Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Western hypocrisy: ‘Israel’ bombs Iran, Tehran told not to retaliate

Al Mayadeen | June 13, 2025

Top Western leaders have called for restraint in the wake of the ongoing Israeli aggression on Iranian territory. Brutal strikes targeted military, nuclear, and civilian infrastructure and led to multiple casualties. Yet, while urging de-escalation, these leaders have largely avoided condemning “Israel’s” violation of international law, choosing instead to direct their diplomatic pressure on Tehran not to retaliate.

The double standard is stark: while Iran has consistently operated within the framework of international law and the UN Charter, the Israeli entity has carried out cross-border aggression with impunity. Under Article 51 of the UN Charter, Iran has a recognized legal right to self-defense, a point conspicuously absent from most Western statements.

Europe avoids accountability for ‘Israel’

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas called the situation, not Israeli attacks, “dangerous” and appealed for restraint from “all sides”, despite Iran being the target of the aggression. Kallas, who reportedly spoke with Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar shortly after the attack, did not denounce the strikes or the violations of Iranian sovereignty.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed the vague language, urging parties to “exercise maximum restraint, de-escalate immediately, and refrain from retaliation.” The call placed the burden on Iran to avoid a response, while the Israeli entity’s unlawful actions were met with silence.

On his part, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot and Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani both stressed the need for “diplomacy”, but neither condemned the unilateral Israeli aggression. Tajani stated, “There is no solution but a diplomatic one. Actions and reactions are dangerous,” drawing false parity between attacker and victim.

Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron convened a special defense meeting but offered no criticism of “Israel’s” blatant breach of international norms.

Australia and NATO echo the US line

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, speaking from Fiji, framed the issue around Iran’s nuclear program rather than the illegal nature of the Israeli strike. “We are very conscious of the threat that Iran becoming a nuclear state would represent,” he said, further aligning with Washington’s narrative. Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs updated travel advisories, urging Australians to leave “Israel” and the occupied Palestinian territories.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, while warning of escalation, also avoided assigning blame, waving the “de-escalation” card for vague purposes.

“De-escalation is now the first order of the day,” he said, reflecting a Western consensus that implicitly tolerates Israeli militarism while expecting Iranian restraint.

Walking a delicate line

Former US President Donald Trump confirmed that he had been briefed ahead of the strikes and stated, “Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb. We are hoping to get back to the negotiating table,” again shifting the narrative away from Israeli accountability.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that the United States had no involvement in the strikes but issued a warning to Tehran, “Israel took unilateral action against Iran,” and any retaliation must not target US interests.

“We are not involved in strikes against Iran, and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region,” Rubio said in an official statement. “Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense, Rubio added, although it was “Israel” that always initiated attacks against the Islamic Republic.

“Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel,” Rubio said, without addressing whether Washington would defend “Israel” in the event of Iranian retaliation, departing from traditional US messaging that often emphasizes unwavering support for the Israeli regime. This support came directly from the US president himself, who rushed to “Israel’s” rescue.

‘Both sides’ should avoid further destabilization

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer labeled the attacks “concerning” but urged all sides to reduce tensions, stopping short of condemning the aggression.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who received a direct call from Netanyahu, affirmed “Israel’s” so-called right to “self-defense” and echoed longstanding Western concerns over Iran’s nuclear program. He, too, urged both sides to avoid further destabilization, without acknowledging who initiated the escalation.

Tehran maintains right to self-defense

Iranian officials have underscored that the Islamic Republic has not initiated the war and that its actions have consistently adhered to international law. Tehran has emphasized that its right to respond is enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, asserting that “Israel’s” continued violations of international law, coupled with Western silence, further undermine the credibility of global institutions.

The widespread Western calls for restraint, directed almost exclusively at Iran, highlight a longstanding hypocrisy: that Israeli violations of international law are tolerated, while Iranian sovereignty and legal rights are dismissed or ignored.

It is worth noting that this is happening as Oman was planning to host the sixth round of US‑Iran nuclear talks this Sunday in Muscat.

Tehran and Washington have held five rounds of talks since April to carve a new nuclear deal to replace the 2015 accord that Trump unilaterally withdrew from during his first term in 2018.

Iran has always reiterated its commitment to diplomacy while upholding its commitments under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, while the West has manipulated the agency to serve geopolitical goals.

It is worth noting that Iranian media outlets on Thursday published a series of documents that reveal covert coordination between IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi and “Israel”, a collaboration Iranian officials say was designed to politicize the agency’s oversight of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.

June 13, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Israel’ crossed the line, aggression is war declaration: Araghchi

Al Mayadeen | June 13, 2025

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that “Israel has crossed every red line” in its hostilities against Iran, calling the Israeli attacks on Iran this Friday “a declaration of war.”

In a letter to the UN Security Council and the UN Secretary-General, Araghchi urged an emergency meeting to address “Israel’s” military actions against Iran, insisting that “the matter must be dealt with immediately.” Araghchi urged the UN Security Council to fulfill its obligations under the UN Charter, demanding that it condemn the attack and take swift, decisive action to hold “Israel” accountable.

The Iranian Foreign Minister also reaffirmed his country’s determination to defend itself in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter, stating that “Israel’s attacks on Iran constitute a blatant violation of Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as an independent UN member state.”

Earlier on Friday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stated in a televised address, “The Iranian people and the nation’s officials will never remain silent in the face of this brazen aggression,” emphasizing that “the enemy will receive a legitimate, forceful, and decisive response that will make it regret its foolish act.”

Pezeshkian vows devastating response to ‘Israel’s’ aggression

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian vowed on Friday that the Islamic Republic of Iran would deliver a powerful and legitimate response to “Israel’s” act of aggression, warning that the enemy will deeply regret its actions.

“Israel” launched a major attack on Iran in the early hours of Friday, targeting residential buildings, nuclear facilities, and military infrastructure across Iran.

June 13, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s Attack on Iran: The Latest Developments

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 13.06.2025

Israel has carried out an unprecedented, multi-wave surprise attack against Iran involving 200 jets, plus drones operating inside the Islamic Republic. Here’s a recap of the key details, plus new information that’s come to light in the past hours.

The attack, codenamed ‘Operation Rising Lion’, targeted:

  • The Natanz uranium enrichment facility and the Tabriz research site.
  • Cities, with damage reported in Tehran and at least 9 other urban areas. 320+ civilians injured, nearly 80 killed.
  • Air defense and missile launchers.
  • Top IRGC and Armed Forces leaders, nuclear scientists, a senior aide to the Supreme Leader.

Iran’s Response

  • Ali Khomeini vowed “severe punishment,” while President Pezeshkian promised to make Israel “regret” its “reckless” actions.
  • Iran cancelled a new round of nuclear talks with the US, owing to US “complicity” in the attacks.
  • Assassinated military leaders are being replaced, with Mohammad Pakpour taking Hossein Salami’s place as IRGC chief, and Abdolrahim Mousavi replacing Mohammad Bagheri as Chief of General Staff.

Has Iranian Counterstrike Taken Place?

  • Initial reports suggested Iran launched 100-200 drones toward Israel.
  • Other reports said up to 800 projectiles, including cruise and ballistic missiles, were launched.
  • But Fars News says Iran hasn’t carried out ANY substantive retaliatory attacks yet.

Trump’s Ultimatum

The US president wrote a mob boss-style Truth Social post boasting about the murder of “certain Iranian hardliners,” and warning that the next attacks will be “even more brutal” unless Iran makes a deal. Later, he issued a post about his “60-day ultimatum,” signaling direct knowledge of Israel’s plans.

  • Israeli officials told Axios the US gave Israel a “green light” for the strikes.
  • JPost reported Israel is trying to convince the US to join in on the attacks directly.

Key Reactions

Traditional regional US allies including Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar sharply condemned Israel, with Qatar saying Tel Aviv’s “reckless actions continue to destroy prospects for peace” & put global security “in imminent danger.”

Russia condemned the sharp escalation of tensions and Israel’s blatant “violation of the UN Charter and international law.”

The UN’s response? “Concern” about the targeting of nuclear sites.

June 13, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

A narrative shatters: Syrian refugees refuse to return despite Assad’s ouster

By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan | The Cradle | June 11, 2025

The fall of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 was expected to trigger a mass return of Syrian refugees. It did not. Six months on, UN figures show fewer than eight percent of Syrians abroad have made the journey home. The promise of a new era in Damascus has collided with the harsh realities of insecurity, poverty, and heightened foreign interference.

The Syrian refugee crisis – now in its 14th year – was born of war, western-imposed economic blockade, and the disintegration of state institutions that started in March 2011. What began as internal displacement soon morphed into a mass exodus across West Asia and into Europe, producing one of the most severe refugee crises of the 21st century.

Life after Assad: The enduring refugee crisis

Despite the fall of the Assad government, the Syrian refugee crisis remains unresolved. As of early 2025, the UN reports that approximately 6.2 million Syrians remain registered as refugees abroad – primarily in Turkiye, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt – with millions more residing in Europe and North America. Only a fraction have returned since the Syrian opposition assumed power.

The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) estimates that about 400,000 refugees returned between December 2024 and April 2025. This number rose slightly to 481,730 by May, still below eight percent of the total refugees abroad. This disparity underlines a stark reality: The fall of Assad did not translate into mass return as the west suggested for years, which reveals that there are deeper, unresolved issues that keep Syrians away from Syria.

In West Asia’s key host countries, Turkiye hosts between 2.7 and three million Syrian refugees under a temporary protection regime, in addition to roughly one million unregistered Syrians. Lebanon hosts around 750,000 registered refugees, though Beirut places the actual figure closer to 1.5 million. Jordan houses approximately 650,000 Syrian refugees.

While many refugees may dream of returning, reality intervenes. A mid-2024 survey found 57 percent hoped to return one day, yet fewer than two percent believed this was feasible within the following year. UNHCR identifies safety concerns and the lack of stable livelihoods as the most significant obstacles. These core issues shape the calculus of return – a calculus that has not shifted meaningfully since Assad was in power.

Why Syrians aren’t going back

A May poll cited critical return deterrents: housing and property conditions (69 percent), service availability (40 percent), safety (45 percent), and economic hardship (54 percent). Fourteen years of war have left Syria fractured, devastated, and distrustful. There is no unified, trustworthy security or governance structure. The post-Assad era remains deeply uncertain to Syrian refugees.

The current political set-up in Damascus is a patchwork of domestic and foreign-influenced actors. Despite Assad’s ousting, returnees consistently cite improved security and essential services as prerequisites. A recent survey indicated that 58 percent of Syrians abroad would return only under “safe and dignified conditions,” while 31 percent remain undecided.

Governance challenges are equally daunting. The new leadership, installed on 8 December 2024 and headed by Al Qaeda-linked Ahmad al-Sharaa (also known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani), has pledged reform. But memories of infighting among rebel groups linger. Many Syrian refugees are alarmed by the ascension of militant factions, including former Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) affiliates, fueling fears of sectarian reprisals and authoritarianism.

Beyond Syria’s borders, refugee networks now serve as lifelines. After more than a decade abroad, Syrian refugees have established enduring community ties. In Turkiye, 60 percent of working-age Syrians are employed, mostly in informal sectors. These jobs, although low-paid, offer stability compared to war-torn Syria.

Yet, most Syrians in Turkiye remain socially unanchored: Over half report feeling disconnected from Turkish society, where racism has become rife, while 84 percent still feel moderately connected to Syria. This duality reflects a long-term migration trend where refugees retain ties to their homeland while integrating abroad.

A recent survey shows that just seven percent of Syrians in Turkiye have concrete plans to leave. Others express the desire to relocate, but without actionable steps. Citizenship also affects permanence: Around 238,000 Syrians had been naturalized in Turkiye by mid-2024, granting them full legal protections, including immunity from deportation. Turkish opposition sources, however, estimate this figure could be as high as 2.5 million.

The return paradox: Poor conditions in host nations, yet no return?

Even deteriorating conditions in host countries have not significantly altered return patterns. Economic collapse in Lebanon, rising costs in Turkiye, and recent conflict along the Lebanese border have not pushed Syrians homeward. Studies consistently show return decisions hinge more on improvements in Syria – security, jobs, services – than on hardships abroad.

Divisions among external powers inside Syria further complicate matters. Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and western states continue to prioritize their respective geopolitical gains over stability. The result is a fragmented political order dominated by armed factions and foreign patrons, with little accountability to actual Syrians.

This instability has real consequences. The massacres along Syria’s coast last March, reportedly instigated by UAE-backed elements, required intervention by the new Damascus authority. Such events erode trust and deter return.

Economically, Syria remains in free fall. According to the UN Development Programme (UNDP), 90 percent of Syrians live below the poverty line. The World Bank projects an additional one percent GDP contraction in 2025. The World Food Programme (WFP) says 9.1 million are food insecure, with 3.6 million reliant on aid.

Electricity is available just two to three hours a day, crippling industry and inflating living costs. Despite promises by the transitional government to reform banking and attract Persian Gulf investment, remaining sanctions and market isolation are still serious hurdles, even after Washington lifted most restrictions in May 2025.

Unemployment is rampant, fuel and transport costs are surging, and social safety nets are vanishing. Monthly incomes in many regions fall below $40, while basic food baskets cost twice that amount. The exodus of Syrian professionals continues to deplete the labor market, deepening reliance on remittances in the absence of a coherent reconstruction plan.

Syria remains a high-risk return

The reluctance of millions of Syrians to repatriate was never actually about leadership change – credible data simply does not exist on this. It is about the cumulative consequences of war: insecurity, economic collapse, political fragmentation, and the absence of justice or reconciliation.

Unless those in power focus on rebuilding credible institutions and securing livelihoods – not just reshuffling elites – the prospect of return will remain a perilous gamble.

June 11, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

Iran’s intel breach involves Israeli nuke plans, surveillance, organ trafficking: Report

The Cradle | June 11, 2025

An Iranian journalist with links to the country’s security establishment has released what he says are the first details from the thousands of sensitive documents on Israel, which Tehran announced it obtained days ago.

The documents include “Tel Aviv’s dangerous four-year roadmap in the nuclear field” and information on Israel’s “nuclear military industry facilities, bases, infrastructure and processes,” journalist Mohammad Ghaderi reported on 10 June.

The documents, which, according to Tehran, revolve mainly around Israel’s nuclear secrets, contain other information, such as documentation of bribes to well-known Arab figures aimed at advancing the Abraham Accords, as well as the “complete profiles” of 23 senior Israeli spies.

They also include “Information on about six million Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Telegram users,” Ghaderi says.

Additionally, there is personal information on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife, including medical documents.

The journalist notes that Iran’s “treasure trove” includes “Information on corruption networks, including organ trafficking networks, drug distribution, sexual exploitation of women and children, information finance, money, banking, and insurance.”

There are also hard drives and nearly 2,000 documents from the Israeli premier’s office, as well as information from “Mossad’s secret archive,” Ghaderi added.

Ghaderi claims Iran has also obtained access to private information on Israeli officials and leaders opposing Netanyahu, “including from hidden cameras in their bathrooms, bedrooms and inside their homes, and information obtained from hacking their mobile phones and personal computers, which were used in Bibi’s office to blackmail his opponents.”

The documents also contain thousands of high-quality aerial images of Israeli cities, ports, and important infrastructure, as well as “40,000 hours of CCTV footage.”

A banned recording of a heated Knesset debate involving Netanyahu, reportedly erased from official Israeli archives, is part of the cache of documents allegedly seized by Iranian intelligence.

According to DropSite News, Ghaderi is “a known media proxy” who “is often used by Iranian authorities to release sensitive information before official acknowledgment.”

DropSite News reporter Ryan Grim said, “either Iran is bluffing for leverage ahead of the next round of nuclear talks, or they pulled off an espionage coup of historic proportions.”

Iran’s Intelligence Minister Esmail Khatib announced on 8 June that Tehran has obtained thousands of sensitive documents on Israel’s nuclear program.

“The transfer of this treasure trove was time-consuming and required security measures. Naturally, the transfer methods will remain confidential, but the documents should be unveiled soon,” Intelligence Minister Esmail Khatib told Iranian television on Sunday.

“Talking of thousands of documents would be an understatement,” Khatib went on to say. The “vast collection of strategic and sensitive [Israeli] documents” includes “plans and data on [Israel’s] nuclear facilities,” according to the intelligence minister.

“They also include other documents about the relationship with the US, Europe, and other countries, as well as intelligence documents that would boost Iran’s offense power,” Khatib said.

On 10 June, the Intelligence Ministry confirmed the operation in an official statement, saying the documents were seized by operatives who managed to break through multiple layers of Israeli security and avoid detection.

A significant portion will be used by Iran’s military, some will be shared with allied countries and anti-Zionist groups, and selected parts will be made public, the ministry added.

The chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Hossein Salami, said the intel will provide Iran with an advantage if it is forced to respond to an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities.

June 11, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

More signs of Britain grooming Syria’s Al-Qaeda-rooted government

The Cradle | June 4, 2025

When Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa (previously known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani), the former Al-Qaeda emir who led the Nusra Front, was affiliated with ISIS, and later headed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), visited Saudi Arabia to meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) in February, he was accompanied by a surprising figure: Razan Saffour, a 32-year-old British-Syrian activist who had never set foot in Syria before the fall of former president Bashar al-Assad’s government in December.

Saffour also joined Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani on his trip to the Munich Security Conference that same month. Her presence in Syria’s new ruling circle highlights Britain’s outsized role in shaping the conflict – bringing Al-Qaeda to power, whitewashing its leadership, and embedding UK operatives within its political infrastructure.

Her presence alongside Julani on official state visits signals not just personal ascension, but the triumph of Britain’s long war to launder extremist power through western-groomed proxies.

Razan Saffour was born and raised in London, studied at SOAS, and emerged as a high-profile Syrian opposition voice during the early years of the war, when she was only in her early 20s. Platformed by major western and Arab media outlets from the Persian Gulf, she was a familiar figure on the regime-change circuit. Her father, Walid Saffour, a leading Muslim Brotherhood (MB) dissident, had fled Syria in 1981 during the MB’s armed uprising against the state.

Walid Saffour would later become the Syrian opposition’s ambassador to the UK, representing the Syrian National Council. Academic Dr Dara Conduit notes that this gave “the Brotherhood an important formal diplomatic link to the UK through an undeclared member.”

Engineering regime change

By the mid-2000s, the British government had aligned with US neoconservatives and MB-linked activists to prepare a full-blown insurgency in Syria.

In October 2006, several members of an MB front group, the National Salvation Front (NSF), traveled to Washington to meet with Michael Doran, a member of the US National Security Council, to discuss plans for regime change in Syria. Doran was a close associate of prominent Jewish neoconservative and former US president George W. Bush’s administration official Elliott Abrams.

In 2009, former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was told by top British officials that “they were preparing something in Syria … Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria.” When asked why, Dumas responded, “Very simple!” because “the Syrian regime makes anti-Israeli talk.”

The covert US-UK effort to topple Assad involved training young, media-savvy Syrian activists to organize anti-government protests, as well as flooding Syria with Al-Qaeda militants from Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, and dozens of other countries to carry out false flag attacks against Syrian police and security forces.

Many were UK nationals and members of the Al-Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). They had been allowed by British authorities to travel to Libya to topple late Libyan president Muammar al-Gaddafi, before being funneled into Syria via Turkiye.

US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford served as the operation’s field coordinator. As former US Naval officer Wayne Madsen reported in 2011, Ford was recruiting death squads from Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Chechnya. His previous role as political officer in Iraq involved implementing the El Salvador Option: organizing Shia death squads to crush Sunni insurgents under Ambassador John Negroponte.

Among those released from the US-run Bucca prison in Iraq and dispatched to Syria was none other than Abu Mohammad al-Julani. He would go on to found the Nusra Front, the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda, after orchestrating a series of suicide bombings in Damascus.

The Powell connection 

While Al-Qaeda’s Syrian franchise grew, British intelligence cultivated parallel assets to manage the political front. In 2011, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, founded the NGO Inter Mediate, a Foreign Office-funded project designed to open secret channels with insurgent groups.

In March 2012, Powell wrote to Hillary Clinton’s advisor Sidney Blumenthal seeking US support: “We are setting up secret channels between insurgents and governments.” He boasted that his group worked “closely with the FCO (the Foreign and Commonwealth Office), NSC (National Security Council) and SIS (Special Intelligence Service, or MI-6) in London.”

“We are starting work in Syria,” Powell added, suggesting that he was communicating with the Nusra Front and other Al-Qaeda linked groups.

By this time, Walid Saffour had assumed his UK ambassadorial post for the Syrian opposition. He lobbied hard for the arming of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) – a cover or “weapons farm” for transferring NATO-grade weapons to Nusra.

His appointment gave “the Brotherhood an important formal diplomatic link to the UK through an undeclared member,” academic Dara Conduit wrote in her book detailing the history of the MB in Syria.

Armed with CIA-supplied TOW missiles and led by Julani’s suicide battalions, Nusra captured Idlib in 2015. A year later, it declared an Islamic emirate in the province, modeled on ISIS’s Raqqa. Brett McGurk, the US envoy to the anti-ISIS coalition, would later call Idlib “the largest Al-Qaeda safe haven since 9/11.”

While McGurk claimed “Idlib now is a huge problem,” the US and UK were quietly working with the Nusra, which was soon rebranded as HTS.

Arab media outlet Jusoor wrote that the “attempts of [Hayat] Tahrir Al-Sham for polishing itself began in the summer of 2017, with a campaign of contacts with the west.”

Jusoor added that HTS media official Zeid Attar had a meeting with the former UK diplomat Powell, “who manages many back channels for negotiating with designated terrorist groups either internationally or nationally.”

From terrorist to statesman

In 2019, US envoy James Jeffrey openly described HTS as an “asset” to Washington’s Syria strategy. The goal: preserve an Al-Qaeda-controlled buffer in Idlib to pressure Damascus.

Russian media later revealed that Powell had met Julani near the Bab al-Hawa crossing with Turkiye, coaching him on how to rehabilitate his image. Julani was advised to grant a western media interview to soften his profile.

PBS journalist Martin Smith soon arrived in Idlib. His April 2021 interview with Julani aired in the US, casting the Salafist extremist leader as a reformed figure who posed no threat to western interests.

In May 2024, Robert Ford revealed at a conference that he, too, had met Julani in Idlib. “In 2023, a British non-governmental organization specializing in conflict resolution invited me to help with their efforts to get this man out of the terrorist world and into regular politics,” Ford told attendees.

That NGO, according to Independent Arabia, was Powell’s Inter Mediate. In a revealing twist, Powell was appointed UK National Security Advisor on 8 November 2024 – just weeks before Julani’s HTS launched its final offensive on Damascus. By 8 December, Julani, who now goes by his government name Ahmad al-Sharaa, had assumed power.

London’s ‘post-Assad’ playbook

As Sharaa settled into the presidential palace, western and Arab media launched a PR blitz to sell him as a modern, diversity-friendly ruler. This was difficult given his previous pledges to carry out a genocide against any of Syria’s minority Alawites who refused to convert to Sunni Islam, and his role in dispatching car and suicide bombers, killing tens of thousands in Syria and Iraq over more than a decade.

An image facelift ensued nonetheless: Military fatigues gave way to tailored suits; his nom de guerre was dropped in favor of his alleged birth name. Time magazine listed Sharaa as one of the year’s 100 most influential people – at Ford’s behest, no less. And the US lifted its $10 million bounty on his head for terrorism.

Sharaa pledged to protect minorities, including the Alawites – even as Syria’s new HTS-led security forces began targeting them under the guise of counterinsurgency. HTS-led Syrian government forces were carrying out brutal massacres against Alawite civilians on the Syrian coast, during an operation to quell an armed uprising against the authorities. During a four-day period of massacres, at least 1,700 Alawite civilians, including scores of women and children, were killed.

The following February, after Razan Saffour accompanied Julani to meet MbS, The National reported that Powell had recently held a “low-key meeting” with Syria’s new government in his new role as National Security Advisor, “boosting suggestions he will play a leading role in relations.”

Syrian analyst Malek Hafez told the Syrian Observer that Powell’s team even runs a media office inside the presidential palace, “reportedly run by two women – one British, the other of Lebanese-British heritage.”

As Hafez concludes, “The rise of Ahmad al-Sharaa was not spontaneous – it was carefully engineered through a long-term, western-backed strategy, in which Britain played a disproportionately influential role among western powers.”

While London has not yet officially expressed its support for Sharaa and Syria’s new government, the UK’s “fingerprints” are increasingly visible, the Observer added.

When weighed against the hundreds of thousands of Syrians killed, the millions displaced, and the wreckage of a nation, the UK’s central role in bringing Julani to power should not be forgotten.

June 4, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

US reshuffle of pro-‘Israel’ officials alarms occupation

Al Mayadeen | June 3, 2025

Israeli officials are expressing growing concern over a series of unexpected personnel changes within the US administration, which have targeted figures long regarded as staunch supporters of “Israel”, Israeli news outlet Ynet reported.

The shake-up comes amid escalating tensions between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over both the war on Gaza and a possible strike on Iran.

Among the most notable dismissals are Merav Ceren, a dual US-Israeli citizen who oversaw the Iran and “Israel” portfolio at the National Security Council, and Eric Trager, who led Middle East and North Africa policy. Both were appointed by former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, a strong supporter of “Israel”, who was removed by Trump.

Their removal was reportedly executed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Waltz’s successor.

Another high-profile figure expected to be removed is Morgan Ortagus, deputy to special envoy Steve Witkoff and in charge of the Lebanon file.

Ortagus’s leaving her post, although unfavorable for “Israel” due to her critical role in efforts to disarm Hezbollah, marks the departure of a controversial figure in Lebanon, with her statements, such as thanking “Israel” for what she claimed was defeating Hezbollah in the Presidential Palace in Baabda, inflaming tensions in the country, flouting proper protocol, and meddling in Lebanon’s internal affairs.

Her dismissal, which sources say was not voluntary, has shocked officials in “Israel”, where she was seen as a key ally. Ortagus is reportedly being reassigned to internal duties within the State Department and will have no further role in Middle East diplomacy.

According to Lebanese outlet al-Akhbar, Ortagus had sought a more senior regional role, aiming to take over the Syria portfolio. However, her responsibilities are now expected to be reassigned, possibly to Joel Rayburn or Thomas Barrack. The Lebanese file, sources noted, has been downgraded in US priorities, with attention shifting to Syria.

American sources confirmed to Lebanon’s MTV network that Ortagus had been dismissed due to internal professional issues unrelated to Lebanon. Her upcoming trip to Beirut has been canceled, and Rayburn is expected to assume oversight of the Lebanon file as assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs.

June 3, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US deputy envoy behind Hezbollah disarmament campaign to be replaced: Report

The Cradle | June 1, 2025

US Deputy Special Envoy to the region Morgan Ortagus, who has been in charge of Washington’s Lebanon policy, is soon to be removed from her position and reassigned to another role, according to US and Israeli reports.

Ortagus “will be leaving her position as Deputy Envoy in the Trump administration,” right-wing US journalist Laura Loomer reported on X on 1 June, citing White House sources.

“I’m told she will be cordially reassigned to another role in the Trump administration. She wanted to be the Special Envoy to Syria, but the position was instead given to Tom Barrack. Morgan’s replacement will be announced this week by Steve Witkoff,” she added.

Ortagus has been at the head of the US government’s campaign to pressure the Lebanese government into disarming Hezbollah and Palestinian resistance groups. In an interview with Al-Arabiya in April, Ortagus referred to the Lebanese resistance as a “cancer” that needs to be “cut out.”

During her first visit to Lebanon, she publicly thanked Israel for “defeating” Hezbollah at the presidential palace in Baabda.

Ortagus was scheduled to visit Beirut in the coming days to advance proposals regarding reforms, border demarcation, reconstruction, disarmament of Hezbollah, and normalization with Israel, according to Lebanese news outlet Al-Jadeed. “The US proposals will be presented with a firm tone, with a specific deadline for Lebanon to implement what gets agreed on or be held responsible” for the consequences, the report said.

Hezbollah has outright rejected disarmament, but says it is eventually willing to hold dialogue with the Lebanese government on a national defensive strategy that sees its weapons incorporated into the state for use in protecting the country from Israel.

According to a report by Israel’s Channel 14, National Security Council (NSC) officials Merav Ceren and Eric Trager have also been recently removed from their positions. Trager was overseeing Middle East and North Africa affairs at the NSC, while Ceren was the director for Iran.

Ceren previously worked at the Israeli Ministry of Defense and is affiliated with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a pro-Israel think tank based in Washington DC which has been described as “hawkish” and has been heavily pushing for the dismantlement of Iran’s uranium enrichment capabilities as US President Donald Trump’s government holds nuclear talks with Tehran.

Channel 14 notes that the decision is part of an effort to restructure the NSC, reduce its influence, and transfer foreign policy to a limited group of “trusted officials.”

The outcome of these changes, including Ortagus’s departure from her current position, was described in the report as “not good for Israel.”

June 1, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Another Neoconservative Bites the Dust: The Life and Legacy of Michael Ledeen

By Jose Alberto Nino – The Occidental Observer – June 1, 2025

Michael Ledeen, the man who urged America to “to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall” every decade, met an end that many of his critics would call overdue. On May 17, 2025, Ledeen died at the age of 83. marking the passing of one of the last influential Jewish neoconservatives of his generation.

Ledeen obtained a Ph.D. in History and Philosophy from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he studied under the Jewish German-born historian George Mosse. He took a particular interest in Italian fascism and wrote a doctoral dissertation that eventually became “Universal Fascism: The Theory and Practice of the Fascist International, 1928–1936,” published in 1972, which explored Benito Mussolini’s efforts to create a Fascist international in the late 1920s and early 1930s.

His academic career began at Washington University in St. Louis, where he was an assistant professor of history from 1967–1973, before becoming a visiting professor at the University of Rome from 1973–1977. Ledeen authored over 35 books throughout his career, including works on fascism, European history, and Middle Eastern politics.

His influence was most felt in the realm of national security though. Throughout his career, Ledeen held multiple advisory roles within the U.S. government, including as a consultant to the National Security Council, a special advisor to the Secretary of State, a consultant to the Department of Defense, and a consultant to the under-secretary of political affairs. Ledeen was an active member of numerous think tanks and regime-change advocacy organizations such as the U.S. Committee for a Free Lebanon, Coalition for Democracy in Iran (CDI), American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). Additionally, he has been published in numerous philosemitic conservative outlets such as the National Review, Wall Street Journal, and the Weekly Standard. His influence extended beyond formal roles. According to the Washington Post, he was the only “full-time” international affairs analyst frequently consulted by Karl Rove, the chief strategist of then-President George W. Bush.

Ledeen’s career was not free of controversy, however. In 1980, Ledeen co-authored articles with Belgian-American journalist Arnaud de Borchgrave in The New Republic alleging Jimmy Carter’s brother, Billy Carter, accepted payments from Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi and met with PLO leader Yasser Arafat. He made those same assertions before a Senate subcommittee as the 1980 presidential election quickly approached. These claims, published weeks before the presidential election, reignited the “Billygate” scandal.

A 1985 Wall Street Journal investigation later confirmed that the stories were part of a disinformation campaign executed by Italy’s military intelligence agency (SISMI) to hurt Carter’s presidential re-election campaign. Italian intelligence officer Francesco Pazienza testified that Ledeen received $120,000 for his role and operated under the codename “Z-3.” Pazienza, who was convicted for extortion in connection to the operation, described Ledeen as a key figure behind the dissemination of false narratives.

Additionally, Ledeen was heavily involved in the Iran-Contra affair during the Reagan administration. As a consultant to National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, Ledeen facilitated back-channel communications between U.S. officials, Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, and Iranian arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar. In this case, the Reagan administration was clandestinely negotiating hostage releases in Lebanon via arms sales to Iran, a scheme that bypassed Congressional oversight and later became a major scandal. Ledeen defended Ghorbanifar despite widespread skepticism about his reliability, subsequently detailing his perspective in the book “Perilous Statecraft.” While he never faced criminal charges, Ledeen’s role in Iran-Contra showcased his willingness to operate in the shadows, ethics be damned.

Like many Jews in the neoconservative movement, Ledeen has a long career of advocating for regime change in the Middle East.

Ledeen was one of the most vocal Jewish neoconservatives lobbying for the removal of Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein. Along with other neoconservative luminaries such as Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, Ledeen signed “An Open Letter to the President” in 1998, urging Bill Clinton to topple Iraq’s Baathist regime.

Similar to other Jewish officials in the national security establishment, Ledeen was an unapologetic champion of using hard military power. Jewish neoconservative journalist Jonah Goldberg coined the “Leeden Doctrine” after reflecting on a speech he attended in the 1990s at the American Enterprise Institute. In that speech, Ledeen was alleged to have said:

Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.

In the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Ledeen was one of the most energetic proponents of using military force against the country. Ledeen wrote a piece at the National Review critical of former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft, who advised against invading Iraq. Instead of exercising restraint, Ledeen called for turning the entire Middle East “into a cauldron”, as he explained in more detail:

Scowcroft has managed to get one thing half right, even though he misdescribes it. He fears that if we attack Iraq “I think we could have an explosion in the Middle East. It could turn the whole region into a caldron and destroy the War on Terror.”

One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today. If we wage the war effectively, we will bring down the terror regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and either bring down the Saudi monarchy or force it to abandon its global assembly line to indoctrinate young terrorists.

Ledeen’s hawkish stance on Iran was also a lifelong constant. He labeled the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini a “theocratic fascist”, and as Jewish political commentator Peter Beinart observed about Ledeen’s Middle Eastern political analysis, every problem in the region “traces back to Tehran.” Despite opposing a direct invasion of Iran in his later years, Ledeen championed aggressive support for Iranian dissidents and preemptive strikes against nuclear facilities if diplomacy failed to get Iran to kowtow to the United States.

Michael Ledeen’s death marks the end of a career that Jewish journalist Eli Lake described as one of “America’s most courageous historians and journalists.” His friend David Goldman, a Jewish international relations commentator associated with the Claremont Institute, wrote that Ledeen’s “personal contribution to America’s victory in the Cold War is far greater than the public record shows.”

Ledeen’s legacy is undeniably one of steadfast advocacy for Jewish interests within the American conservative movement. For those who saw his influence as a barrier to a more authentically gentile Right, his passing, like David Horowitz’s, may indeed be viewed as an opportunity for change as more of the Jewish founders of neoconservatism and their progeny exit the plane of the living.

For this author, Ledeen will certainly not be missed.

June 1, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

Russian Cybersecurity Gains Traction in Global South and East – Deputy Foreign Minister

Sputnik – 01.06.2025

Russian cybersecurity solutions have become increasingly sought after by countries in the Global South and East amid the growing discreditation of most leading Western IT firms, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Vershinin told Sputnik.

“In the field of information and communication technologies, we possess significant capabilities — from legislation and law enforcement practices to extensive experience and developments in ensuring ‘digital sovereignty,’” he said.

According to the senior diplomat, Russian companies are offering cybersecurity solutions that are in high demand among nations in the Global South and East.

“This is largely due to the fact that many leading Western IT corporations have discredited themselves,” Vershinin noted.

He pointed out that there have been recurring revelations about Western companies ignoring the laws of the countries in which they operate, embedding hidden “backdoors” in their products — often for the benefit of intelligence agencies — and carrying out politically motivated directives from Western governments.

“All of this is, of course, being noticed by our partners in developing countries, who are increasingly leaning toward supporting our depoliticized and impartial approaches and initiatives in the ICT sphere on multilateral platforms,” he emphasized.

June 1, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

“Senators from Israel” Sabotaging Trump’s Iran Deal

By Kevin Barrett | American Free Press | May 27, 2025

Last month I warned in these pages that Donald Trump faces a stark choice regarding Iran: “Nuclear Deal II or World War III.” I pointed out that Iran is open to a deal, but that it won’t be much different from the JCPOA that Trump unilaterally canceled during his first term.

Failure to reach a nuclear agreement would make a catastrophic US war on Iran almost inevitable—not because Iran would quickly build nuclear weapons or threaten anyone, but because failed negotiations would embolden Israel to attack Iran, knowing that it would almost certainly be able to draw the US into the war. And if that happened, Iran could climb the escalation ladder by killing thousands of US soldiers, sinking US ships, and most importantly, destroying enough of the region’s oil production to completely collapse the global economy.

Iran doesn’t want nuclear weapons, which are banned by a decades-old religious edict renewed by the current Supreme Leader. But a growing minority of Iranians want to rethink that edict. They believe that Iran’s lack of nuclear weapons has allowed nuclear-armed Israel to repeatedly attack it, murder its scientists, perhaps even (deniably) assassinate its president, and commit genocide and other crimes with impunity. So even though nukes are ungodly, the minority claims, there is a “necessity doctrine” that allows people to do things that are ordinarily forbidden if survival requires it.

Israel, for its part, wants to completely dominate the region. Zionist extremists, who now represent about half the Israeli public, are committed to building “Greater Israel.” That would require genocide at industrial scale to eliminate regional populations so Yahweh’s supposedly chosen people can steal all the land and resources between the Nile and Euphrates rivers.

An ever-expanding Israel that continues invading and occupying its neighbors, stealing their land and resources, and murdering and expelling their populations cannot dream of doing such things unless it is the only nuclear weapons state in the region. So the possibility that one day Iran might “go nuclear” worries Israeli hardliners. If Iran continues developing its civilian nuclear program, Israelis believe, someday its leaders might change their minds and decide to build nuclear weapons. The Israelis apparently don’t understand that it is their own reckless criminality that is driving more and more Iranians toward considering the necessity of developing nukes for self-defense.

A Trump nuclear agreement would, like its predecessor, keep Iran in a position of needing about a year of “breakout time” to build nuclear weapons—as opposed to months or even weeks without a deal. But that’s not good enough for Netanyahu and other Israeli hardliners. They want to lay waste to Iran, even if it requires blowing up the global economy and with it Trump’s presidency.

A group of “Senators from Israel” led by Tom Cotton (R-IS) and Lindsey Graham (R-IS) is trying to torpedo Trump’s nuclear negotiations with Iran. The treasonous Israeli-owned senators are pushing a resolution demanding that Iran completely dismantle its civilian nuclear program. That’s a non-starter. International law, beginning with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) specifically allows Iran (like other non-nuclear-weapons states including Japan, Brazil, and the Netherlands) to enrich up to 5%. Under the 2015 JCPOA Iran agreed to limit enrichment to 3.67%, a significant concession representing roughly the minimum enrichment required for nuclear power and research.

The “Senators from Israel” also want Iran to abandon its ballistic missiles—the core of its defense strategy—and stop cooperating with regional allies in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and above all, Palestine. Those demands, too, are non-starters. Their only purpose is to destroy the possibility of any agreement, thereby opening the door for Israel to drag the US into a disastrous war on Iran.

Will the Trump Administration break free from the malign influence of the Israel lobby and its extremist leader, Benzion Mileikowsky, that Polish-born internationally-wanted criminal who operates under the alias “Benjamin Netanyahu”? Will Trump take the advice I offered last month and “terminate Bibi’s command…with extreme prejudice if necessary?”

There are encouraging signs that Trump may jettison Netanyahu in order to avoid the war-on-Iran-for-Israel trap that Bibi has set for him. By striking a separate peace with Yemen’s Houthis that allows them to continue targeting Israel, then triumphally visiting the region’s Arab capitals (including Hamas-funding Qatar) Trump has done everything but order Israel to stop its genocide in Gaza.

Trump needs to give that order ASAP—not only for humanitarian reasons, but also to create a fait accompli that will help bring down Netanyahu and forestall the Israeli hardliners’ efforts to trick the US into yet another disastrous war for Israel. If the Trump Administration does not act decisively, Netanyahu’s bought-and-paid-for “US” senators will keep pushing Bibi’s war plans, with potentially catastrophic results.

May 27, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Right Approach to the US-Iran Nuclear Negotiations

By Glenn Diesen | May 27, 2025

I recently attended a media festival in Tehran and also had the opportunity to explore Iran’s weapon systems and one of its nuclear facilities. Iran’s nuclear program is cited as the main reason for Israel and the US to threaten war with Iran. Such a war would likely escalate into a disastrous regional conflict, and perhaps even pull in the other great powers in a world war. Israel obviously needs to bring America on board to attack Iran, so the discussions between the US and Iran are of great importance. What do the Americans and Iranians want, and is there common ground that can be reached?

If the only demand by the US was for Iran to abstain from developing nuclear weapons, then an agreement could be reached, as Iran claims it does not intend to develop nuclear weapons and has accepted that inspectors are there to ensure compliance. Indeed, Iran agreed to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and honoured its obligations before the US unilaterally withdrew from the agreement. The US now demands a renegotiation and demands the complete dismantlement of Iran’s civilian nuclear energy program, which it is entitled to have as a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Furthermore, the US has linked its hegemonic policies in the region to the nuclear issue. The US demands that Iran limit the range of its ballistic missile program and also suspend its support for allies in the region – primarily Yemen, Lebanon and Hamas. From Tehran’s perspective, this represents a complete capitulation that would make its security dependent on the benign intentions of Israel and the US. This neglects that the US has had Iran in its crosshairs for the past 45 years, and Iran does have legitimate security concerns.

What can be considered a legitimate security concern by the US is that Iran has become a nuclear threshold state, with the knowledge and material to develop a nuclear weapon. Restricting the extent to which uranium is enriched and imposing strict inspections could possibly be negotiated.

However, threatening to bomb Iran would not eliminate its know-how or all of its material, and such an attack would only incentivise Iran to develop a nuclear deterrent. Even US threats to attack Iran unless it complies with US demands must be making the political leadership in Iran consider acquiring a nuclear weapon. So far, Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, because doing so would encourage other states, such as Saudi Arabia, to also pursue nuclear weapons. Recognising the security competition, the result would not be greater security for Iran.

In my opinion, another approach to negotiations would be to do what is rarely done anymore in Western diplomacy: to recognise and mitigate the security concerns of the other side for the purpose of reducing the security competition. Threatening and bullying Iran into making unilateral concessions has become the new normal in the unipolar era. The US offer to remove sanctions on Iran is merely an offer to stop punishing Iran. The point of departure in any diplomatic approach should be to address mutual security concerns and explore where an agreement that enhances security for both sides can be found. Threatening Iran with capitulation and linking nuclear issues to unrelated matters will only ensure the failure to reach an agreement.

May 27, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »