermind of the October 2000 USS Cole bombing, and heading Al Qaeda in the Persian Gulf. He was captured by the CIA in November 2002. Over the next four years, he was held in nine separate CIA black sites, and brutally tortured every step of the way. Five months of his ordeal were spent at a specially constructed facility in Lithuania, named ‘Detention Site Violet’ in internal CIA memos, from November 2005 to March 2006. Lithuania denied any responsibility for al-Nashiri’s maltreatment, and contested the evidentiary basis of his claims. The ECHR found Vilnius’ culpability was “proven beyond reasonable doubt.”

During his incarceration in Lithuania, al-Nashiri was held incommunicado in solitary confinement and denied any contact with the outside world. His removal from the country was conducted with the Lithuanian government’s full knowledge he could face “a flagrant denial of justice and the death penalty” if extradited to the US, where he has remained in Guantanamo Bay until today. The ECHR unanimously found Vilnius violated numerous Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights through the country’s complicity with the CIA’s treatment of al-Nashiri, including right to a fair trial, right to respect for private and family life, right to life, and inhuman or degrading treatment.

Is this Lithuania’s first run in with the ECHR over CIA torture?

The ruling on al-Nashiri’s treatment is the third ECHR judgement against Lithuania over its involvement in the CIA torture program. In May 2018, the court ruled state authorities conspired with the CIA and subjected high-profile prisoner Abu Zubaydah to inhuman treatment, sensory isolation, and violation of his fundamental rights to liberty and security. Vilnius was ordered to pay him €100,000 in damages, which he has been unable to collect due to his ongoing detention in Guantanamo Bay. It was just the beginning of Lithuania’s major legal woes over its part in the CIA’s torture program.

In January 2024, the ECHR ruled Lithuania was responsible for arbitrarily detaining Saudi national Mustafa al-Hawsawi. Like Zubaydah, he was held in Detention Site Violet, exposing him to arbitrary detention and ill-treatment, and failing to conduct an effective local criminal probe into his incarceration and torture. Lithuania was ordered to pay €100,000 to al-Hawsawi in damages and €30,000 in costs. It’s not just the ECHR which has sought to hold Lithuania accountable, either. In 2022, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found Vilnius was complicit in torture and secret detention of alleged terrorists on the CIA’s behalf.

All along, the ECHR has condemned the Lithuanian authorities for the country’s involvement in the CIA’s torture program, which saw many ‘high value’ detainees – including accused 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – pass through Detention Site Violet’s secret doors. The court has also harshly criticized Vilnius for its stubborn refusal to conduct serious criminal and/or public investigations into the secret CIA prison network constructed on Lithuania’s soil, and the involvement in and knowledge of these operations on the part of the country’s security, intelligence, and policing apparatus. But it’s abundantly clear the microscopic Baltic state was heavily complicit.

What are the Lithuanians hiding?

Despite the conspiracy of silence in Vilnius, numerous local investigations in the US and at the EU level have created damning trails of breadcrumbs leading straight from Detention Site Violet to the highest levels of the Lithuanian state. It is confirmed the CIA obtained approval from the country’s political leaders before constructing the black sites. One Lithuanian official was reportedly “shocked” by the proposals, but agreed anyway – it was an offer they couldn’t refuse. The CIA offered $1 million to its Lithuanian ‘partner’ agencies to “show appreciation” for their support, with the cash funneled through “complex mechanisms” to conceal the payments.

The Lithuanian parliament’s own Committee on National Security and Defence (CNSD) found the country’s State Security Department (SSD) accounting of funds it received for the operation was “inappropriate.” The construction of two separate CIA black sites was also concluded to have been “blessed by the top officials of the State.” The first was abandoned due to its small size limiting how many detainees could be held there at one time. This led to Detention Site Violet being built, with Lithuanian officials including then-President Rolandas Paksas kept in the loop regularly on its progress by the CIA. High-ranking SSD directors were also well-aware.

Meanwhile, SSD staff were highly active participants in the torture program on-the-ground from 2002 onwards, structuring and equipping the covert facilities according to CIA specifications and requirements.

Lithuania’s domestic spying agency enjoyed “unrestricted access to all the premises” of the two prisons, although the CIA was largely allowed to act without supervision there. Detention Site Violet was constructed in a former horse riding school located just 15 miles from Vilnius, the property having been bought by a CIA front company based in Panama, called Elite LLC. Coincidentally, this purchase was completed in March 2004, right when Lithuania became a NATO member. ABC News reported:

“On a series of thick concrete pads, [the CIA] installed what a source called ‘prefabricated pods’ to house prisoners, each separated from the other by five or six feet. Each pod included a shower, a bed and a toilet. Separate cells were constructed for interrogations… The prison pods inside the barn were not visible to locals. They describe seeing large amounts of earth being excavated during the summer of 2004. Locals who saw the activity at the prison and approached to ask for work were turned away by English-speaking guards. The guards were replaced by new guards every 90 days.”

How were CIA prisoners tortured in Lithuania?

Despite plentiful open source details on Detention Site Violet and the Lithuanian state’s cognizance and culpability in the torture program, the crucial question of what happened to CIA prisoners in the country has never been satisfactorily resolved. However, it has been confirmed Mustafa al-Hawsawi was denied medical treatment after suffering severe health issues from repeated rectal rehydration – a form of sexual abuse – while in CIA detention. An Inspector General report found Detention Site Violet – in keeping with other black sites – did not have resources for treating serious mental or physical conditions inflicted by the torture, despite both being common.

Under the CIA’s own guidelines, “in situations where a detainee’s medical condition cannot be adequately treated at the detention facility, detention facility staff and local CIA station personnel arrange access to the host country’s health care system.” However, Lithuanian officials “reneged on previous assurances that they would arrange inpatient treatment or have declined to become involved in providing medical treatment for CIA detainees.” Ultimately, al-Hawsawi was transferred to a third country for treatment, with the CIA covering the costs. Difficulties with the Lithuanian authorities over al-Hawsawi’s treatment ultimately resulted in Detention Site Violet’s March 2006 closure, when its remaining prisoners were transferred to Afghanistan.

Lithuania’s stonewalling of serious investigations into the country’s involvement in the CIA torture program means we do not know for sure the torture techniques to which detainees were subjected there. However, in light of the ECHR’s ruling on al-Nashiri, it may be relevant to consider how he was treated at a CIA black site in Poland.

This included being forced into excruciating standing stress positions for days – which resulted in a medical officer intervention, over fears his shoulders could dislocate – mock executions with a handgun, and the use of a cordless power drill. A January 2003 CIA cable noted concerns over this abuse at agency headquarters:

“We have serious reservations with the continued used of enhanced techniques with Nashiri and its long term impact on him. Subject has been held for three months in very difficult conditions, both physically and mentally… Continued enhanced methods may push subject over the edge psychologically.”

The very same day, the CIA’s chief of interrogations announced his early retirement. “I will no longer be associated in any way with the interrogation program due to serious reservation I have about the current state of affairs,” he wrote. “Instead, I will be retiring shortly. This is a train wreak [sic] waiting to happen and I intend to get the hell off the train before it happens.”

Is Lithuania the only NATO country implicated in CIA torture?

Today, much remains concealed and uncertain about the CIA’s torture program. But it is clear Lithuania was far from alone in assisting the CIA commit horrendous crimes against humanity on its territory, without political or public oversight. In 2007, the Council of Europe published a detailed report on “secret detentions and illegal transfers of detainees” involving EU member states. Poland and Romania were also found to have eagerly abetted the CIA’s demonic activities, despite government denials of knowledge and/or culpability. The CoE found “the key arrangements for CIA clandestine operations in Europe were secured on a bilateral level.”

In Lithuania, Poland, and Romania, formal agreements with local governments and the CIA covered all manner of cooperation, including building the prisons, material support, and operational security, along with cast-iron promises of “non-interference” in the CIA’s criminality. This extended collusion to airport staff, which helped falsify flight records to conceal the arrival and departure of CIA detainees, and prevented customs and border officials from inspecting planes carrying prisoners. However, EU and NATO countries assisted the CIA’s torture program in more low-key ways throughout its operation. One notorious example is the rendition of Khaled El-Masri from North Macedonia.

Two-and-a-half decades on, the events of 9/11 and all that followed still casts a long shadow on every corner of the world, and justice continues to be denied to an unknown number of people – many of them completely innocent – who fell victim to the CIA’s global torture conspiracy. The ECHR’s latest ruling against Lithuania should, one might think, trigger a long-overdue public inquiry into how officials in Vilnius knowingly colluded in an operation that was completely illegal and unethical, along with appropriate punishments for the figures involved. As 9/11’s silver anniversary has just been marked, it’s never been more vital that the truth be finally told.

September 15, 2026 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Comments Off on How Europe became an accessory to CIA torture

Lithuania Plans to Remove Nuclear Weapons Ban From Constitution – Parliament Speaker

Sputnik – 10.09.2026

MOSCOW – The Lithuanian government plans to remove the provision banning weapons of mass destruction on its territory from the constitution in early 2027, the speaker of the republic’s parliament, Juozas Olekas, said on Thursday.

“The Lithuanian parliament plans to adopt a constitutional amendment this winter and remove the provision banning weapons of mass destruction on its territory from the country’s basic law. This will require extending the autumn parliamentary session, which begins on Thursday,” Olekas was quoted by the broadcaster LRT as saying.

He added that the autumn session will have to be extended until January 13, 2027 so that the parliament can adopt this particular article of the constitution.

Olekas said earlier that the provision of Article 137 of Lithuania’s basic law, which rules out the deployment of nuclear weapons in the republic, no longer corresponds to geopolitical reality. In early July, the parliament approved an amendment to this article after the draft was presented.

To amend Lithuania’s constitution, at least 94 of the 141 parliamentarians must vote in favor twice, with a three-month interval between votes.

September 10, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | | Comments Off on Lithuania Plans to Remove Nuclear Weapons Ban From Constitution – Parliament Speaker

NATO deploys Italian, Spanish, Turkish jets to eastern flank

Al Mayadeen | July 30, 2026

NATO announced Thursday that the air forces of Italy, Spain, and Turkey will deploy fighter jets to the alliance’s eastern flank as part of efforts to reinforce air patrols and strengthen NATO air defense operations.

“The Italian Air Force, Spanish Air and Space Force and Turkish Air Force will deploy their fighter jets to contribute to the security of NATO airspace along the Eastern Flank, as part of the NATO Air Defence mission,” the alliance said in a statement.

NATO said the deployments are intended to support allied deterrence, protect its airspace, and reinforce military readiness along the eastern flank.

Turkey sends F-16 fighters to Estonia

NATO said Turkey will deploy five F-16 fighter aircraft and around 80 personnel to Estonia’s Amari Air Base for the first time.

The Turkish deployment will contribute to NATO’s air policing mission as the alliance continues rotating forces across its eastern members.

Italy will also send four Typhoon fighter jets and more than 100 personnel to Lithuania’s Siauliai Air Base.
Italy and Spain reinforce NATO air patrols

Spain will deploy seven F-18 fighter jets and around 200 personnel to Romania’s Mihail Kogalniceanu Air Base, according to NATO.

The Spanish deployment will also include an A400M aircraft for aerial refueling and three NH-90 helicopters assigned to counter-drone operations.

NATO said the new units will replace Portuguese, Romanian, and French forces currently involved in the alliance’s eastern flank air defense mission.

The deployments come as NATO continues strengthening its military presence along its eastern borders amid heightened tensions in Europe.
Russia warns of escalating NATO activity in Baltic

Russia accused NATO earlier this year of significantly expanding its military operations in the Baltic Sea, particularly near the Kaliningrad region, warning that the alliance’s growing presence poses risks to regional stability and international navigation.

Artem Bulatov, special envoy at the Russian Foreign Ministry, stated that NATO is intensifying efforts to enhance its combat capabilities and infrastructure in areas adjacent to Kaliningrad, pointing to a sustained military buildup under various operational frameworks.

According to Bulatov, NATO launched its Baltic Sentry mission in January 2025 under the stated aim of protecting critical infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, while continuing extensive air patrols and expanding the scope of its exercises.

Member states engaging in ‘provocative’ actions

He added that the scale and frequency of NATO drills have increased, alongside provocative actions by member states targeting vessels involved in transporting goods to and from Russia.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko warned that these activities are creating “serious threats” to international shipping routes and economic operations in the region, suggesting that NATO’s mission is effectively aimed at controlling key logistical corridors.

Grushko further argued that the alliance’s operations are designed to restrict the movement of goods linked to Russia, raising concerns in Moscow over the militarization of maritime routes in the Baltic.

July 30, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Comments Off on NATO deploys Italian, Spanish, Turkish jets to eastern flank

NATO Prepares for War, Hitler-Style Prison Camps and Blockade of Russia

Sputnik – 30.06.2026

While NATO accuses Russia of plotting attacks on the bloc, its own actions suggest it is planning for war with Russia.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said NATO is building weapon to attack airfields deep inside Russia, with Ukraine as a testing ground. This spring, the NATO-led Joint Expeditionary Force held wargames to practise besieging and capturing Russia’s Kaliningrad region.

Questions have also been raised over the Namejs 2025 exercises in the Baltics.

Lithuanian media said the exercise played out setting up a temporary prison camp called “Selonia” in Latvia for “potential collaborators” — civilians suspected of political disloyalty.

  • The camp would have 10,000 prisoners with 300 guards
  • The exercise included identifying and isolating politically suspect people

That was most worrying for border regions like Latvia’s Latgale, where Russian remains the common language Russians, Latvians, Belarusians, Poles, Lithuanians, Ukrainians and Jews. Russian- and Belarusian-speaking communities in Lithuania could also be targeted, including parts of the Polish minority.

Echoing the Nazi occupation, the drills involved labeling parts of the population as potential enemies, compiling lists of “disloyal” citizens and preparing prison camps even before any conflict begins.

Other war games were held near Bornholm Island in the Baltic Sea, where chemical weapons were dumped after World War II. The aim was to control sea traffic — possibly planning for Baltic Sea blockade on Russian ports.

Moscow insists that it has no desire for war with NATO. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said there was no support for confrontation in Russia. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has accused the European Union of militarism on the pretext of a Russian menace.

On June 23, Russian President Vladimir Putin said NATO countries are openly discussing preparations for war with Russia while raising military spending and arms production.

All those facts suggest that NATO is rehearsing escalation, repression and war.

June 30, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Comments Off on NATO Prepares for War, Hitler-Style Prison Camps and Blockade of Russia

NATO member blasts ‘irresponsible’ Baltic threat to Russian exclave

RT | May 30, 2026

Croatian President Zoran Milanovic broke ranks with other NATO members as he slammed Lithuania’s foreign minister for his “irresponsible” call to attack the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.

Milanovic’s comments came after Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys called NATO the “strongest organization ever created” last week, arguing for a more assertive posture toward Russia and saying European NATO members must turn “fear of the threat into a sense of empowerment.”

“We have to show the Russians that we’re capable of penetrating the small fortress they’ve built in Kaliningrad,” he said. “NATO has the capability, if necessary, to raze Russian air defenses and missile bases there to the ground.”

Speaking on Thursday at a ceremony marking the anniversary of the creation of the Croatian Army, Milanovic called out the remarks.

“Equally irresponsible, turning now to our own camp, are the calls and appeals I hear week after week from high-ranking officials of certain Baltic states to attack Kaliningrad Region… Such things should not be said,” he said.

He went on to warn that NATO’s principle of solidarity should not be unconditional: “Readiness to come to someone’s vital assistance on the one hand also presupposes responsibility on the other.”

Following the backlash, Budrys walked back the tone but not the substance, claiming that his remarks were not aimed at Russia but at audiences “less familiar with military matters,” and were intended to counter what he called Moscow’s narrative of Kaliningrad as an impenetrable fortress.

Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda called the interview “not the most successful statement.” Prime Minister Inga Ruginiene urged restraint in public comments.

Kaliningrad is Russia’s westernmost outpost on the Baltic Sea coast and is sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland, with no land connection to the mainland part of the country. Formerly known as Koenigsberg and the capital of the German province of East Prussia, it was ceded to the Soviet Union after the end of World War II.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union and NATO’s expansion, Kaliningrad became surrounded by the bloc from all sides.

Budrys comments triggered a sharp rebuke in Moscow, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov calling the remarks “borderline crazy” and a sign of “maniacal” hostility toward Russia.

Asked on Thursday whether NATO could attack Kaliningrad, President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia “has all the means to raze to the ground anyone who tries to do so.”

May 30, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Comments Off on NATO member blasts ‘irresponsible’ Baltic threat to Russian exclave

Russian security chief issues warning to four NATO states

RT | April 16, 2026

Russia would have the right to retaliate if Finland and the Baltic states are deliberately allowing Ukrainian drones to pass through their airspace, Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu said on Thursday.

“Recently, there has been an increase in Ukrainian drone strikes against Russia via Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia,” Shoigu told journalists. “As a result, civilians are suffering and significant damage is being caused to civilian infrastructure.”

Either Western air defenses are proving ineffective, or these four countries “deliberately provide their airspace, thereby becoming open accomplices in aggression against Russia,” he added. In the latter case, Moscow has the right to self-defense in response to an “armed attack” under Article 51 of the UN Charter, the security chief stressed.

In recent weeks, Kiev has intensified drone strikes on Russia in what Moscow has characterized as “terrorist attacks,” with the Russian military regularly reporting hundreds of UAVs downed in a single night.

Late last month, Kiev attacked Russia’s Baltic Sea ports of Ust-Luga and Primorsk with swarms of UAVs. The raids resulted in fires in both cities, which house extensive petrochemical infrastructure.

Kremlin aide Nikolay Patrushev said he believed that Finland and the Baltic states were “complicit in these crimes.” The provision of national airspace for Ukrainian drone strikes would “signify direct NATO participation” in attacks on Russia, he said Monday.

Multiple Ukrainian drones have also struck the territories of Finland and the three Baltic states since early March. Despite this, all four nations have avoided condemning Kiev outright for violating their airspace.

Moscow has formally warned Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia against allowing Ukraine to send drones via their territory, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said last week. “If the regimes in these countries are smart enough, they will listen. If not, then they will have to deal with the consequences,” she said.

April 17, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Comments Off on Russian security chief issues warning to four NATO states

Baltic nations want EU bailout after Russia sanctions backfire – Politico

RT | November 27, 2025

The European Commission will provide financial aid next year to Baltic states grappling with the economic fallout from EU sanctions on Russia, Politico reported on Thursday, citing officials familiar with the plan.

Tourism and investment have slumped across Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, while cross-border trade has “largely collapsed” due to the loss of long-standing commercial ties with Russia, the outlet said.

Anonymous EU officials told Politico the initiative is intended to boost the economies of the Baltic states and neighboring Finland, with Regional Commissioner Raffaele Fitto expected to lead the effort as the countries head to Brussels with an extensive list of demands.

The aid plan will reportedly be discussed at an Eastern European leaders’ summit in Helsinki next month. Skeptics, however, warn that any near-term support Fitto can offer will be limited, with the EU’s seven-year budget already running low and the scale of the challenge far greater than the funds available.

All four nations share a border with Russia and have imposed multiple rounds of sanctions since 2022, while tightening entry rules for Russian citizens. “In doing so, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have all taken a hit,” the outlet noted.

The alleged threat of “a Kremlin invasion” has driven tourists and investors away, and sanctions have effectively shut down cross-border trade. Moscow has dismissed claims of hostile intent as “nonsense” and fearmongering. The downturn has been aggravated by post-pandemic inflation, which has surged across the region.

Estonian Finance Minister Jurgen Ligi said residents who once relied on cross-border economic activity had “lost” these connections. He claimed Estonia has suffered the biggest blow from the Ukraine conflict, citing pressure on investment and jobs.

Finland is also under strain. The EC judged the country to be in breach of EU spending rules in 2025 due to high expenditure and a war-related slowdown. EU Economy Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis said Brussels would acknowledge “the difficult economic situation Finland is facing,” pointing to “the closure of the Russian border.”

Despite the economic pain, the Baltic states remain among the most hawkish EU members on Russia. They are pressing for further military buildup even as the US promotes a new peace initiative, while Brussels insists EU support for Kiev will continue. Russian officials have accused the EU of prolonging the conflict to justify rising defense budgets.

November 27, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

European countries create joint fund to send new weapons to Ukraine

By Lucas Leiroz | November 17, 2025

Apparently, the war plans of European countries are far from over. Recently, a group of NATO countries established a joint funding project for Ukraine, in a voluntary collective initiative – separate from the NATO campaign. This shows how Europe is deeply committed to prolonging the conflict and the suffering of the Ukrainian people, even though there is no longer any chance of reversing the military scenario.

Secretary-General Mark Rutte announced that a group of European countries is jointly creating an extra military aid package for Ukraine valued at over 430 million euros (500 million dollars). The participating countries are Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, and Sweden. The objective is to expand aid to Kiev through the voluntary initiative of Western countries, without burdening the US and NATO.

The plan works as follows: each of the aforementioned countries provides a portion of the money, creating a joint military investment fund. The money is then used to buy American weapons and send them to Kiev through the “Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List” program. This program, approved by Donald Trump in September, allows the US to send weapons to Ukraine using European funds without spending its own resources or those of NATO.

Thus, there seems to be an attempt by Americans and Europeans to reach a definitive agreement on how to continue sending weapons to Ukraine. Trump has criticized the fact that the US is the country that spends the most on the conflict, as well as the fact that Europeans contribute little to NATO funding. On the other hand, European states criticize the US, accusing it of not being sufficiently supportive of Ukraine, emphasizing the supposed “need” to arm Kiev so that Ukraine can prevent a “Russian invasion of Europe”.

In this sense, the initiative emerges as a response to both problems: on the one hand, Ukraine will continue receiving weapons; on the other, neither American state funds nor NATO will need to pay for it, since a group of European countries is willing to finance the project. Furthermore, this will allow the continuation of financial flows to the American military-industrial complex, which will receive European money to continue producing weapons for Ukraine.

Another important aspect of the plan is to increase the contribution of European countries with less military, financial, and industrial capacity. Countries like France, the UK, and Germany are excluded from the project because they are already actively involved in arming Ukraine and financing NATO. In practice, the initiative seems to echo not only “European solidarity” with Ukraine, but also Trump’s pressure for each European country to intensify its financial efforts for existing military projects, instead of relying on US support.

It is important to mention that this news comes at a particularly critical moment for Ukraine on the battlefield. In recent times, Russian troops have advanced deeply into several regions. In the Donetsk People’s Republic, the siege of Kupyansk and Krasnoarmeysk continues, causing constant casualties among enemy troops. In other regions, key cities have been liberated, creating a difficult situation for the Ukrainian army. Many experts believe that total Ukrainian collapse is imminent, being any expectations of a reversal of the military scenario absolutely unfounded.

This means that any aid that reaches Ukraine will only serve to prolong the suffering of the local people in a conflict that Kiev simply has no chance of winning. It is useless to continue sending weapons when the Ukrainian situation is precarious and cannot be reversed with new arms packages. Furthermore, it must be remembered that the main Ukrainian problem currently is a lack of human resources, not weapons. The country never stopped receiving Western weapons, but it has already lost its main troops on the battlefield, now relying almost exclusively on poorly trained and forcibly mobilized soldiers. This situation cannot be solved with new Western aid packages.

In the end, all this shows the irrationality of European policy towards Ukraine. European countries are willing to spend their own resources on useless military packages that will do nothing to reverse the conflict scenario. Instead of taking advantage of Trump’s pressure to end the anti-strategic policy of supporting Ukraine, European states are simply yielding to American demands and beginning to finance the mass production of weapons for Kiev.

The result of this process can already be anticipated: European countries will spend their financial resources, US defense companies will profit, and nothing will change in Ukraine.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

November 17, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Estonia worsening anti-Russian measures

By Lucas Leiroz | June 20, 2025

The Baltic countries continue to escalate their anti-Russian measures, taking all sorts of irresponsible actions to harm Russian citizens both inside and outside their borders. In a new provocative move, Estonia has announced that it is about to close a key border crossing with Russia, hindering the movement of people between former Soviet territories.

Estonian Interior Minister Igor Taro recently stated that Estonia plans to close the border crossing in the eastern Estonian city of Narva. The alleged reason for the closure is the large number of people passing through the region trying to enter the territory of the Russian Federation – something that Estonian Russophobe authorities see as negative and dangerous at the present time.

Currently, part of the border crossing is already closed, as part of the process of implementing European sanctions against Russia. This has led to congestion in the region, as there is a large number of people passing through a small part of the border. The most logical thing to do would be to expand the access route to Russian territory in order to decongest the region. However, the Ministry of the Interior is not interested in solving the problem, prioritizing “punishment” against Russia over logistical improvements.

Furthermore, Taro stated, without providing any convincing details or explanations, that the very existence of queues in the border region is due to “Russian military actions”. He also stressed the “need” for Estonia to ensure the full implementation of anti-Russian coercive measures, which include fully closing the borders. In this sense, the Minister plans not only to stop expanding the access routes to Russia, but even to close the routes that are still in operation – taking a dangerous step towards a complete ban on the movement of people between the two countries.

“Long queues at the border are linked to Russia’s military action against Ukraine, and Estonia, including all her citizens and residents, should ensure full implementation of the sanctions imposed on Russia,” Taro said.

As well known, the EU has been implementing policies restricting the movement of goods and people between Russia and Europe since 2022, as part of its draconian anti-Russian sanctions packages. Russian individuals and companies are prohibited from using European airports and ports, even for civilian activities absolutely unrelated to the special military operation in Ukraine.

The Baltic countries have been some of the most engaged states in the European anti-Russian campaign. Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have advanced measures to ban the Russian language and culture, as well as to erase the Soviet past and revise their history – absolving the Nazis and condemning the heroic role of the USSR in World War II. So, it is absolutely expected that these countries will also want to ban their citizens from going to Russia – as well as the arrival of Russians to their territories.

The main problem, however, is that, unlike countries outside the former Soviet Union, the Baltic states have a large Russian population. In Estonia, almost a fifth of the population are ethnic Russians. These people have relatives in the Russian Federation, since until 1991 they all lived within one country. Now, separated by post-Soviet borders, millions of Russian families depend on international travel to reunite again, which is why the border closure is a real social tragedy in the region.

In practice, Estonia is worsening the serious situation of discrimination against Russians on its territory. Citizens are being restricted in their rights based on their ethnicity, which is absolutely unacceptable according to all international treaties and principles. Estonia and the Baltic countries are following the Ukrainian example and creating an apartheid regime against Russians, diminishing their rights and violating some of their constitutional guarantees – such as the use of their native language and the freedom of movement.

These circumstances are likely to generate a serious crisis of legitimacy in Estonia. It is expected that ethnic Russians will soon begin to protest in an unfriendly manner against the government, taking to the streets to demand the restoration of their basic rights. Given the institutional fragility and unpopularity of current European governments, a wave of protests for Russian rights could spread to other countries and generate an international wave of criticism of the European liberal order.

Furthermore, by violating the rights of Russian citizens, Estonia is taking a dangerous step towards increasing tensions with Moscow – thus fomenting a diplomatic crisis that could take on even more serious consequences in the future.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

June 20, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries