Britain’s industrial disaster
By John Redwood | The Global Warming Policy Foundation | September 19, 2025
High energy prices, bans on making and extracting things, changed UK tariff policies and high taxes are a toxic mix. The factory and company closures are coming thick and fast, doing grave damage to the UK industrial base and losing us many jobs.
There are the pending closures of most of the bioethanol industry. It makes fuel from grains. Both the large Redcar and Hull works are at risk, and closure has begun. Bioethanol was meant to be one of the bright spots for green growth, offering a fuel that is to be gradually introduced into petrol and into aviation spirit to cut their fossil fuel dependence. E10 petrol is 10% ethanol with more to come. Sustainable aviation fuel is promised and that could also require bioethanol. The abolition of the 19% tariff on US imports has been the final blow to an industry hit by higher energy and employment costs.
These closures put at risk domestic CO2 supply as this is also produced at one of the plants. It will cut demand for wheat and grains from UK farms damaged by government tax changes. It is another set of policies undermining UK economic security and forcing us to find the money to import more. Imports mean paying the wages and taxes of overseas countries, not our own. How do we earn our living?
We have just seen the closure of two large refineries at Grangemouth and Lindsey, making us more dependent on imported fuels and oil products. The damage at Grangemouth is not over yet, with the threat that the large olefins and polymers petrochemical plant will also have to close, driven out by high energy costs. Sabic has announced its closure of another olefins plant at Wilton with the possible loss of 330 jobs.
An industrial nation needs to produce more of its own fuel and chemicals if it is to retain the businesses dependent on these basics. The UK was an important exporter of refined oil products to the EU as well as meeting more domestic demand. Taken together with closing down of our own oil and gas production which could have fed these works, we are witnessing an industrial disaster.
The ceramics industry has been in full retreat for some time. This has also been badly hit by dear energy which it needs for its kilns. This year Royal Staffordshire and Moorcroft have closed, following on from Johnson Tiles last year. Great names of a once flourishing industry are now available for foreign producers if they want to buy or licence the brands. Most of the jobs and tax revenues pass elsewhere. Wedgwood has announced this week a 90-day manufacturing pause as it has too much product for current sales levels. High costs of energy are a problem.
Nippon Electric has decided to close its large glass fibre facility in Wigan with another 250 jobs to go. Dunbar Cement says it will stop producing 700,000 tonnes a year that is needed by the construction industry owing to cost pressures. The UK is moving over to more imports of cement, just in time for the CBAM high tariff to deter imported CO2 heavy products being introduced. This will add to UK construction costs. At Birtley the aluminium extrusion plant is being shut. Three aluminium door and window manufacturers are cutting capacity. The government wants construction-led growth, but it is casually allowing the production of building materials to pass abroad, diluting the beneficial jobs effect of more building.
Jaguar Land Rover’s car output is currently halted owing to a cyber-attack. It is also the case that the car industry is struggling to sell its new emphasis on electric cars to the non-fleet buyer, and is actively closing its substantial capacity to make petrol and diesel cars ahead of the 2030 ban.
The Government needs to wake up to the reality. This is not a series of one-offs. It is not a chain of bad luck from different sources. It is the direct result of very expensive and unreliable energy, of bans on activities and of tax changes that make it dearer and less attractive to make things in the UK.
The collapse proceeds outwards from the bad decision to wind down the UK oil and gas industry prematurely and abruptly with bans and early closures, leading to the closure of petrochemicals and other feedstock dependent businesses. Dear energy lies behind the collapse of our blast furnace steel making, our glass industry, and all other energy-intensive industrial activities.
We choose instead to buy from a China that uses masses of cheap coal, and from an EU that still uses plenty of coal and gas, with some of that gas still bought from Russia. Why is the government so mad keen on imports, and so negative about UK industry? Why the bans on making petrol cars here from 2030 when elsewhere they will still be made? Why agree to the closure of the Gryphon platform in the North Sea which could still be used to bring more oil and gas ashore? Another bizarre tragedy. Can we end this self-harm? Can we go for cheaper energy and understand that using our own gas would be so much better for jobs and taxes than turning to imports? Policy is even boosting world CO2 output at the same time. We need to make more things to help pay for the NHS and get more people back to work.
Nine out of ten patients who die as a result of surgery didn’t need their operation
By Vernon Coleman | September 18, 2025
Surgical deaths in the U.K. number around 30,000 a year. In bigger countries the number is obviously higher. Some patients die because surgeons make mistakes but anaesthetic problems are a major cause of death. Changes in medical practices because of global warming (traditional anaesthetic drugs are being abandoned in a bizarre attempt by doctors to save the planet from a none existent threat) will mean the number dying on the operating table, or immediately afterwards, will go up.
The risks of surgery are dramatically underestimated and vary, of course, according to the age and general health of the patient and the difficulty of the operation. On the whole longer ops mean more risk.
All this is important because nine out ten operations are done to improve life rather than to save it.
This means that 90% of the people who die as a result of surgery didn’t need their operation.
Little research has been done to find out if those optional operations actually do improve patients’ lives.
All this may be worth considering if you’re contemplating surgery which isn’t necessary to save your life.
SNSC says Iran will suspend cooperation with IAEA after re-imposition of sanctions
Press TV – September 20, 2025
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) says Tehran will suspend its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) after the United Nations Security Council voted not to permanently lift sanctions on Tehran.
In a statement on Saturday, Iran’s top security body condemned the “ill-considered” moves by Britain, France, and Germany —known as the E3— regarding the Islamic Republic’s peaceful nuclear program.
On Friday, the 15-member Security Council failed to adopt a resolution that would have prevented the reimposition of UN sanctions on Iran after the E3 triggered the “snapback” mechanism, accusing Tehran of failing to comply with the 2015 deal, formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Iran rejected the illegitimate move by the European troika, pointing out that the United States had already pulled out of the deal and accusing the European trio of siding with illegal sanctions instead of honoring their own commitments.
In a Saturday session, chaired by President Masoud Pezeshkian, the SNSC addressed the latest situation in the region and the Israeli regime’s adventurism, the statement said.
“Despite [Iranian] Foreign Ministry’s cooperation with the Agency and the proposals presented to settle the [nuclear] issue, the actions of European countries have effectively suspended the path of cooperation with the Agency,” the SNSC emphasized.
According to the statement, Iran’s top security body tasked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with continuing its consultations within the framework of the SNSC decisions to safeguard the national interests.
It added that Iran’s foreign policy under the current circumstances will be based on cooperation to establish peace and stability in the region.
Earlier on Saturday, Pezeshkian said Tehran can overcome any re-imposition of sanctions and will never surrender to excessive demands.
“We should believe that we can overcome obstacles and that the ill-wishers of this territory cannot block our way,” the president added.
The SNSC was formally put in charge of overseeing cooperation with the IAEA in July, following a series of illegal and unprovoked Israeli and US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities.
The shift came after Iran’s Parliament passed legislation on July 2, requiring that all IAEA inspection requests be reviewed and approved by the SNSC.
Infiltration: A Cardinal Function of the Zionist Movement
By David Miller | MintPress News | September 16, 2025
What is the function of the Zionist movement? Let’s start with four statements that together define what the Zionist movement does by adding its functions cumulatively.
The Zionist movement creates and sustains the “Israel lobby” to extend its ideological and political reach, shaping both foreign and domestic policy in the countries where it operates. It provides material support for ethnic cleansing and genocide, funneling millions each year through charities that aid in land theft and war crimes. It grooms children and youth into ideological loyalists through a vast network of schools, synagogues, youth groups and settler recruitment programs, including Birthright tours, the Masa journey and the Lone Soldier Program. Beyond all this, the movement systematically dispatches its adherents into broader society as lifelong agents of Zionist ideology. This is not a metaphor. It is infiltration.
This concept of infiltration extends beyond the traditional intelligence model of recruiting agents for covert missions—though that, too, remains part of it. It also involves utilizing individuals who are, in a sense, sleeper agents, ready to be activated.
But it is more than that in the sense that, in many cases, the sleepers don’t need an actual tap on the shoulder to partake in a particular mission. They are already primed to act when the interests of the so-called Jewish state are threatened, or even merely imagined to be.
They are primed by their often decades-long experience of radicalization and grooming to become believing ideological Zionists. In other words, this is a multifaceted and profound level of infiltration cultivated from childhood and reinforced throughout every stage of life.
To understand how such a system came into being, we must examine the origins and evolution of the Zionist movement itself.
The Zionist movement
Even the most hardline Zionists and the most revolutionary socialists agree on one point: before 1948, the Zionist movement functioned as a coordinated political force. It organized and executed the Nakba—the ethnic cleansing and mass displacement of Palestinians—in order to establish what it called the state of Israel. Zionists, of course, reject this terminology, but the historical record is clear.
With its primary objective achieved in 1948, the movement briefly considered dissolving. However, at the World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem in 1951, delegates chose to continue and redefine new goals for the future.
This led to the creation of the “Jerusalem Program,” which formally codified the movement’s new objectives. Alongside it, the Israeli parliament enacted the World Zionist Organization–Jewish Agency (Status) Law to govern the relationship between the “state of Israel” and the Zionist movement. That law remains in effect today, shaping the global Zionist movement’s operations and responsibilities.
1951 Congress
At the World Zionist Congress held in Jerusalem on Sept. 24, 1951, the movement faced a crossroads. With the founding of the state of Israel three years earlier, delegates debated whether the Zionist movement had fulfilled its purpose and should dissolve or reconstitute itself with new goals. In practice, by a vote of 286 to 0, with the remaining 438 delegates abstaining, the Congress resolved to continue its proceedings.
David Ben Gurion speaks at the 1951 World Zionist Congress, 13 August 1951. Source | Wikimedia Commons
It adopted a new set of objectives to reorient the movement. These were defined as: the strengthening of the state of Israel, the ingathering of the exiles in Eretz Yisrael, and the fostering of the unity of the Jewish people.
This moment marked the transformation of Zionism from a settler-colonial movement into a global ideological infrastructure. It was no longer just about building a state; it was about embedding that state into the hearts, minds, and institutions of Jews worldwide.
The status of the Zionist movement
The law passed by the Knesset to formalize the relationship between the Zionist movement and the state of Israel spelled out the obligations of both parties. It designated the World Zionist Organization as the authorized body responsible for developing and settling the land, absorbing immigrants from the diaspora, and coordinating the work of Jewish institutions operating within Israel.
Crucially, the law affirmed that the state of Israel “expects the cooperation of all Jews, as individuals and groups, in building up the State.” It further stipulated that the World Zionist Organization “requires full cooperation and coordination on its part with the state of Israel and its Government, in accordance with the laws of the State.” To that end, the law mandated the creation of a formal committee to coordinate activities between the Israeli government and the Zionist movement’s executive leadership.
In other words, the state of Israel and the World Zionist Organization, as a matter of law, are required to work together, and, also as expressed in law, both bodies expect the cooperation of “all Jews.” The extent to which this expectation is met remains an empirical question.
First established at the 1951 Zionist Congress and enacted in 1953, the Jerusalem Program laid out the operational aims of the World Zionist Organization. This foundational document was later revised in 1968 and again in 2004 to reflect the movement’s evolving priorities. These revisions formalized a series of ideological commitments still in effect today, collectively referred to as the “foundations of Zionism.”
Among these are the preservation of Jewish unity and its enduring bond to Eretz Yisrael, as well as the centrality of the state of Israel, specifically Jerusalem, in Jewish national life. The program affirms support for mass aliyah from all countries and the absorption of Jewish immigrants into Israeli society. It calls for strengthening Israel as a Jewish, Zionist, and democratic state; promoting Jewish, Hebrew, and Zionist education to preserve the distinctiveness of the Jewish people; and defending the rights of Jews globally while combating antisemitism. Most revealingly, it asserts that “settling the country” remains a core expression of practical Zionism.
These principles are intended to guide Zionist activity both within Israel and throughout the world. To make the role of individual Zionists abroad absolutely clear, the movement later published a separate guide detailing their personal responsibilities outside of occupied Palestine.
Duties of the individual Zionist
The duties of the individual Zionist were first codified in a 1972 policy document “approved at the 28th Zionist Congress.” They were later adopted as an integral part of the resolutions of the 29th Congress in 1978. The resolution outlined personal obligations derived from the Jerusalem Program and from formal membership in a Zionist organization.
Among these duties was the call to make aliyah—that is, to become a settler colonist in occupied Palestine. Others included joining local Zionist federations or affiliated groups, actively promoting the movement’s ideological program, and ensuring children received Zionist, Hebrew and Jewish education designed to reinforce loyalty to Israel. Zionists were also expected to donate financially through established channels such as Keren Hayesod, the Jewish National Fund or their local branches, in order to consolidate Israel’s economy and fund its expansionist aims.
With the exception of physically becoming a settler colonist, all of these duties amount to an explicit call for infiltration of host societies. Perhaps the most direct duty, however, is “to strengthen Zionist influence within the community.” This likely refers to the “Jewish community” rather than broader society. Even so, it is still a call to expand the influence of Zionism on society as a whole.
One might reasonably ask how much attention ordinary Zionists pay to such calls. Are these dry, dead words, left to gather dust in the Central Zionist Archives in Al Quds? Or do they still animate the central activities of the movement today? Let us take a look.
Here is a 1961 report from the Jewish Chronicle about a Zionist meeting in Glasgow, which came to hand as I was writing this. I present it as an example of the movement’s thinking and practical activities. The meeting was specifically designed as an educational Zionist event and expounded a particular set of ideas.
A Zionist Federation meeting in Glasgow, reported in the Jewish Chronicle, Oct. 20, 1961, p. 14
The measures which would have to be taken if children in the Diaspora were to remain Jews were discussed by Professor Ernst Simon, of the Hebrew University, when he gave an address at a meeting held in the Central Hotel last week in connection with the Zionist Federation’s Education Fortnight. Mr. Edward Woolfson, President of the Glasgow Zionist Federation, was in the chair. Outlining a practical programme for bringing up children as Jews, Dr. Simon declared that this would have to start with the education of expectant Jewish mothers and fathers at child guidance clinics. As a result, children from their earliest years would be reared in an atmosphere where they would see all the symbols and customs of Jewish life observed. This would then be followed by the children being sent to a Jewish or Hebrew Kindergarten, and then to a Jewish day school. Another important part in the programme, Dr. Simon went on, would be the creation of a Jewish resurgence…
In this view, Zionist education required that children remain Jewish, making “Jewish education” crucial for the movement. A 1961 report reflected this, the year before the British Zionist Federation founded Scotland’s first and only Jewish school, Calderwood Lodge. Is that commitment to inculcating Zionism still present today?
A lifelong commitment to the genocidal ideology
It certainly is. Although Calderwood Lodge was taken over by the local authority in 1982, it remains a Zionist school today. It collaborates with the United Jewish Israel Appeal (UJIA), Maccabi, Mitzvah Day, the Scottish Jewish Youth Alliance (SJYA) and other Zionist groups. (The SJYA is itself a collaboration between Glasgow Maccabi and UJIA Scotland, both Zionist organizations.) The school also marks Israeli Independence Day (Yom Ha’atzmaut) and the “liberation” of Jerusalem (Yom Yerushalayim)—their term for the illegal occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967.
Celebrating the creation of the Zionist entity in Calderwood Primary School, 2025, with Shayna Conn (right) of the Scottish Jewish Youth Alliance. Source | Facebook | Jewish Telegraph
The UJIA is the U.K. outpost of one of Israel’s four “national institutions,” established to create and sustain the state of Israel. It serves as the U.K. affiliate of Keren Hayesod, which raises funds to finance settlement in Palestine. In its 2018–19 annual report, UJIA described its mission as developing a “lifelong connection” between Israel and the “diaspora” community, beginning with children as young as four. Of 12 school programs run by UJIA, nine are in primary schools, reaching thousands of pupils.
From A Lifetime of Connection: UJIA Annual Report 2018-19. Source | United Jewish Israel Appeal
“Strong British Jewry with a lifelong commitment to Israel.” Source | United Jewish Israel Appeal
Does it work?
Varying statistics suggest that between 60% and 90% of British Jews—or perhaps more—identify as some form of Zionist.
Research by Pew in the United States in 2021 found that “eight in ten U.S. Jews say caring about Israel is an essential or important part of what being Jewish means to them. Nearly six in ten say they personally feel an emotional attachment to Israel.” In the United Kingdom, a 2024 study by the Institute for Jewish Policy Research reported that “73% say they feel very or somewhat attached to the country. However, the proportion identifying as ‘Zionists’ has fallen from 72% to 63% over the past decade.”
Ultra-Zionists often claim that even more Jews identify as Zionist. For example, the so-called Campaign Against Antisemitism conducted a survey in late 2023 that produced even higher figures. It reportedly “revealed that 97% of British Jews feel ‘personally connected’ to events happening in Israel … 80% of respondents considered themselves to be a Zionist.”
It appears that the activities of the UJIA and the wider Zionist movement are proving effective. Yet after two years of livestreamed genocide, there is also growing unrest and dissent within the Jewish community, particularly among the young. A recent poll cited in the Jewish Chronicle found that “only” 57% of Jews in their twenties “identified with Zionism.”
Nevertheless, the extent of Zionist adherence is still far too large. This means there are Zionists throughout the social structure of most advanced nations, even when the Jewish population is very small, as in the United Kingdom, where it has fallen to 0.4%. In the United States, Jews make up about 2.4% of the population.
The uncomfortable truth is that the Zionist movement urges its adherents to infiltrate the societies where they live and to display their commitment to its racist ideology at every possible turn. As the UJIA examples above show, they encourage a lifelong commitment to Israel. But is that the so-called dual loyalty “trope”—the allegedly racist claim that Jews are more loyal to the state of Israel than to the countries in which they reside?
Only if we say it, if they say it, it’s fine—nothing to see here. As Pat Buchanan once remarked in a debate with Ralph Nader, “dual loyalty would be an improvement.”
The fact remains that the Zionist movement promotes commitment to both the ideology and the practice of Zionism, even when this runs counter to the interests of the host nation. In the case of the state, this is true in most instances. In the case of the citizenry, it is true in all.
Meet the Zionist Infiltrators
Some within the movement consider the term “infiltration” outdated, arguing that it implies a deliberate Zionist strategy. Yet this article has shown that such a strategy does exist. The question, however, is how conscious or deliberate it is. The evidence suggests there are different types of infiltration and different kinds of infiltrators.
We can begin with those directly or indirectly engaged in specific forms of infiltration on behalf of agencies of the Zionist entity. Their activities align more closely with the traditional sense of the term. From there, we turn to those with looser ties to the movement as a whole. In what follows, I outline six types of infiltration.
Direct Service to the Zionist Entity
The most obvious form of infiltration is direct service to the Zionist entity through collaboration with its intelligence agencies. One example is the Ofer family, which breached U.S. sanctions to deliver Mossad agents and weapons for subversion and assassination operations in Iran. Another involves activities linked to Jeffrey Epstein, who gathered sexual kompromat for Israeli intelligence.
Mossad also relies on Sayanim, its informal helpers abroad, most famously Robert Maxwell. Beyond this, thousands of Zionists work with the Israeli Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and its predecessor, the Ministry of Strategic Affairs. Their operations range from propaganda and lobbying to trolling, doxxing and lawfare.
One such network is the Combat Antisemitism Movement, which has nearly 1,000 members and operates in a “joint venture” with Voices of Israel, a company run by the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs. In total, many thousands of Zionist groups are engaged in this form of activity.
Tech Start-ups as a Zionist Strategy
Service is also given directly to the Zionist entity through the creation of tech start-ups founded by former intelligence personnel. This has long been a strategy of Unit 8200, Israel’s signals intelligence agency. Today, there are hundreds of such firms in the tech industry. Some have become widely and controversially known, including Cellebrite, NICE, Toka, and the NSO Group, maker of the Pegasus surveillance product. One online listing of 28 such firms records a combined value of $208 billion.
The covert use of this vast surveillance apparatus by the Zionist regime has been widely noted. Investigative reports also show that significant numbers of Zionist infiltrators—including former occupation forces members, intelligence operatives and others—have secured senior positions across mainstream media and Big Tech. These include Google, Apple, Facebook/Meta, Microsoft, TikTok and more.
Emissaries of the Zionist Project
There is also a civilian equivalent of the Sayanim, known as Shlichim, or emissaries. The Jewish Agency—one of the four pillars of the formal Zionist movement—sends Shlichim from occupied Palestine to build what it calls “living bridges to Israel.” These emissaries are placed in schools, synagogues, JCCs, camps, universities, youth movements and Federations across the globe.
In 2021, the Union of Jewish Students, the Zionist student group in the U.K., reported hosting two Shlichim from the Jewish Agency. The recently revealed diary of Israel’s ambassador to the U.K. even records a “goodbye breakfast” she hosted in July 2024 for Shlichim returning to the Zionist entity after completing their tours of duty.
Other Zionist groups also send emissaries. The World Mizrachi Movement, for example, sent about 300 last year. The Haredi sect Chabad—described by critics as a genocidal cult—uses the same term for its global network of emissaries. According to Chabad itself, “Today, 4,900 Chabad-Lubavitch emissary families, or shluchim, operate 3,500 institutions in 100 countries and territories, with activities in many more.
Zionist Family Networks
Another form of service to the genocide comes through Zionist family networks in the West, particularly via philanthropic giving. Family foundations funnel money to Zionist organizations, all of which effectively encourage genocide.
One example is the many millions donated by Sheldon and Miriam Adelson to pro-Zionist political candidates. “I’m a one-issue person. That issue is Israel,” Adelson said in 2017. In the U.K., millions are given by the Lewis family, which owns River Island, and the Wolfson family, which owns Next, to support the genocide. Their contributions directly fund the occupation forces as well as settlement construction and ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.
Millions more are spent by Zionist family foundations to spread Islamophobia—through the Policy Exchange and the Henry Jackson Society in the U.K., and through the so-called Islamophobia network in the U.S. Additional funds go toward indoctrinating Jewish children through nurseries, schools, youth groups, student groups and “Birthright” tours, which promote the racist belief that Jews have a birthright to steal Palestinian land and kill Palestinian children.
Zionist billionaire families dominate this giving, but many thousands of others also contribute through large and small Zionist charities and causes. In the U.K., there are an estimated 3,000 such organizations, and in the U.S., there are likely more than 10,000. A preliminary compilation of data on U.S. Zionist groups is available here.
Defending Zionism Over the Life Course
The final form of infiltration is tied directly to the Zionist strategy of ensuring that all Jews make an enduring, lifelong commitment to Israel. As this article has shown, this has been central to the Zionist movement since at least 1951 and remains so today. Zionists expect all Jews to act on behalf of Israel whenever called upon—or whenever they perceive Zionist interests to be under threat.
Practically, this means service to Zionism through daily professional, political and social activities, wherever Zionists find themselves: in the media, political parties, business, finance, schools, universities and civil society, including left-wing and so-called “anti-racist” organizations.
In other words, Zionists throughout the social structure are engaged in subversion and infiltration. One example is the Jewish network within the U.K. civil service. Although set up by the civil service itself, it is in practice run by and for Zionists rather than Jews. Similar patterns exist in universities, the media, the legal profession, finance, industry and other institutions across society.
When the time comes for the proverbial tap on the shoulder, how many who have passed through Zionist indoctrination will fail to respond “appropriately”? To ask the question is almost to invite disbelief. In many cases, no tap on the shoulder is even required. Across the BBC, the media, the entertainment world, the civil service, politics, finance and other commanding heights of society, there are Zionists who are ideologically committed. For them, it makes perfect sense to “do the right thing” when the moment arrives.
The fact remains that the Zionist movement encourages loyalty to its ideology and its program of action even when these run counter to the interests of the host state—or, in all cases, to the interests of its citizenry.
Can we trust Zionists?
In the end, no Zionist can be trusted. Do we imagine that they are not also infiltrating the left? The Palestine solidarity movement? The anti-war movement?
Zionism is, at its core, a racist ideology. No matter how hard “liberal,” “socialist,” or “leftist” Zionists try to disguise it, that racism always reveals itself—whether in adopting Zionist positions in their professional lives or in subverting and sabotaging pro-Palestine activism in political life.
This has historically meant that the anti-racist movement and the Palestine solidarity movement have been weak on the question of Zionism. It was a major mistake for the “left” in the U.K. and elsewhere not to confront Zionism head-on earlier. Today, we face a significant struggle to cleanse the left and the anti-imperialist movement of both Zionists and Zionist assumptions—ideas that have seeped out of the movement and into the consciousness of many non-Zionist, or even anti-Zionist, socialist activists.
This process has been underway for many decades. However, this is not the place for a detailed analysis of the Jewish left or of Zionist penetration of the non-Jewish left. A fuller exposition will be needed in another article. For now, it is enough to point to the need for a material and maximalist anti-Zionism.
Infiltration today
The traditional forms of infiltration used by intelligence services continue—covert spies, informers and, in the case of the Zionists, the widespread penetration of the tech industry by alumni of Unit 8200. In addition, the Zionist movement makes extensive use of emissaries, both through the mainstream movement and through more marginal elements such as the Chabad-Lubavitch cult, as we have seen.
But in addition to this—as this article has argued—there is an effort to recruit all Jews into a “lifelong connection” to “Israel.” In practical terms, the movement treats all Jews as potential resources. This is why so much effort is devoted to grooming and radicalization through nurseries, schools, synagogues, youth and student groups, and the wide array of Zionist lobby groups and charities.
They attempt to radicalize Jews such that they will put Israel first wherever they end up in the social structure. And given that Jews are systematically advantaged in the social structure across the West, this has the potential to be a very powerful set of relations. I submit that infiltration is a cardinal principle of the Zionist movement, and it helps to explain how Zionist individuals and ideas are so heavily embedded in political, civil, economic and cultural life in Western nations.
Knowing your enemy is the first step toward defeating them—and toward dislodging Zionism from its entrenched status and role in society.
Professor David Miller is a non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Islam and Global Affairs at Istanbul Zaim University and a former Professor of Political Sociology at the University of Bristol. He is a broadcaster, writer and investigative researcher; the producer of the weekly show Palestine Declassified on PressTV; and the co-director of Public Interest Investigations, of which spinwatch.org and powerbase.info are projects. He tweets @Tracking_Power.
UN Security Council votes to reimpose nuclear sanctions on Iran
Al Mayadeen | September 19, 2025
The United Nations Security Council voted on Friday to reimpose nuclear sanctions on Iran, citing its alleged violations of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
The move, driven by Britain, France, and Germany, has sparked sharp criticism from Russia, China, and Iran, highlighting deepening divisions within the international community over the future of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
The three European signatories to the JCPOA called for the activation of the snapback mechanism, falsely claiming that Iran had breached commitments made under the 2015 deal, which was designed to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons capabilities.
The European powers alleged that Iran’s advancements in uranium enrichment and reduced cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) constitute material violations of the agreement.
Iran, Russia, and China push back
In response, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Tehran had presented a “fair and balanced” proposal to European nations aimed at preventing the reimposition of sanctions.
Russia’s UN Ambassador, Vasily Nebenzia, rejected the European-led move, saying, “There are no grounds for reinstating UN sanctions on Iran.” He emphasized that the E3’s push for snapback sanctions has no legal authority and affirmed that Moscow would not recognize it.
Russia also called on Security Council members to support a joint Russian-Chinese draft resolution on Iran, offering an alternative diplomatic track to avoid escalation.
China’s envoy emphasized that pressure on Iran must stop and urged Tehran to reaffirm the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, noting Iran’s declared willingness to cooperate.
Iran maintains that its nuclear program remains peaceful and has accused Western powers of double standards and bad faith. Chinese Ambassador to the UN echoed this stance, stating, “It was the United States that withdrew from the agreement, attacked Iran militarily, and disrupted negotiations.”
China’s envoy also called on the European trio to immediately withdraw their notifications to reinstate sanctions, stressing that “pressure is not the solution.”
Snapback could nullify Cairo agreement
Al Mayadeen’s sources warned on Thursday that activating the snapback sanctions mechanism would nullify the Cairo Agreement and end cooperation between the IAEA and Tehran.
This would prevent international inspectors from accessing sensitive facilities, escalating the standoff even further.
According to the sources, the diplomatic window with Iran remains open, but indicators point to the potential activation of the snapback sanctions mechanism. They argued this is largely because Washington is steering the European Troika in the talks.
The sources warned that Washington is expected to call on Tehran to resume negotiations after activating the snapback mechanism, aiming to impose its conditions from what it perceives as a position of strength. They described this approach as a serious miscalculation of Iran’s stance and the way Tehran would respond.
VIGILANT: British Cops Push Censorship Technology at Trinity College Dublin
By Tadhg MACDONNELL | The Burkean | September 15, 2025
Tucked away inside its Pearse Street labs and offices, Trinity College Dublin quietly plays host to a variety of initiatives and interests blurring the lines between academia, the private sector and security realm. The VIGILANT project is just one of them.
A €4 million EU-funded scheme run out of the campus’ ADAPT centre for emergent technologies, VIGILANT (Vital Intelligence to Investigate Illegal Disinformation) is a pan-European initiative bringing together the private and public sector to create and fine tune an AI-driven platform for monitoring hate speech.
Commencing work in 2022 and lasting until late this year, VIGILANT ropes in the PSNI as well as policing services of Moldova, Greece and Estonia in the fight against hate speech and disinformation.
Alongside policing services VIGILANT partners include the Spanish technology giant ATOS and GLOBSEC (a Slovakian registered Atlanticist think tank) both with their own funding streams and political agendas.
Treating online speech as a potential security threat, part of VIGILANT’s remit includes establishing an informal intelligence for officers to share information on threats. Central in its pitch is its ability to counter so-called far right extremism with the VIGILANT website listing its ability to neutralise the spread of alleged migrant crime videos as chief among its selling points.
In effect, VIGILANT creates a pan-European surveillance consortium, mixing public police powers with private data-driven expertise, headquartered in Dublin but reaching deep into continental security networks. Publicly, VIGILANT is sold as a tool to help protect democracy yet the technology’s scope flagging “hate speech” puts it squarely in the camp of shutting down civic dissent.
As readers no doubt know, “Hate speech” and “disinformation” are infinitely expandable categories. Today it’s neo-Nazis; tomorrow it’s farmers protesting carbon taxes, parents objecting to gender ideology, or critics of NATO policy or the EU.
Let’s not ignore the symbolism: the PSNI, a British police force with its own chequered legacy, is now a partner in dictating what Europeans may say online, under the banner of an Irish university. Trinity’s prestige provides the camouflage, but the reality is murky.
Western media keep breaking records in ludicrous Russophobic propaganda
By Drago Bosnic | September 18, 2025
The infamous mainstream propaganda machine has been directly engaged in the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict since before it even began. It’s quite clear that Western media are an integral part of the warmongering agenda, either by promoting and trying to justify wars before they start or covering up actual NATO war crimes after the hostilities commence. One major part of this process is dehumanizing the opponent. For instance, during the kinetic phase of NATO aggression on Yugoslavia/Serbia (1991-present), Serbs were presented in the worst possible light. This one-sided viewpoint was used to justify the political West’s crawling invasion of virtually the entire former Yugoslavia, ending in a total disaster for the vast majority of the population, irrespective of ethnic, religious, cultural or any other background.
This was made possible thanks to the nearly universal dominance of the mainstream propaganda machine. They liked the results so much that they simply had to try it out during dozens of other, truly unprovoked and illegal Western invasions, particularly in the Middle East. By the early 2000s, the “evil Serbs” were replaced by “evil Arabs” and “evil Iranians” (or other predominantly Muslim ethnic groups and nations). After killing millions and destroying the lives of tens of millions, particularly across the Middle East, the political West decided it was time to “rekindle” its rivalry with Russia. Thus, after 2014, the previously implicit Russophobia became much more apparent. However, after 2022, it degenerated into mindless, pathological hatred. Suddenly, even Russian trees and cats were banned in Western countries, their vassals and satellite states.
In the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, Australia, etc., Russia was the “pariah” and simply had to be “cut off from the rest of the world”. Obviously, this failed because the multipolar bloc comprises more than 70% of the global population (in other words, the actual world). However, within the confines of Western geopolitical space, Moscow remains the “root of all evil”, particularly thanks to constant media coverage that aims to perpetuate Russophobia. As previously mentioned, this sort of hatred is reaching truly pathological levels. Nowadays, institutionalized Russophobia has gone so far that it could easily be considered a serious mental condition (perhaps even a medical emergency). This was particularly evident in the opening months of the special military operation (SMO) in NATO-occupied Ukraine.
For instance, the claims about alleged “Russian war crimes”, including supposedly “against children”, turned out to be blatant lies, with even the Kiev regime firing its children’s rights commissioner Lyudmila Denisova for spreading fakes about “Russian soldiers raping preschool kids”. However, while the mainstream propaganda machine widely published these blatant lies on front covers, they refused to apologize for this after it became clear these were all fakes. In other words, just like in the case of Serbs during the 1990s, it doesn’t matter whether the stories are true, as long as the majority of the population hears about this. For the warmongers, war criminals, plutocrats and kleptocrats in Washington DC, London and Brussels, dehumanizing the current opponent (whoever that may be) and fomenting mindless hatred is all that really matters.
Then came the role of the so-called “international justice institutions” of the “rules-based world order”. On March 17, 2023, the so-called “International Criminal Court”, no more than a glorified NGO financed by the EU/NATO, issued an arrest warrant for President Vladimir Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights. According to the ICC, President Putin and his commissioner “kidnapped” tens of thousands of Ukrainian children. Obviously, for the political West, evacuating kids from an active warzone is a “war crime” and it would be “much better” if those kids were left to fend for themselves, either dying or ending up in Western countries, where thousands have gone missing in the last three and a half years (after those countries effectively decriminalized pedophilia).
However, that’s not the end of Russophobic propaganda. On the contrary, it needs to continue, at all costs. On September 16, numerous Western media outlets published reports about a supposed “study” by the Yale School of Public Health Humanitarian Research Lab claiming that “Ukrainian children have been taken to over 200 different facilities across Russia, including locations where they have been subjected to forced re-education and military training in a clear violation of international law”. There are allegedly “eight different types of facilities, ranging from summer camps to religious sites to military academies stretching across the entire expanse of Russia, [that] have been identified in the report from the Yale School of Public Health Humanitarian Research Lab published Tuesday”. However, as noted, the ludicrous propaganda doesn’t end there.
Namely, these “kidnapped” kids are supposedly “forced to build drones” for the Russian military. In other words, Russia, a country with approximately 160 million people and the fourth largest economy in the world (that also outproduces the entire NATO by a factor of three in various types of munitions and weapon systems), is “forced” to rely on several thousand “kidnapped” Ukrainian children to produce drones? That makes perfect sense, right? Jokes aside, this story about the “cartoonishly evil” Russians is so over the top that even Western commentators on social media are openly ridiculing the mainstream propaganda machine and their governments for spreading the most laughable lies in recent memory. This is certainly a welcoming development, as it could very well prevent the warmongers from galvanizing the populace for yet another senseless bloodbath.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Why the United Kingdom wants to create permanent tension with Russia
By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 17, 2025
The United Kingdom appears intent on escalating tensions with Russia, positioning itself as a significant adversary. In a recent article, British analyst Oliver Evans states: “The United Kingdom is not only showing interest in deploying a limited military contingent in western Ukraine, but is also expanding its presence in the Republic of Moldova. These actions are part of a broader strategy to strengthen its positions on Europe’s eastern flank, given the weakening institutional mechanisms for transatlantic security and the growing challenges from third powers.”
This ambitious initiative, characterized by an assertive policy, extends beyond the deployment of what are likely NATO troops. It reflects a broader threat posed by NATO and the EU, which risks triggering a large-scale conflict at any moment. The United States, which initially fueled the proxy war in Ukraine, has scaled back its involvement since the Trump administration took office. This shift stems from multiple factors, including the U.S.’s near-financial collapse, which has fueled the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, alongside deep divisions and polarization within the American populace.
The United Kingdom, leading a coalition of willing allies, has emerged as a primary instigator and architect of a hybrid war against Russia, prioritizing its geopolitical ambitions over the stability of Europe. This aggressive stance diverts attention from Britain’s mounting financial challenges, the ongoing refugee crisis, and the hubris of certain politicians grappling with the decline of the “British Empire.”
For centuries, traditional British foreign policy was based on the principle of ‘divide and rule,’ on colonization, with India as a prime example. Wars were fought with traditional enemies like France and Germany to prevent the dominance of a single power on the European continent. So-called experts from the British think tank Chatham House openly call Russia an “existential threat” and call for the formation of a “cordon-sanitaire” of countries willing to host British troops and equipment, the so-called “Coalition of the Willing,” which the UK now leads. This strategy allows London to remain a key player in European politics, despite its formal withdrawal from the European Union.
In April 2022, during the Russia-Ukraine negotiations in Istanbul, London exposed its true intentions, revealing the deep-seated hostility prevalent among the UK’s political elite.
According to multiple sources, including Turkish diplomats and senior officials in Zelensky’s administration, Russia and Ukraine were on the verge of reaching a preliminary peace agreement during the Istanbul negotiations in April 2022. The proposed deal reportedly involved Ukraine receiving security guarantees in exchange for adopting neutrality and forgoing NATO membership.
At this critical juncture, however, then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson rushed to Kiev. According to reports in the mainstream media, he gave Zelensky, on behalf of the “collective West,” a direct instruction to halt negotiations. Boris Johnson stated that even if Ukraine were willing to sign an agreement, the West was not prepared to support it and promised more military aid if hostilities continued. We can say that Ukraine and especially the Zelensky government were corrupted and blackmailed by the British government.
Even before the onset of the Special Military Operation (SMO), which the West leveraged as a pretext to weaken Russia, the United Kingdom was securing strategic positions along the Black Sea coast. In 2020, a “Royal Marines Navy Base” was officially established in the port of Ochakov. Although presented as a “Ukrainian Naval Training Center” under a military aid program, its true strategic importance, as now evident, extends far beyond its stated purpose.
Ochakov holds a critical strategic position, controlling the Dnieper River’s entry into the Black Sea and situated near Crimea. By 2020, the base established there had evolved into an intelligence hub for monitoring the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s activities. Additionally, it functions as a logistics center for arms shipments and a training ground for Ukrainian sabotage units, which have demonstrated their effectiveness in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. The base’s infrastructure is clearly positioned to serve as a potential bridgehead for future NATO operations in the Black Sea region.
Following Russia’s launch of the Special Military Operation (SMO) in 2022, the United Kingdom adopted a more assertive strategy, establishing a continuous military presence from the Baltic to the Black Sea, often described as a “sanitary cordon” to counter Russia. Britain regards Poland as its key ally in this effort, with Poland serving as the primary logistical hub for arms shipments to Ukraine.
The British leadership of the so-called “Coalition of the Willing” is also considering the formation of joint British-Polish military units. Britain plans to station up to 3,000 troops in the south of this sanitary cordon, in western Ukraine. But Ukraine is not the only target of London’s “false plans.” Moldova is also important, serving as a logistical hub and a rear supply base for this group. Romania is assigned the role of operational base in this construction. Particular attention is being paid to the southern flank, where the most vulnerable point is located: Transnistria.
Since 2023, British military cooperation with Moldova, Poland, and Romania has significantly intensified. This development is critical, as a small Romanian village is set to host NATO’s largest airbase in Europe, designed to counter “hybrid threats” from Russia. Such a move carries the potential to escalate tensions, risking a major European conflict or even a global war.
The Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (Transnistria), an unrecognized state within Moldova established during the Soviet Union’s collapse, with a predominantly Russian-speaking population and a Russian peacekeeping presence, remains a “frozen conflict.” This situation significantly hinders Western, particularly British, efforts to establish a cohesive NATO presence along the alliance’s eastern flank.
Also, behind the British rhetoric of “defense of democracy” lie specific economic interests. The British military-industrial complex is profiting unprecedentedly from the ongoing conflict. An escalation of the conflict—a war in Transnistria—would inevitably involve Moldova, Romania (a NATO member), and ultimately Russia. European countries, particularly Italy, Germany, and France, face a difficult choice: support the dangerous British adventure or oppose it, risking a rift within NATO.
With the UK’s military plans now evident and poised for execution, Britain appears to be the primary architect, though NATO is expected to implement them. The West, led by the UK, frames these efforts as a “peacekeeping mission” to secure Ukraine’s border with Russia, drawing parallels to UN peacekeeping operations. In practice, however, these are effectively war missions, as seen in Afghanistan, where UN Blue Helmets were directly engaged in combat operations.
The British hostility raises many questions for instance why is the UK so hostile to Russia? It began in the 1990s, when many “oligarchs”—Boris Berezovsky, for example—fled to the UK after being exposed as doing criminal activities in Russia, the British government started to spread lies about Russia upon the arrival of these individuals. Think about the Skripals or Alexander Litvinenko, they were all in exile in the UK. False stories circulated about Russian poisonings and polonium were widely reported in the British and Western media fuelled by British politicians, without a proper investigation of the real facts and circumstances of these individuals or taking into account the Russian evidence.
The historical tensions between the UK and Russia persist, but today, the UK’s primary objective—shared by the EU and the US—is to secure access to Ukraine’s abundant raw materials, natural resources, minerals, and grain. Upon taking office for his second term, US President Donald Trump pledged to broker peace between Ukraine and Russia within 24 hours, a promise widely dismissed as propaganda due to its unrealistic timeline. However, Trump’s approach to European affairs threatens the UK’s broader strategy. His plan reportedly involved pressuring Ukrainian President Zelensky to recognize Crimea as Russian territory and accept the Russian control of the Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson regions, legitimized through a democratic referendum in 2022.
Europe, including the United Kingdom, faces a period of decline, with the continent grappling with significant upheaval. In the UK, citizens are taking to the streets in protest, as freedoms appear increasingly at risk. Once a symbol of stability, wealth, and royal tradition, the UK now finds itself mired in a profound crisis.
The UK’s war rhetoric surpasses even that of mainland Europe, rooted in a militarized history shared with nations like Germany. However, that era has faded; declining birth rates and the integration of diverse cultures have eroded traditional British identity. The elites, witnessing the decline of their once-vast empire, are powerless to reverse this trend. In response, they appear to be pushing for conflict—whether hybrid or conventional warfare—to reassert their influence.
Grossi, again? Iran’s new IAEA deal reeks of JCPOA 2.0
By Fereshteh Sadeghi | The Cradle | September 15, 2025
Three months after the Israeli occupation state’s aerial assault on Iran, the Iranian government reached a new deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The agreement, and the fact that IAEA chief Rafael Grossi and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi offered conflicting interpretations of it, has outraged Iranian political circles and the public, many of whom view Grossi as a facilitator of Israeli aggression. Araghchi is now accused of concealing details of the agreement and repeating the mistakes of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal.
Iran signs surprise deal with IAEA after Israeli strikes
During a brief visit to Egypt on 12 September, Araghchi shook hands with Grossi as they announced a deal on the resumption of UN inspections of Iran’s nuclear program. The agreement was significant as Tehran had halted its cooperation with the IAEA in the wake of the Israeli aggression in June, and a parliamentary vote had suspended international inspections. The vote had been ratified after the cessation of the 12-day war between Iran and the occupation state in late June, amid accusations that the IAEA was sharing intelligence on their nuclear facilities and scientists with Israel and the US. Iranian officials claimed two IAEA inspectors smuggled classified documents on the Fordow nuclear site to Vienna. Iran revoked their licenses, but the agency took no punitive action. Fordow was later bombed by US B-52 bombers. Grossi’s 12 June report to the IAEA Board of Governors, which accused Iran of failing to meet its safeguards obligations, is widely seen as having paved the way for the 12-day Israel–Iran war that started one day after on 13 June. The agency’s refusal to condemn Tel Aviv’s attacks deepened Iranian distrust.
E3 pushes for sanctions as Iran tries to avoid snapback
As Iran withdrew from indirect nuclear talks with the US and halted cooperation with the IAEA, Germany, France, and Britain (the E3) announced their intention to reinstate UN sanctions. Those sanctions had been suspended under the 2015 JCPOA. The E3 said it would trigger the snapback mechanism before its expiry in mid-October, claiming that Iran had failed to uphold its commitments.
Seeking to avoid further sanctions, Iran agreed to engage the E3 in talks in late August. In exchange for Iranian cooperation with the IAEA, clarification on 440 kilograms of highly enriched uranium stockpiled before the Israeli attack, and a return to US negotiations, the Europeans offered to extend the snapback deadline by six months. Iran rejected the offer. The E3 then launched the snapback process but gave Iran a 30-day deadline to comply with the UN atomic watchdog’s demands. A week later, IAEA inspectors were scheduled to visit Iran to supervise fuel replacement at the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Araghchi reassured lawmakers that the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) had authorized the inspectors’ visit and insisted all cooperation would comply with the law banning extensive IAEA engagement. A source close to the Iranian Foreign Ministry tells The Cradle that inspectors had also planned to visit other facilities, including the Tehran Research Reactor, but those plans were quietly scrapped under parliamentary pressure. Then, without warning, the Araghchi–Grossi agreement in Cairo was revealed, shocking Iranian society. The deal guarantees renewed Iranian cooperation with the IAEA.
Parliament sidelined, backlash intensifies
One day before Araghchi’s Cairo trip on 9 September, parliamentarian Hussein-Ali Haji-Deligani warned that a new IAEA deal was imminent – one that violated Iranian law and did not protect national rights. He warned Araghchi against signing or risking impeachment. Once news of the agreement broke, reports surfaced that the Iranian legislature, the Majlis, would close for three weeks for lawmakers to visit their constituencies. Critics alleged this was a calculated move to shield the Cairo agreement from scrutiny.
While the Foreign Ministry and the SNSC remained silent, Grossi publicly elaborated:
“The technical document would include access to all facilities and installations in Iran and contemplates the required reporting on all the attacked facilities including the nuclear material present at those and that will open the way for respective inspections and access.”
That statement drew sharp rebuke. Tehran MP Amir-Hussein Sabeti said, “This passive and weak settlement to renew cooperation with the IAEA contradicts national interests, paves the way for new [Israeli] strikes, and clearly violates the law.”
In a televised debate, Araghchi attempted to allay the criticism, claiming the deal was approved by the SNSC. He dismissed Grossi’s remarks as “his own interpretation of the text”, adding, “from now on, the IAEA should request access to each nuclear site and the SNSC will review the requests case by case.”
The Iranian top diplomat stressed that “as long as Iran has not implemented environmental and safety measures at the attacked facilities, the IAEA will not be granted permission to visit them.” He insisted the agreement had nothing to do with the E3’s ultimatum; nevertheless, he contradicted himself by stating, “This settlement will be declared null and void if the Snapback mechanism goes into effect.”
Araghchi faces mounting calls for impeachment
Araghchi’s inconsistent justifications failed to quell the backlash. His repeated references to the SNSC did little to calm MPs. And in Iranian politics, it is an unprecedented event. Tehran’s Hamid Rasaei posted on X, “Ambiguities remain despite Araghchi’s explanations. Therefore, the Foreign Ministry must publish the text of the agreement.” He added sarcastically, “We usually kept deals secret for fear of the enemies. But since the other party is Grossi – the Israeli spy – there’s no reason to hide this deal from the public.” His colleague, Kamran Ghazanfari, went further to threaten Araghchi, “either deny Grossi’s remarks and share the signed document with lawmakers, or get prepared for your impeachment. We are not treating our national interests flippantly.”
Keyhan newspaper openly called the Cairo deal “invalid” because it does not meet the requirements of the Iranian law. Rajanews compared the Cairo document with Lausanne’s nuclear deal, adding, “Back in 2015, the government of Hassan Rouhani and then FM [Mohammad Javad] Zarif refused to publish the relevant fact sheet. Only later, Iranians found out the fact sheet had imposed unprecedented restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program.”
As public scrutiny intensified, the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee summoned Araghchi for a closed-door session. He described the three-hour meeting as “very good and constructive” but revealed no details. According to reports, “Araghchi provided the committee with the text of the memorandum” and “it was decided that cooperation with the IAEA remain only in the framework of the law and its implementation depends on non-happening of the Snapback.” That reassurance did little to assuage critics. Rasaei summed up the mood with a blunt X post, “The three-hour session finished. It’s the JCPOA all over again.”
On 14 September, the SNSC issued a statement indicating that its Nuclear Committee had ratified the Cairo agreement, adding “the committee is backed by the SNSC whose decisions are confirmed by Iran’s leader [Ali Khamenei].” Yet, the statement also stressed that should any hostile action be taken against the Islamic Republic and its nuclear facilities, including the reinstatement of the terminated resolutions of the UN Security Council, the implementation of the arrangements would be suspended. So far, 90 lawmakers have asked Majlis Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf to convene a session on the Cairo memorandum. Ghalibaf has yet to comply.
In a country still reeling from the JCPOA’s consequences, lawmakers are increasingly determined to block another unilateral, opaque agreement made without parliamentary oversight.
West May Lose at Least $285Bln If Confiscates Russian Reserves
Sputnik – 14.09.2025
MOSCOW – Russia’s frozen reserves continue to “burn the pockets” of Western countries: states burdened with huge debts and budget deficits have begun to talk more and more about confiscating Russian assets that they froze in 2022, but such a step could cost them at least $285 billion, Sputnik calculated based on national statistics.
Currently, the G7 countries and the European Union are implementing a scheme to seize income from frozen Russian assets to finance a $50 billion loan to Ukraine. In early September, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed creating a new “reparation loan” to finance Ukraine from these incomes. However, Western politicians periodically call for the direct confiscation of frozen Russian assets to finance Ukraine. The Russian authorities have repeatedly said that they would take reciprocal measures in the event of confiscation.
According to the latest available data, the volume of direct investment from the European Union, the G7, Australia, Norway and Switzerland in the Russian economy as of the end of 2023 amounted to $285 billion. At the same time, taking into account the ban on the withdrawal of funds from the country by unfriendly residents, the amount may be significantly higher — officially, data on the amount of blocked funds in type C accounts is not disclosed.
The EU accounted for $238 billion in assets, of which $145.4 billion belonged to Cyprus, $21.7 billion to France, and $19.2 billion to Germany. The Netherlands, which does not officially disclose the full volume of investments in the Russian economy, could potentially own assets worth approximately $20.8 billion. Italy ($12.6 billion) and Austria ($6.9 billion) are also among the largest European investors. The remaining EU states accounted for another $11.5 billion.
Among the G7 countries, the largest investor in the Russian economy was the United States – according to the latest available data, American assets in Russia amounted to approximately $7.7 billion. Japan had Russian assets worth $4.8 billion, Canada – $3.9 billion, and Britain – $3 billion.
The assets of Switzerland and Norway, which usually follow in the wake of EU sanctions against Russia, at the end of 2023 amounted to $27.5 billion and $43 million, respectively. Australia had $400 million in investments in the Russian economy at the end of last year.
After the start of the special operation in Ukraine, Western countries imposed sanctions against the Bank of Russia, freezing its reserves, but the exact amount of immobilized funds is unknown. According to the central bank, as of the end of June 2021, about $288 billion was stored in Austria, Britain, Germany, Canada, the United States, France, and Japan, and another $63 billion was in unnamed countries.
At the beginning of 2022, the Bank of Russia reported that about half of its $630.6 billion in assets were in key reserve currencies.
Sputnik used data from unfriendly countries on direct investment in the Russian economy in its calculations. Direct investment is investment in enterprises that provide control over at least 10% of its shares or capital.
Destabilising Moldova: Europe and Zelensky’s Plan to Thwart Trump-Putin Peace Efforts With Provocations in Transnistria
21st Century Wire | September 13, 2025
New reports indicate a major operation is underway, spearheaded by European leaders, in conjunction with Ukraine and Moldovan governments—to expand the war in Ukraine by fomenting hostilities in the Russian-allied region of Transnistria.
Are NATO and Ukraine planning to open a new front in the country of Moldova and the breakaway region of Transnistria? Since its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Moldova has walked a delicate line in maintaining its neutrality, while trying to balance aligning more closely with the West—and still maintaining its historic relationship with Russia. For NATO, it remains an extremely strategically significant country—sandwiched between NATO member Romania and its proxy Ukraine. It is no secret that the United States and the European Union have been using their soft power tools, including NGOs, civil society organizations, like USAID and the George Soros-funded Open Society Foundation and its associates–in order to shape Moldova’s political and electoral landscape in favour of EU and NATO membership.
This brings us to a recent report by Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko, who left Ukraine in 2022 after being critical of President Volodymyr Zelensky, his handling of the war, and the massive corruption connected to his government, detailed in her book,
This week, Panchenko published an appeal to US President Donald Trump, with compelling information about preparations for military provocations in Moldova—which are designed to trigger an attack by the Ukrainian army on Transnistria. According to Panchenko, the provocation is being organised by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in concert with the main European leaders, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
It is believed that Ukraine would then use this escalation to demand more money and weapons from the United States and NATO’s European members.
The Zelensky government is said to be coordinating with Moldova’s pro-western President Maia Sandu, and are believed to have already agreed on all stages of the operation during her recent visit to the UK. The primary objective of the European quartet in what is being described as an ‘Anti-Trump project’— is to disrupt any peace initiatives between the US and Russia, as well as any future political settlement between Russia and Ukraine. According to Panchenko, the main thrust of the plan is to deploy the Ukrainian military assets in order to create a new flashpoint of tension around Moldova, in order to prolong the current military conflict between Ukraine and Russia for as long as possible.
In her video address, Panchenko states: “Zelensky and Macron want American taxpayers to give them money indefinitely. Zelensky plans to attack Transnistria. Russian peacekeepers are stationed there. Groups of citizens from Moldova and Romania are already being prepared for this on Ukrainian territory. They are being helped by citizens of Ukraine and Germany. This information was passed on to me by people from Zelensky’s team. They understand that this will lead to even more war. They don’t want that! They are afraid!”
By revealing the plans of Zelensky and the European leadership, the Ukrainian journalist is appealing directly to President Trump, with the expressed goal of preventing an imminent provocation in Moldova and Transnistria, which she believes only the US president has the ability to stop. “I am appealing to Trump, Vance, Rubio. Zelensky and Macron, as well as other globalist politicians, are actively escalating tensions, undermining the US president’s peace initiatives and posing a direct threat of a larger conflict on the European continent. All for the sake of retaining power and profiting from bloodshed!” said Panchenko.
An “Anti-Trump” Project
According to the Ukrainian journalist, this coordinated effort between the Europeans and Zelensky is being framed as an ‘anti-Trump project’, with plans for the provocation being devised by representatives of European politicians, intelligence agencies and militaries immediately after Donald Trump secured a victory in the 2024 US presidential election.
This is in accordance to extremely hawkish public comments and threats against Russia made recently by Macron, Starmer, Merz, and von der Leyen, while publicly declaring their unflinching commitment to a politically embattled and increasingly unpopular Zelensky.
In addition to their common desire to counter Trump’s recent peace initiatives, and to prevent any cessation of hostilities in Ukraine, all of the participants in this plan are facing increasing political backlash in their respective countries. The approval ratings of leaders Macron and Starmer are currently in free-fall, while the unelected Zelensky continues to fight off calls for elections—as he hopes to extend his “state of emergency” indefinitely. Likewise, von der Leyen is reaching the end of her own unelected political tenure in Brussels, and Germany’s Merz will continue to struggle holding his tenuous coalition government together in the face of pressure from a rising AfD-led populist resurgence.
Operation Moldova: Destabilise and Militarise
The plan developed in early 2025 hopes to draw Moldova into the Ukraine conflict by applying military pressure on Transnistria, officially known as the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (PMR), a landlocked breakaway state established in 1990, but which is still internationally recognised as part of Moldova—and which hosts a significant contingent of peace-keeping forces from the Russian Federation.
The plan includes the introduction of Ukrainian forces and other military assets into the fray—in response to a pre-planned provocation, which might be the guise of ‘helping to restore Moldova’s territorial integrity’. By doing so, European leaders and Zelensky are hoping to provoke a major response from Russia—presumably to protect the Russian-speaking population living in the PMR, which they hope will lead to another prolonged escalation of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine.
Moldovan President Maia Sandu in London, meeting with King Charles III on a state visit the UK, July 24-25, 2025.
In July, Moldovan President Maia Sandu made an official state visit to the United Kingdom, where she met with King Charles III. Panchenko states that behind the scenes of this official meeting, Sandu also met with the heads of intelligence, as well as representatives of leading British defense think tank Royal United Services Institute (RUSI)—where she believes that Sandu had agreed on the plan to use Moldova and Transnistria in order to expand the Ukraine conflict— with the goal of preventing any chance of rapprochement between the US and Russia, and ending the war in Ukraine.
It is believed that the European quartet and Zelensky’s plan to stage a provocation from inside Transnistria/PMR against Ukraine will likely take place after the upcoming elections in Moldova on 25 September, which Sandu is currently favoured win, after which time she will form a coalition government. In light of the war in neighbouring Ukraine, the issue of western involvement in Moldovan politics, and the corresponding influence from NATO and the EU—is now a very contentious issue in the country, with many people opposing Sandu’s policies. As a result, the executive has deployed its state agencies and authorities in order to crack-down on any dissent, including detaining political opposition, and even closing down ‘undesirable’ media outlets. Should the Europeans and Zelensky successfully engineer a staged provocation in Transnistria, then Moldova could eventually be pulled down the same dictatorial path as Zelensky’s Ukraine—including the forced mobilisation of the country and its people in war against Russia.
The French Connection
Recent reports suggest that French intelligence services had already tried, and failed, in launching a similar operation using their Romanian counterparts in order to foment tension by meddling in the recent Romanian elections, including the personal involvement of the head of French foreign intelligence (DGSE), Nicolas Lerner, who is believed to have led interference operations in the recent presidential elections in Romania.
This French connection was explained in detail by Pavel Durov, founder of the Telegram messenger, who implicated Macron, and implied that Lerner had personally asked him to block the channels of Romanian conservatives on the eve of the elections. Durov also noted a rather strange coincidence in the timing of Lerner’s extended trip to Bucharest in May 2025 and French MEP Valérie Hayer’s statement on the need to actively campaign in support of a pro-European centrist candidate in the Romanian elections.
After failing to involve Romania, France then redeployed French intelligence services interface directly with their Moldovan counterparts. Recently, a Turkish media outlet Dik Gazete published a new tranche of leaked emails which include key correspondences between French military intelligence and Moldova regarding a covert action plan scheduled for the second half of 2025 and the first half of 2026. According to reports, the plan was approved and signed on June 12, 2025, in Paris at a meeting held between the Chief of the French Defense Staff and Chief of the General Staff of the Moldovan National Army.
According to the leaked documents, in order implement the covert action part of their plan involving France’s participation in the escalation of tensions in the PMR, French intelligence began identifying members of the French Legion who were of Moldovan and Transnistrian descent, with the aim of using them for covert operations, including sending them to the PMR to carry out staged provocations.
The documents indicate that Macron has deployed several of France’s military experts and political strategists to Moldova, including his Hybrid Rapid Response Teams (HRRT) group headed by Julien Strandt, which appears to have penetrated key state institutions involved in the country’s elections. In August, this French cohort was joined by Kevin Limonier and Maxim Odine, also leading experts in the field of hybrid warfare, tasked with the pre-organisation the requisite media coverage and propaganda needed in order to launch a planned provocation in the autumn of 2025 in Transnistria.
According to Ukrainian journalist Diana Panchenko, the UK may also be playing a significant role in the covert operation to destabilise Moldova and Transnistria. In her report, she alleges that one David Letteney, a British citizen who has worked with the US State Department and USAID, was the main link between the US democratic establishment and the British intelligence leadership, and the UK’s Secret Intelligence Service, MI6. Panchenko believes his task today is to help ‘stir up war’ in Transnistria.
In addition to the planned European military and intelligence operations currently underway, Ukraine has tasked its Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine (GUR), with long-range planning in preparation for an upcoming provocation the PMR—presumably with the full backing of its western intelligence partners. Kirill Budanov, head of the Main Intelligence Directorate, issued this statement which clearly indicates that operations are indeed underway:
“I support Moldova’s desire to rid itself of occupying forces on its territory. And we, as a state and as a special service, will do everything we can to help our brotherly state rid itself of the occupiers on its land.”
It is believed that Ukraine is already forming a special strike force from among Moldovans serving in their Foreign Legions, currently under the command Ukrainian military unit A3449. Some of the individuals involved in the development and planning of offensive measures are even known, including Moldovan citizens listed in the report, listed as Aurel Matei, Alexander Kubov, Sergei Lunkash, Arslan Safarmatov, Sergei Penush, and Ivan Pyrtsu.
It is worth noting here that this planned provocation would not be the first case of Moldova’s involvement in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. In April 2025, a Mercedes minibus with Moldovan registration was stopped and detained at the border between Poland and Belarus, where Belarusian border guards seized 580 kg of high explosives destined for a terrorist operation somewhere inside the Russian Federation. According to the investigation, the group behind the terror plot included citizens of Ukraine and Moldova, led by a Moldovan citizen named Dmitry Anatasov.
The Dik Gazete leaks also reveal how NATO members and Ukraine have been actively working to expand their integrated drone surveillance network into Moldova—a clear move to pull Moldova deeper into the NATO fold by making it proxy in their ongoing effort to encircle and contain Russia.
Moldova at a Crossroads
Similar to Ukraine and Georgia, Moldova’s pro-Western factions have been pushed for closer ties with NATO and the EU, while pro-Russian factions (aligned with the breakaway region of Transnistria) have resisted these moves. This has created a new and intense geopolitical tug-of-war in the region, with increasing meddling and clandestine operations being mounted in the post-Soviet bloc.
Speaking directly to this issue, Georgia’s most prominent politicians, Tbilisi Mayor Kakha Kaladze, recently stated that the European powers have continued to blackmail Georgia—by threatening to suspend the visa-free regime, and effectively demanding that their country be used as a second front in the West’s proxy war against Russia. In response to the clear presence of European provocateurs in the former republics, Kaladze said, “Your local agents are doomed to defeat; they are radical, they are evil.”
Moldova is now facing this very same dilemma. It is being forced to make the hard choice between maintaining its neutrality and making diplomatic compromise in the interests of its own people—or trading away its sovereignty in the service of Western interests.
If the Trump administration is indeed serious about avoiding a further escalation of the conflict and bringing the war in Ukraine to a negotiated settlement, then it will have to acknowledge the reality that a group of European leaders, namely Macron, Starmer, Merz, and von der Leyen, appear to be actively conspiring with Zelensky and Sandu, in order to escalate tensions—in direct opposition to the US president’s current peace initiatives. Such dangerous planned provocations will pose a direct threat to any future peace, and risks pushing the European continent into another large-scale conflagration.
Zionist lawfare operation facing collapse?
By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | September 13, 2025
On September 7th, notorious Zionist lobby group UK Lawyers For Israel published a joint letter, triggered by 86% of International Association of Genocide Scholars members backing a resolution declaring “Israel” is committing genocide in Gaza days earlier. The lengthy screed blamed Hamas for Tel Aviv’s mass slaughter of Palestinians since October 7th, and charged the Resistance group itself was in fact guilty of genocide, on the risible, purported basis that Operation Al-Aqsa Flood was intended “to destroy, in whole or in part, Jews and Israelis.”
UKLFI’s repulsive, inverted narrative of Tel Aviv’s 21st century Holocaust in Gaza was reportedly endorsed by close to 500 “legal, antisemitism, history, holocaust, and genocide scholars.” Yet, upon publication, multiple listed signatories angrily announced their names were included without consent, while denouncing the letter’s content in the strongest possible terms. Close inspection indicates several signatories are listed repeatedly, many are tied to Zionist lobby groups, and others – such as a professor of electrical engineering – are self-evidently not qualified to make any judgement on genocide whatsoever.
Such brazen fraud is par for the course for UKLFI. The group has a lengthy, deplorable history of targeting individuals and organisations via frivolous if not outright vexatious lawfare, falsely conflating criticism of the Zionist entity with antisemitism in order to neutralise Palestine solidarity in schools, universities, workplaces, hospitals, and elsewhere. UKLFI’s embarrassingly botched stunt is especially shameful this time round though, as the operation is presently embroiled in significant legal quandaries of its own. The situation is so dire that UKLFI could collapse.
As Al Mayadeen reported in August, a detailed complaint was filed against UKLFI by the Public Interest Law Centre and European Legal Support Center with Britain’s Solicitors Regulation Authority. The 114-page document accused the group of using the law for nakedly politicised intimidation purposes, and ostensibly operating as a legal body despite being unregulated and unaccountable. Adding to UKLFI’s woes, its charitable wing is concurrently under formal investigation by the Charity Commission For England and Wales, due to the pioneering research of advocacy group CAGE.
‘Validating Evidence’
Founded in 2010 – aptly following a “conference on lawfare” convened in an illegal Israeli settlement near Jerusalem [Al-Quds] – UKLFI quickly established itself at the forefront of a new, “more combative” strain of Tel Aviv’s lobbying in Britain. UKLFI’s website is entirely explicit about its rabid commitment to defending the Zionist entity by any means necessary. UKLFI avowedly provides “legal support including advocacy, research, advice and campaigning in combating attempts to undermine, attack and/or delegitimise Israel, Israeli organisations, Israelis and/or supporters of Israel.”
The organisation moreover aims “to contribute generally as lawyers to creating a supportive climate of opinion” in Britain towards the Zionist entity. CAGE forensically details how UKLFI’s stances are not only “fringe” within the legal profession, but reflect Zionism at its most extreme. For instance, the organisation’s representatives fervently argue the Occupied Palestinian Territories aren’t in fact in breach of international law. The UN has consistently found over many years these Israeli settlements are flagrantly illegal, and displaced Palestinians must be permitted to return home.
CAGE traces in forensic detail UKLFI’s intimate yet opaque ties with the Israeli government. In 2012, UKLFI jointly hosted a two-day seminar alongside the Zionist entity’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and London’s Israeli embassy on lawfare strategies. This included presentations on strategies to cripple the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, and how British laws – including the Public Order Act, legislation on Hate Speech, and civil suits for defamation – could be used to the detriment of Palestine solidarity.
In 2019, UKLFI chiefs consulted senior Israeli Ministry of Justice officials, seeking “assistance in finding or validating evidence to help” the organisation in “potential legal actions” brought against it by two pro-Palestine charities, after UKLFI libelously charged the pair were linked directly to proscribed terrorist groups. The Zionist lobby group has lodged bogus complaints against countless organisations, including leading Palestinian aid organisations, to the Charity Commission, and other authorities since birth. This includes Amnesty International, for accusing “Israel” of practicing apartheid. None have been upheld.
In 2016, UKLFI established a charitable wing – the pair are effectively indivisible, sharing patrons and personnel. The charity claims to offer pro bono education and training services, but CAGE notes this invariably amounts to “apologia for racial segregation and apartheid.” Its events routinely host Zionist Occupation Force representatives, and hardline Zionist figures and groups. Some speakers deny uncontroversially proven historic Israeli atrocities and massacres against Palestinians. Others offer advice to audiences on how to weaponise the law to further Tel Aviv’s interests locally and globally.
In 2019, UKLFI’s charitable wing hosted Regavim, an Israeli NGO that actively advocates for the destruction of Palestinian homes in the West Bank. The organisation itself employs lawfare, and via regulatory loopholes, facilitates the destruction and dismantling of Palestinian homes and infrastructure. In the process, per CAGE, “entire communities” are left “without proper roads, houses, or even water systems.” Regavim was founded by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, and is Zionist entity-funded. Even liberal Israeli lobby groups harshly condemned the event.
A common UKLFI tactic is to bombard British regulatory bodies and private entities “to disrupt any public displays of solidarity for Palestine” in any context, problematising even the most basic expressions of support as somehow antisemitic. This has prompted numerous organisations to ban wearing Palestine badges or other paraphernalia by staff or students, and in extreme instances, led to employees losing their jobs. CAGE records:
“There are manifold cases in both the public and private sector of UKLFI writing to organisations and attempting to ensure staff of those organisations do not wear anything that might indicate support for Palestine… [UKLFI] doesn’t appear to have any cogent case for why expressing solidarity for Palestine necessitates Jewish people to feel unsafe – especially when considering the widespread support that the Palestinian cause has among Jewish groups in the UK.”
‘Encouraging Hamas’
UKLFI’s noxious activities have become turbocharged since the Gaza genocide’s eruption. Along the way, it has taken credit for the suspension of pro-Palestine NHS doctors, among other things. Meanwhile, in April 2024, UKLFI charity wing chief Natasha Hausdorff – formerly an Israeli Supreme Court clerk – testified to parliament’s Business and Trade Committee on British arms exports to the Zionist entity. She argued the flow of weapons should continue, dismissed confirmed Palestinian death tolls as fraudulent, and unbelievably praised Tel Aviv’s “consistent upholding of international humanitarian law.”
The next month, UKLFI deployed perverse arguments to deny the Zionist entity was deliberately starving Gazans. In a letter to the Co-operative Group opposing a motion to boycott Israeli products, UKLFI chief Jonathan Turner condemned a Lancet estimate of 186,000 Palestinians murdered by Tel Aviv during the genocide to date. He sickeningly suggested “Israel’s” unconscionable assault in fact delivered health benefits that could increase local life expectancy, such as a reduction in obesity, due to constricted access to unhealthy food and cigarettes.
In September that year, UKLFI dispatched a formal letter to the British government threatening legal action in the form of a judicial review unless a partial, token suspension of 30 arms export licences to “Israel” was reversed. Three months later, the lobby group submitted complaints to the Bar Standards Board and International Criminal Court against ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan for seeking arrest warrants against Israeli leaders. UKLFI alleged Khan had breached professional conduct rules, by making false statements and misleading the ICC.
The Court responded by warning UKLFI to be “alive to their own ethical responsibilities and their duty not to mislead.” Clearly undeterred, in April 2025, Hausdorff testified to Parliament’s Foreign Affairs committee. She used the opportunity to dodge charges that “Israel” was deliberately starving Palestinians, repeatedly dismiss Palestinian statehood as a “fantasy”, and accuse Western governments – including Britain’s own – of somehow “encouraging Hamas”. Her comments elicited audible objections of “delusional” from committee chair Emily Thornberry, not recorded in official transcripts.
The next month, Hausdorff led a counter-protest in London against a public commemoration of Palestine’s 1948 ethnic cleansing – known as the Nakba – declaring the event an antisemitic blood libel, and saying that “the lie of the Nakba” was part of a wider attack on Jews. This was despite the commemoration’s sizeable Jewish presence. Hausdorff published her address on social media – one of “innumerable” examples of public statements contrary to international law she has made collated by CAGE, which triggered the Charity Commission probe.
None of UKLFI’s work could plausibly be characterised as fulfilling legitimate charitable or legal objectives. It’s a bitter irony indeed that the organisation, which has for a decade-and-a-half sought to corrupt and distort British law in service of Tel Aviv’s repugnant settler colonial project, and ruined countless careers and lives in the process, now finds itself effectively in the dock. UKLFI’s latest faux pas, like “Israel’s” recent failed attempt at regime change in Iran, is unambiguously indicative of a flailing entity on the verge of extinction.
Featured Video
Stanislav Krapivnik: Massive Escalation – Attack on Putin’s Residence
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
China and India have ‘low intellectual potential’ – top Zelensky aide
RT | September 13, 2023
The people leading India and China lack the ability to predict the long-term consequences of their policies, a senior aide to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has claimed.
Mikhail Podoliak pointed to what he called “the problem of the modern world,” singling out India and China, in an interview with Ukrainian media on Tuesday.
“The problem with these countries is that they do not analyze the consequences of their own moves. These countries, unfortunately, have low intellectual potential,” he said.
Podoliak suggested that even though India has a lunar exploration program, it “does not mean that this nation understands what the modern world precisely is.”
The dismissive remarks were in the context of Beijing and New Delhi’s refusal to support Kiev in its conflict with Moscow. Podoliak complained that India, China and Türkiye were “profiting” from the war by maintaining trade with Russia.
“Technically, it is in their national interests,” he acknowledged, before presenting his view of what would benefit China in the long-run.
“China should be interested in Russia disappearing, because it is an archaic nation that drags China into unnecessary conflicts,” he claimed. … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
papasha408 on Trump Says Hamas Will Be Given… papasha408 on Is Israel About to Return to G… Bill Francis on NSW Premier Admits New “Securi… Richard Ong on Israeli forces arrest writer a… Bill Francis on How reporting facts can now la… Gemma on Israel’s diamond industr… Bill Francis on Victoria Moves to Force Online… papasha408 on The Empire of Lies: How the BB… loongtip on US Weighs Port Restrictions on… Bill Francis on Chris Minns Defends NSW “Hate… Sheree Sheree on I was canceled by three newspa… Richard Ong on Czech–Slovak alignment signals…
Aletho News- The new German totalitarianism
- Stanislav Krapivnik: Massive Escalation – Attack on Putin’s Residence
- Gaza races to preserve what remains of its 5,000-year-old archaeological legacy
- Dayton At 30: US Betrayal Old And New
- UNRWA head slams ‘outrageous’ Israeli law to cut water, energy to agency’s facilities
- Trump Says Hamas Will Be Given a ‘Short Period of Time’ to Disarm
- Is Israel About to Return to Genocide? Three Scenarios for What Comes Next
- Netanyahu Aligned Think Tanker: Somaliland Offered To ‘Absorb’ One Million Palestinians
- The DOJ is flaunting the law on the Epstein Files. Why isn’t Pam Bondi in handcuffs?
- The Epstein Saga: Chapter 4, Good Old Robert
- If Americans Knew
- Gaza health officials report outbreaks of water-borne illnesses, flu – Not a ceasefire Day 82
- TCN Warns – “ISRAEL FIRST: U.S. May Attack Iran Again”
- Hamas calls on Israel to allow impartial investigation into 7 October attacks
- Indiegogo Withholds $51K In Donations From MintPress in Financial Censorship Crackdown
- Gaza races to preserve what remains of its 5,000-year-old archaeological legacy
- Gaza health official says miscarriages surge as births fall by 40%
- Leahy Law Requires Ban on Aid to Israeli Police Unit for Killing Two Palestinians Who Surrendered
- Israel blocks entry of eye drops for blind people in Gaza
- I did not understand I grew up in a concentration camp until I left Gaza
- One excavator, 10,000 bodies, a sea of rubble: inside Gaza’s effort to retrieve and bury its dead
- No Tricks Zone
- Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
- New Study Finds A Higher Rate Of Global Warming From 1899-1940 Than From 1983-2024
- Meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue Warns “Germany Won’t Make It” If Winter Turns Severe
- Merry Christmas Everybody!
- Two More New Studies Show The Southern Ocean And Antarctica Were Warmer In The 1970s
- Der Spiegel Caught Making Up Reports About Conservative America (Again)
- New Study: 8000 Years Ago Relative Sea Level Was 30 Meters Higher Than Today Across East Antarctica
- The Wind Energy Paradox: “Why More Wind Turbines Don’t Always Mean More Power”
- New Study Reopens Questions About Our Ability To Meaningfully Assess Global Mean Temperature
- Dialing Back The Panic: German Physics Prof Sees No Evidence Of Climate Tipping Points!
Aletho News 