Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Made in America. Hidden in Berkshire. Dropped on Iran.

Introducing RAF Welford the largest repository of Weapons of Mass Destruction in the country

By Daid Miller | UK Column | July 26, 2026

Tucked away off an obscure exit from the east-bound M4 near Swindon is a military base referred to regularly in the local press as ‘secret’. What is the connection between this obscure RAF facility and the mass destruction of civilian infrastructure in Iran in March and April this year? Back then we saw reports of attacks on the desalination plants in Qeshm Island, and commercial and energy infrastructure targets in Bandar Abbas, which also caused noted civilian casualties. There were also reports of attacks on Kashan International Airport, including on civilian infrastructure such as passenger terminals. Serious bombs were dropped in Isfahan, destroying the protected Shah Mosque heritage site and causing civilian deaths among facility workers and nearby residents.

In the recent resumption of daily US attacks on Iran, it has been reported that the planes dropping the bombs have come from RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire.

One thing connecting all these incidents is that the bombs in the long range bombers came from a little-known location in the sleepy Berkshire countryside. Perhaps it’s surprising to learn that the RAF were involved, but here’s the thing: Welford is not an RAF base any more. Rather, it’s the largest US bomb arsenal in the UK, and the second largest in Europe. The bombs stored here are transported by road to RAF Fairford where they are loaded onto long-range B-1 and B-52 bombers.

Mainstream reporting by the BBC as well as in independent media like the Canary and Declassified UK have all described the goings on at RAF Fairford. But hardly anyone seems to know about the secret munitions dump only miles away. Let’s examine what’s been going on there.

The Base

RAF Welford used to be a functioning air force base with three runways laid out to form an intersecting triangular pattern. Aerial photographs from the 1940s show the base clearly, but it has not functioned as an airstrip for many years. The US Air Force doesn’t fly in here, either — in fact, they dug up the runways and replaced them with a myriad of cavernous underground bomb silos.

The base is referred to as secret in part because there are opaque signs on the motorway indicating ‘Works unit only’, with no further information. Before 2015 these signs were edged in red, an indication, at least, that the destination was a military installation. Reviewing data from Google Street View indicates that the signs were changed between April 2015 and September 2016 to the current blue colour indicating, deceptively, a civilian installation.

The previous, less deceptive, sign. Image: Google Street View, April 2015.

The replacement sign. Image: Google Street View, September 2016.

Munitions stored at, or supplied from, RAF Welford have supported USAF bomber operations from RAF Fairford in multiple conflicts, including the 1991 Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm) and the 2003 illegal invasion of Iraq, plus operations in Afghanistan, Syria, and elsewhere. Operations against Iranian targets in 2026 have involved bunker-busting and precision-guided bombs loaded for B-1B missions and launched from Fairford.

Bombs being loaded at RAF Welford

These JDAMs are among the types of bomb loaded at RAF Fairford. Image: USAF

The massive stockpiles of bombs at Welford are looked after by the USAF 420th Munitions Squadron, part of the 501st Combat Support Wing which is headquartered at RAF Fairford. Welford functions as the second largest conventional munitions storage area in Europe and one of the largest heavy munitions compounds for the entire United States Air Forces in Europe–Air Forces Africa (USAFE-AFAFRICA).

In May 2019, the USAF moved 450,000 pounds (200 tonnes) of explosives to the site which hides a huge variety of bombs. They include three key types — ‘smart’, ‘dumb’ and ‘stand off’:

  • ‘Iron’ or ‘dumb’ bombs (Mk 82/Mk 84 ): 500-pound/2,000-pound unguided general-purpose bombs. Blast/fragmentation for troops, vehicles, buildings, rail yards, infrastructure.
  • Joint Direct Attack Munition or ‘smart’ bombs (technically GBU-31 JDAM): These are GPS-guided 2,000-pound ‘precision’ bombs. They are essentially an add-on to ‘dumb’ bombs to make them more accurate. They can also use BLU-109 penetrator add-ons — so called ‘bunker busters’ — for hardened bunkers/underground facilities. Intended for military bunkers, infrastructure, fixed/relocatable targets. These, of course, were responsible for the attacks on civilian infrastructure and the inevitable civilian casualties caused.
  • Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (AGM-158 JASSM): Stealthy long-range stand-off cruise missile for high-value, defended military targets from range. The US uses these if they want to avoid Iranian air defences and the possibility of their planes being shot down, as started to happen in April this year.

RAF Welford is directly linked to RAF Fairford, the USAF’s primary bomber forward operating location in Europe. The 420th Munitions Squadron at Welford supplies munitions to bombers (including B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers) deployed at Fairford, enabling heavy bombing missions. Moves occur when heavy bombers (B-1B, B-52) deploy to RAF Fairford for exercises or operations. Bombs are then fitted with JDAM kits and loaded onto aircraft.

These munitions and bombs are routinely transported by road between RAF Welford and Fairford, which lie on opposite sides of Swindon. Convoys — reportedly highly secure with armed escorts — travel west via the M4 motorway, a distance of approximately 32 miles. Movements often take place at night with no identifying markings on vehicles for operational security.

However, quite strict rules apply to transporting bombs on British streets and motorways! Military high explosives (UN Class 1) moved by road from RAF Welford to RAF Fairford are regulated under the Ministry of Defence Explosives Regulations (JSP 482) and JSP 800 Volume 4b (Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road).

Convoy vehicles on the M4 are required to display plain orange plates at the front and rear of each transport unit, along with explosive hazard placards (Class 1 diamonds) on both sides and the rear. It’s not clear whether these rules are always adhered to.

The route from RAF Welford to RAF Fairford is fairly restrictive and predictable. Image: Google Maps

Within Range?

According to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Islamic Republic has deliberately capped its missile range at 2,000 km. If this policy has not been changed, it would be difficult for the IRGC to eliminate the USAF’s UK bunkers of death with a missile attack. That’s because RAF Welford is some 4,035 km from Tabriz in north-west Iran, the closest location from which missiles might be fired. Nevertheless, as a result of Burnham’s reckless decision, the Iranian Foreign Minister has now announced that these bases are legitimate targets for Iran.

Andy Burnham has put British citizens at risk.

RAF Welford is not, however, beyond the range of anti-war campaigners in England. Newbury is less than 10 miles away. Reading, Oxford, and Swindon are less than 30 miles away, Bristol 58 miles, and central London less than 70 miles.

A quick examination of Google Maps shows that when US bombs leave Welford they need to take country roads and can only access the M4 heading west at Junction 14, Shefford Woodlands. They likely then leave the motorway at Junction 15, Badbury, onto the A419. It should not be too difficult to find ways to mount effective demonstrations or blockades to markedly interfere with the smooth supply of death-dealing to US bombers.

No bombs on the planes means no bombs on civilian heads.

You know what to do.

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Made in America. Hidden in Berkshire. Dropped on Iran.

US sanctions Palestine Action, designates group as ‘terrorist organization’

Press TV – August 26, 2026

The Trump administration has imposed sanctions on UK-based Palestine Action, freezing its US assets and prohibiting Americans from providing funds, goods or services to the pro-Palestine group.

The US Treasury Department announced the measure on Wednesday, designating Palestine Action as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT), according to a notice published on its website.

The designation blocks any property or financial interests belonging to the group that fall under US jurisdiction and generally bars US persons from conducting transactions with it.

It also prohibits the provision of funds, goods or services to the group, with violations potentially carrying civil or criminal penalties.

The move makes Palestine Action the first known British left-wing activist group to face US so-called counterterrorism sanctions over activities Washington considers “terrorism.”

The designation places it on the same US sanctions list as groups including al-Qaeda and the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group.

The measures could also put British citizens who continue to fund Palestine Action or participate in activities on its behalf at risk of US sanctions and visa restrictions.

The US State Department said the action forms part of a broader campaign against what it describes as transnational far-left terrorism, including efforts to identify and disrupt international networks that organize, facilitate or carry out “violent activities.”

The designation follows the UK government’s decision in July 2025 to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act, citing the group’s targeting of companies linked to Israel’s military industry.

Palestine Action has focused much of its campaign on Elbit Systems UK, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer, which the group says has supplied weapons to the Israeli military during the genocidal war in Gaza.

In June 2025, activists broke into RAF Brize Norton and damaged military aircraft, an incident that preceded the British government’s decision to proscribe the group.

The group’s US branch, Palestine Action US, was formed with a similar aim of targeting and disrupting companies and military contractors connected to Israel. It later rebranded as Unity of Fields.

Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori denounced the US move, saying the group’s actions were aimed at disrupting Israel’s military industry.

The US sanctions come as Palestine Action continues to challenge its proscription in Britain. In July, the UK Court of Appeal upheld the government’s decision, ruling that Palestine Action was not an “ordinary protest group.”

However, the UK Supreme Court has since granted Ammori permission to challenge the ban. The case is scheduled to be heard between October 1 and December 21.

August 26, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Comments Off on US sanctions Palestine Action, designates group as ‘terrorist organization’

Blame Churchill for World War 2. Not Hitler

By Mike Whitney • Unz Review • August 25, 2026

Winston Churchill, for all his triumphs and successes, was probably the man most responsible for the early and rapid collapse of the British empire….What brought the British empire down as rapidly and terribly as it did was world War 2. In my opinion, WW2 was exactly what Churchill called it “The Unnecessary War”. And the fatal blunder was the decision in panic of the British government after Czechoslovakia fell apart in March, 1939, was to give an unsolicited war guarantee to a collection of Polish colonels who had a romantic view of their own warlike capacities , who participated in the breakup of Czechoslovakia, and Britain gave them this guarantee to back them in a cause –control of Danzig– where they thought the Germans were fundamentally right. And that war guarantee which stiffened the Polish spine, gave the Poles the backbone to stand up to Hitler who now had no way out but to take Danzig. Hitler attacked Poland, Britain declared war on Germany, and that six year war brought down the British empire. And the man who was driving hardest for war with Germany was Winston Churchill Pat Buchanan Interview, You Tube (:29 seconds)

Video Link

“We must recognize that many of the fundamental ideas that dominate our present-day world were founded upon a particular understanding of that wartime history, and if there seems good reason to believe that narrative is substantially false, perhaps we should begin questioning the framework of beliefs erected upon it.” Ron Unz, Editor The Unz Review

I have long thought that our over-simplified, “cartoonish” portrayal of Adolf Hitler as ‘the embodiment of all evil’ has distorted our understanding of the events leading up to the Second World War. Hitler may have been a tyrant and a monster, but his strategic objectives do not appear to align with what we are told by western analysts and historians. Hitler’s invasion of Poland was not the first step in a broader campaign aimed at world domination nor did he plan to conquer all of western Europe. His goals were much more modest and reasonable. He simply wanted to recapture the territory that had been seized from Germany under the terms of the universally reviled Versailles Treaty. The Treaty –which arbitrarily partitioned Germany, stole its material assets, slashed the size of its army, and imposed reparations so big that the nation would remain a permanent colony of western bankers and financiers– also left 8 million German nationals marooned in countries outside of their own sovereign borders. Poland was one of those countries and Hitler intended to ‘put it right’. Here’s how Ron Unz summed it up:

Hitler’s final demand, that 95% German Danzig be returned to Germany just as its inhabitants desired, was an absolutely reasonable one, and only a dreadful diplomatic blunder by the British had led the Poles to refuse the request, thereby provoking the war. The widespread later claim that Hitler sought to conquer the world was totally absurd, and the German leader had actually made every effort to avoid war with Britain or France….

(Hitler) hoped to finally settle the Polish border dispute, offering concessions far more generous than any of his democratically elected Weimar predecessors had ever considered. But Poland’s dictatorship instead spent months rejecting his attempts at negotiations and also began brutal mistreatment of its German minority, finally forcing Hitler into declaring war. Why Everything You Know About World War II Is Wrong, Interview Ron Unz

So, the dominant narrative that we all learned in grade school is (as Unz says) “substantially false” which calls into question the “framework of beliefs erected upon it”, particularly that WW2 was the “good war”, a Manichean struggle between the forces of good and evil. But it wasn’t a struggle between good and evil, because as Unz points out, Hitler’s claims were “reasonable” and legitimate. Versailles was a catastrophe from the get-go and Hitler set out to roll back its demands as would any German patriot. Imagine if the US went to war with Mexico and foreign politicians decided that the US must hand over Texas, Arizona and California as part a final settlement. The public outcry would be so ferocious that eventually a politician would emerge (like Hitler) who would promise to retake the stolen territories by hook or crook. That same rule applies to Hitler. He was just doing what he was elected to do.

The whole idea that Poland was just the first steppingstone in a broader campaign for world domination is laughable. There’s no evidence to support that at all. Hitler wanted to rebuild post-Versailles Germany and put as many of the 8 million German nationals who found themselves outside the country, back under German rule. This wasn’t a global power-grab, it was a firm but responsible way to reach a just outcome, which is evident by the way he pursued his goal, through negotiation. Once again, most educated people in the west seem to think that Hitler overpowered Czechoslovakia and then marched into Poland the next day. Wrong. Hitler pursued a diplomatic path for nearly a year. Negotiations with Poland lasted roughly 10 months, from late October 1938 until the invasion on 1 September 1939. In other words, Hitler showed great restraint and patience. So why would an impulsive, tyrannical hothead look for a diplomatic solution when he could simply deploy the Wehrmacht and crush the anemic Poles beneath his tank-tracks without batting an eye?

Maybe because he wasn’t an impulsive, tyrannical hothead after all. Maybe that’s just more of the same hyperbolic narrative that has colored our understanding of Hitler from the very beginning.

Video– Historian Darryl Cooper on Churchill — “Churchill Is the Chief Villain in WWII. ..Churchill is a terrorist… Hitler didn’t war with England.”

Here’s where it gets interesting, because Poland is not some little blip on the radar. The whole history of WW2 rests on our understanding of who started the war and who is ultimately responsible for the war. And that honor goes to England not Germany. It wasn’t Germany that declared war on England. It was England that declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939, two days after Germany invaded Poland.

But if Germany invaded Poland than Germany must be responsible for starting the war.

No, because as Buchanan points out in the opening statement, Poland regarded Chamberlain’s “unsolicited war guarantee” as an insurance policy against a German invasion. As the author says, “that war guarantee which stiffened the Polish spine, gave the Poles the backbone to stand up to Hitler”. In other words, Polish leaders were duped into believing that they could thumb their nose at Hitler because the Brits ‘had their back.’ They didn’t need to negotiate or be reasonable because big brother would bail them out. Of course, big brother couldn’t bail them out because England had no combat troops, no military bases, no airfields, and no naval bases anywhere near Poland. So there was no way they could rescue Poland if Hitler attacked. Even so, they ignored all of that, shrugged off Hitler’s demands, and forced Hitler to invade. Poland fell in two weeks and Chamberlain never lifted a finger to help. (So much for British guarantees) In fact, it’s worse than that, because Hitler had formed an alliance with Stalin to divide Poland between themselves (The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) thinking that the alliance would deter Chamberlain from declaring war. But Chamberlain wasn’t deterred. He stood firm and declared war anyway offering up Poland as a sacrificial lamb in order to drag all of continental Europe into a World War with Germany.

Buchanan describes Chamberlain’s war guarantee to Poland the “greatest blunder in British history” worse than the Munich Agreement. It provided a “blank check” to the Polish government who then refused to negotiate over Danzig (an overwhelmingly German city) and the Polish Corridor, issues that many British leaders believed should have been resolved in Germany’s favor. The guarantee transformed a limited German-Polish border dispute into a general European war that pitted Germany against the Allied Forces in western Europe and US. The eventual outcome of the conflict would be the destruction of Poland, the fall of France, the Blitz, and tens of millions of deaths, outcomes that were entirely avoidable.

So, Chamberlain’s war guarantee was the proximate cause of World War 2, not Hitler’s invasion. The guarantee not only ensured that Poland would be destroyed but also that a large swath of countries in eastern Europe would fall under the iron grip of Soviet Russia after the war ended. Apparently, none of the geniuses in Chamberlain’s cabinet were able to anticipate that dreary outcome.

Historian David Irving reveals Hitler’s secret peace offering to Churchill in June, 1940 (while Churchill was bombing Berlin)

“I will withdraw all German forces from everywhere in Europe except for the provinces which had always been German and which had been taken away from Germany at the end of the first world war… I have the greatest admiration for the British and the British empire and I want the empire to survive into perpetuity and grow larger and larger. If the British empire at any time should threatened by some outside force,.. I guarantee that I will provide to the British whatever forces they may ask for to throw these aggressors out of the empire.”

And the consequences for England were equally dismal due largely to Churchill’s zealous commitment to a conflict in which Britain never should have participated. This is part of the story you will never find in the western histories where “bulldog” Churchill is regularly lionized as a symbol of moral fortitude and true grit. What’s lost in these glowing panegyrics is that the dissolute PM’s “incurable bad judgement” precipitated the end of the Empire and the sharp decline of Britain’s role in the world order. Churchill was given a prosperous and prestigious state to oversee, and left it a broken, bankrupt shambles requiring the handouts from foreign creditors.

Keep in mind, England was the world’s biggest creditor state when the war began but wound up as the world’s biggest debtor by war’s end. Take a look:

Grok– Before the Second World War began in 1939, the United Kingdom was still one of the world’s leading creditor nations (often described as the largest or among the very largest in terms of accumulated overseas investments and net external assets). British holdings of foreign securities, direct investments, and related income streams remained very large. By the end of the war in 1945, Britain’s position had been reversed:

Large volumes of overseas assets had been sold or liquidated to pay for essential war supplies. Britain had accumulated massive external liabilities, particularly the “sterling balances” owed to Commonwealth countries, India, Egypt, and others, plus obligations linked to American assistance. Net income from overseas investments fell sharply… Contemporary official assessments stated that Britain had “ceased to be a large-scale creditor country” and faced a severely weakened external financial position, ranking among the world’s major debtors relative to its pre-war standing.

By 1945, Britain’s external financial position had reversed dramatically: it faced large net liabilities, reduced investment income, and dependence on American financial support…. This shift from global creditor to major debtor was a direct consequence of the enormous cost of the wars and the need to finance them by drawing down assets and accumulating obligations. Grok

So, the war’s biggest cheerleader (Churchill) was, in reality, an incompetent, drunken buffoon who dragged his country to ruin in order to engage in a conflict which he later admitted was “unnecessary”. Shocking.

August 25, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular, Video | | Comments Off on Blame Churchill for World War 2. Not Hitler

NATO wages hybrid war on Russia as Europe prepares for wider conflict

By Ahmed Adel | August 24, 2026

The war in Ukraine has long ceased to be a bilateral conflict between Moscow and Kiev. What began as a military operation has evolved into a sustained hybrid NATO campaign against Russia, with Ukraine receiving military assistance and intelligence sharing, European states rearming, and the anti-Russia sanctions regime continually expanding. The cumulative effect is an attempt to degrade Russia’s strategic capacity while avoiding the formal declaration of direct war.

According to Bild, military planning documents are circulating within NATO. The documents, developed by United States Army Major Andrew Pingray, lay out that the objectives in a war with Russia would be to halt an offensive and significantly weaken the Russian military’s potential. The German newspaper reports that NATO has developed a multi-phase concept for a potential large-scale conflict with Russia, often referred to as the NATO Land Warfighting Concept.

“NATO is preparing with a new concept of land warfare for a possible Russian attack in the Baltic region,” the publication says.

Bild reported that in the opening phase, combat aircraft, long-range missiles, and unmanned systems would play a central role. Along the frontiers of the Baltic states with Russia and Belarus, planners envision autonomous zones where the permanent stationing of Alliance ground forces would be minimized. From these zones, strikes could be directed against targets on Russian territory, including airfields, industrial facilities, bridges, and rail nodes. Later phases involve more restrictions on logistics and deploying unmanned systems deeper into Russian territory.

The circulating documents also state that NATO’s top priority should be suppressing the missile threat. To this end, the Alliance plans to use aircraft, missiles, and drones to destroy Russian missile systems. One of the plan’s key areas of focus is the Kaliningrad exclave of Russia, where Russian missile and air defense systems are deployed.

According to Bild, the NATO plan also includes the possibility of cooperation with Russians opposed to President Vladimir Putin. Separately, the creation of an “air bridge” for the delivery of drones and robotic systems to Russian territory, which could be used against military targets, is being considered.

Although it is unclear whether this document is a fully authorized operational plan or one of many contingency studies, its existence and partial disclosure indicate that European military planners are seriously exploring scenarios for direct conflict with Russia.

The political context for these preparations has shifted markedly. Under the previous administration, American involvement in the Ukrainian theater was more overt and expansive. The current Trump administration’s position reflects greater reluctance to commit combat forces or to underwrite indefinite European escalation.

American intelligence support, satellite reconnaissance, and the continued sale of advanced weapon systems to Ukraine have not stopped, but the heavier financial and manpower burden is being shifted to NATO’s European members. European Union countries have responded by expanding their procurement programs, particularly in air and missile defense, artillery munitions, and longer-range strike capabilities. These purchases are presented as investments that strengthen collective defense and revitalize domestic industry, thereby providing political cover for rising defense budgets amid Europe’s economic woes.

Germany has moved from limited, non-lethal aid and uniforms to a more assertive military posture, especially after the change of leadership in Berlin. The current German government has accelerated spending commitments and public rhetoric that frames Russia as an enduring threat to the EU. British and French strategic preferences continue to shape the overall direction, with the two traditional powerhouses of Western Europe encouraging Germany to assume greater responsibility as a continental military power while seeking to limit their own direct exposure.

The Black Sea, particularly the ports of Odessa and Nikolaev and the Danube delta, has taken on heightened strategic importance. Disruption of these ports affects the flow of Western military supplies into Ukraine. Russian strikes on port infrastructure are therefore attempts to sever supply lines that have been reoriented from commercial grain exports to military cargo. The substitution of Western weapons shipments for agricultural traffic along the Danube highlights the militarization of civilian infrastructure.

At the same time, a formal ceasefire that leaves the underlying security architecture unresolved would, from the Russian perspective, create new vulnerabilities rather than lasting stability, especially if Ukraine remains integrated into Western military, intelligence, and political structures and does not revert to neutrality. This is particularly important because European states are already expanding industrial capacity, stockpiling munitions, and refining doctrines for high-intensity conflict.

The ongoing hybrid campaign—integrating support, economic measures, information warfare, and societal militarization—allows the West to exert constant pressure without direct attribution to combat. If this hybrid strategy continues without a political solution that addresses Russia’s core security concerns, NATO’s planning is likely to become increasingly aggressive. Europe’s accelerated rearmament and the emerging detailed plans within NATO dispel any resistance to the idea that the conflict has now expanded beyond Ukraine’s borders.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

August 24, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Comments Off on NATO wages hybrid war on Russia as Europe prepares for wider conflict

Japan rejects Ukraine’s missile plea

RT | August 24, 2026

Japan does not plan to supply Ukraine with weapons, Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara has said. At a press briefing on Monday, he told reporters that Tokyo “is not considering any deliveries” of defensive or offensive weapons “at this time.”

Kihara was responding to Ukrainian Prime Minister Sergey Koretsky, who asked Japan on Sunday for anti-ballistic missiles, in an interview with Kyodo News.

“I would like to kindly ask one and only thing… anti-ballistic missiles,” he was cited as saying. “It’s the most important thing we need… I very much hope and count on your country.”

Koretsky took office in July and was reportedly close to disgraced businessman Timur Mindich, a close associate of Vladimir Zelensky who fled to Israel amid a corruption scandal.

“At this time, the government does not consider transferring weapons under the Self-Defense Forces Law to Ukraine,” Kihara said, referring to an overhaul in April of Japan’s defense-export policy that lifted restrictions limiting transfers to non-lethal categories and opened the door to lethal weapons exports.

He noted that Tokyo has already provided Kiev with non-lethal equipment and pledged around $20 billion in recovery, reconstruction, and humanitarian aid, signaling that it intends to keep its assistance within these bounds.

Japan’s stance on the Ukraine conflict has been marked by contradiction. Tokyo has publicly sided with Kiev, condemning Russia’s military operation and taking part in the Western sanctions. However, it has stopped short of supplying lethal weapons to Ukraine, and unlike some Western nations, has retained stakes in key Russian energy projects, citing their importance to domestic energy security.

Over the past few months, Ukraine has increasingly sought new military hardware from its Western backers to counter severe battlefield shortages amid the steady advance of Russian forces. Last month, Russia announced the capture of the key Ukrainian stronghold of Konstantinovka in northwestern Donbass before launching an offensive toward the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk agglomeration, the last two major cities in the region still under Ukrainian control. Over the past week, Russia has liberated six settlements in Donbass.

Kiev has intensified long-range drone attacks deep inside Russia, increasingly striking energy and civilian infrastructure and prompting Moscow to denounce the raids as terrorist attacks against civilians. Last month, Russian Ambassador-at-Large Rodion Miroshnik told RT that Ukraine is trying to mask its battlefield setbacks by attacking Russian civilians and presenting the strikes as “some kind of achievement.”

Russia has long accused Western weapons suppliers of enabling Ukraine’s deep-strike campaign. A Sunday Times report last week claimed that Ukraine has used British-made drones for long-range attacks inside Russia over the past six months. Moscow maintains that this aid makes Kiev’s foreign backers direct participants in the hostilities and only serves to prolong the conflict. Earlier this month, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that Russia will adopt “much harsher methods to destroy everything that enables the West to fuel Kiev’s war machine.”

The ‘coalition of the willing’, a group of Western states pushing for continued aid to Ukraine which includes the UK, France, and Germany, will convene in Kiev on Monday to discuss future weapons deliveries. Kiev is expected to seek additional interceptor missiles. The UK is set to announce that it will provide Ukraine with classified technical information needed to assemble long-range cruise missiles domestically.

August 24, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Comments Off on Japan rejects Ukraine’s missile plea

Can the US Outsmart Iran? /Lt Col Daniel Davis & Brian McGlinchey

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – August 19, 2026

IRAN’s NOT GOING BACK, New Demands Are Clear /Professor Seyed Marandi

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – August 19, 2026

UKRAINE: Under Siege From Every Front /Lt Col Daniel Davis

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – August 19, 2026

August 19, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Can the US Outsmart Iran? /Lt Col Daniel Davis & Brian McGlinchey

David Miller on his victory over Zionism, Pax Judaica, and Jewish Supremacy

If Americans Knew | August 17, 2026

David Miller is a British sociologist whose research and publications focus on Islamophobia and propaganda. Miller was Professor of Political Sociology at the University of Bristol, where he was dismissed by the university because it was deemed he had not met the standards of behavior expected from staff. The dismissal related to allegations from students that Miller engaged in antisemitism during one of his lectures.

Miller was ultimately cleared of any unlawful behavior. In 2026, the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the 2024 Employment Tribunal finding that Miller’s anti-Zionist beliefs constituted a protected philosophical belief under section 10 of the Equality Act 2010.

In this interview Miller discusses his victory over Zionism, Pax Judaica, and Jewish Supremacy. Miller describes how the United States and its powerful armed forces have become a proxy for the Jewish state’s imperial interests.

For the entire interview, visit:    • David Miller CRUSHES Zionists in Court  

August 19, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | Comments Off on David Miller on his victory over Zionism, Pax Judaica, and Jewish Supremacy

David GIbbs: How Intelligence Services Captured Academia & Journalism

Glenn Diesen | August 17, 2026

David N. Gibbs is a professor of history at the University of Arizona.

Debate on the CIA and academia: David Gibbs and Robert Jervis

Article in the Los Angeles Times on the CIA-academic nexus: https://irp.fas.org/news/2001/01/lat012801.html

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen

August 18, 2026 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism, Russophobia, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , , , | Comments Off on David GIbbs: How Intelligence Services Captured Academia & Journalism

Russia warns UK will ‘pay the price’ over drones used in Ukrainian strikes

RT | August 17, 2026

The UK is deliberately escalating the Ukraine conflict and acting as an accomplice to Kiev’s terrorist attacks, Russia’s embassy in London has said, warning that Britain will be held accountable for its actions.

The statement comes after a Sunday Times report claiming that Ukrainian forces have used drones supplied by two British manufacturers for long-range attacks inside Russia over the past six months.

Multiple Ukrainian military sources told the newspaper that British UAVs had been deployed against industrial and military targets, including oil refineries in Volgograd and Yaroslavl.

The Russian Embassy responded on Monday, saying that the report confirms that “London is deliberately opting for an escalation of the Ukraine crisis, while hypocritically professing a desire for peace.”

“In doing so, the United Kingdom is acting as an accomplice and co-perpetrator of the bloody crimes and terrorist attacks committed by Ukrainian neo-Nazis, seeking to contain Russia and inflict maximum damage on it by proxy,” the embassy wrote, warning that “London’s actions will inevitably carry consequences for which it will have to answer.”

“The deeper its involvement in the conflict and the greater its support for Kiev’s terrorist machinery, the higher the price it will pay,” the statement concluded.

Britain has been one of Kiev’s most active military backers since the escalation of the conflict in 2022. In June, London pledged to provide Ukraine with 150,000 drones by the end of the year and has already supplied long-range Storm Shadow cruise missiles, which have also been used for attacks inside Russia. Several Ukraine-linked drone production facilities are also operating on British soil.

Kiev has sharply intensified its long-range attacks in recent months, launching hundreds of UAVs at a time against Russian territory. Moscow says the strikes have increasingly hit energy infrastructure, residential areas and other civilian sites, killing and wounding dozens of civilians, including children.

Russia has responded by stepping up its own missile and drone strikes against Ukraine’s military-industrial facilities, logistics centers and infrastructure supporting its armed forces.

Moscow has repeatedly argued that Western weapons deliveries, intelligence sharing and targeting assistance make NATO countries direct participants in the conflict. Last week, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that Russia would continue to adopt “much harsher methods to destroy everything that enables the West to fuel Kiev’s war machine.”

Russian officials have also warned that Ukraine-linked weapons manufacturing facilities scattered across Europe could be regarded as legitimate military targets.

August 17, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Comments Off on Russia warns UK will ‘pay the price’ over drones used in Ukrainian strikes

Why you are being lied to about Yemen and the implications of its liberation

By Robert Inlakesh – Al Mayadeen – August 16, 2026

The Yemeni Armed Forces’ campaign to liberate their nation and end the Saudi-led blockade could be one of the most important events for the Arab world in decades. Not only will it have major implications for the ongoing regional war, but it also has the potential to dramatically reshape the region.

In July, the collapse of the Yemen-Saudi ceasefire agreement, which had been in place since 2022, was triggered by a strategic mistake committed by Riyadh. While Iran sought to break the inhuman blockade on Yemen through landing civilian airliners in the nation’s capital, Saudi Arabia’s air force rushed to bombard Sanaa International Airport. The Saudis may not have known it, but their irrational actions strung them up in a strategically placed trap.

Not only had the Sanaa government been coordinating a general mobilization, but its Armed Forces decided to directly retaliate by striking vital Saudi oil infrastructure and imposing a counter-blockade on their opponents to the north. The Yemeni Armed Forces then decided to take it a step further, committing round-the-clock ballistic missile and drone strikes that inflicted hundreds of casualties on Saudi-proxy forces inside Yemen and even advanced to liberate more of their nation’s territory.

Saudi Arabia is now unable to transit the Bab al-Mandab Strait, and its ability to export oil has been severed, representing a serious economic blow. Riyadh is now facing an unprecedented predicament, as Ansar Allah imposes an equation whereby Saudi violations of Yemeni airspace are met with direct strikes on oil infrastructure.

The reason why this all matters so much is that since 2015, the so-called “International Community” has rallied behind Saudi Arabia and its GCC allies. The global media have also participated in the facade, pretending as if some rebel group that they call “the Houthis” were fighting against an “internationally recognized government.” Why they kept up their lies is simple: without full control over their nation and its resources, the Sanaa government was simply not as valuable a partner as the Arab Gulf States, so everyone played along.

Nobody cared to point out that “the Houthis” is not an accurate name for Ansar Allah, that they aren’t simply a group of “rebels” but run a government that rules over the largest portion of the Yemeni population, or that two-thirds of the nation’s Armed Forces sided with them. Neither will they tell you that the so-called “Yemen Presidential Leadership Council” was created in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Riyadh and that its undemocratically selected leader lives in Saudi Arabia.

In fact, the idea that the Saudi-proxy forces in Yemen are the legitimate representatives of the nation and are somehow a sovereign government is even more outlandish than when most of the Western world randomly decided that Juan Guaidó was the “internationally recognised” President of Venezuela.

But none of this will even end up mattering if Ansar Allah succeeds in uniting Yemen and reaching an agreement to liberate its territory from its US-Israeli-backed aggressors. The reason why the Arab regimes, alongside the US-UK-EU-Israeli alliance, have fought against the government in Sanaa is that they all fear the consequences of their success.

Yemen will be the only Arab nation that will not only oppose US imperialism and support the regional resistance, but will also actively fight the Israelis and work to combat the “Greater Israel Project.” The only Arab government that dared to open fire on the Israelis or impose a blockade on them, in support of Gaza, was the Sanaa government in Yemen. All the others that fought for Gaza were non-state actors.

A strong and united Yemen, with access to its resources and the ability to continue developing its military capabilities, will without a doubt be the biggest threat to US-Israeli hegemony in the Arab World. Yet, it will also spell another equation: it could well serve as an example to populations throughout the region, as to what is possible if the people fight for their liberation. No prospect frightens the Arab regimes more than this.

The impact Yemen can have on global trade, oil markets, regional power equations and ultimately the Palestinian cause for national liberation, all have the Zionist allied powers shaking in their boots. For so long, the Yemeni issue has been ignored, but that could soon dramatically change.

August 16, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why you are being lied to about Yemen and the implications of its liberation

BBC censored film on British Army killing child

By Anne Cadwallader | Declassified UK | August 12, 2026

The very highest levels of the British government secretly exerted pressure on the BBC to censor a film about the army killing an unarmed child in 1972.

Official documents, recently discovered by the Pat Finucane Centre, also show the British Army was aware, shortly after the killing in Derry, that the boy had been killed at “point blank” range by an immensely powerful machine-gun.

However, the Ministry of Defence falsely informed an inquest into his death that he was shot from 25 meters away by a soldier who thought the boy was armed.

The case revolves around the shooting dead of 15-year-old Danny Hegarty during “Operation Motorman” in the early hours of July 31, 1972, as the British Army moved in to clear barricades and retake “no go” areas in the city that had previously been under IRA control.

A BBC Panorama reporter, Alan Hart (now deceased), had filmed people in Derry questioning the British Army’s account of how Hegarty was shot twice in the head and how his cousin accompanying him, Christopher, was wounded (another cousin, Thomas, was unscathed).

Pressure had begun mounting on the BBC after Hart had asked the British Army in Derry for an official response.

Hart had told the army how “everybody that he spoke to emphasised that it was impossible that the lad or his cousin…were carrying arms or explosives.”

He said Hegarty was from a “deeply religious Catholic family [who] have been actively preaching the Fifth Commandment — ‘Thou shalt not kill’ — and their peace overtures were well known.”

Hart’s request was referred to Donald Maitland, press secretary to the then prime minister, Edward Heath.

Maitland responded by telling a Northern Ireland Office (NIO) press spokesman, one R.J.Seaman, to “seek to persuade Panorama not to include this tragic incident in the projected programme.”

The NIO, said Maitland, was responsible for dealing with the BBC request as it was the secretary of state for Northern Ireland, William Whitelaw, who had asked people in Derry to stay at home during “Operation Motorman.”

The Panorama programme went ahead on Aug. 7, 1972, without Hart’s evidence from Derry.

‘Major Effort’

Seaman’s memo of the following day told the Ministry of Defence: “After a major effort, the NIO managed to get the item removed from Monday’s programme.”

The Aug. 8th memo also stated that the Royal Scots soldier (known only by the cypher “Soldier B”) had shot Hegarty with his “General Purpose Machine-Gun” at point-blank range (between “6-9 feet”).

This flatly contradicts statements given by the military authorities in 1973, at the first inquest into Hegarty’s killing, when they claimed (supported by a map of the area) that he had been shot from further away — 25 meters — and from the opposite side of the street.

The 18-year-old soldier who fired the fatal bullets (now deceased) said in evidence to the October 1973 inquest: “I cocked the weapon and when the youths were about 25 metres away I aimed at the leading man and fired a quick burst of 3 x 7.62 rounds.”

The inquest recorded an open verdict but a later, highly critical, report from the Historical Enquiries Team (HET) led to a second inquest in 2011. After a five-day hearing, the jury found:

  • There were no shouted warnings to the three cousins
  • The boys were unarmed and posed no risk to the soldiers
  • The soldiers failed to give medical assistance or conduct a search for alleged weapons.

Further, the HET found that the police had failed to carry out any forensic tests on the oldest boy, Thomas, who survived unscathed.

“Given,” said the HET report, “that the reason advanced for the shooting was that the youths were perceived to be a threat… this seems to have been an extraordinary omission.”

There was no attempt by the police, says the HET report, to interview the soldiers involved.

The police investigation, it said, failed to obtain clothing and forensic swabs from Thomas Hegarty, failed to take samples from the staining on the pavement, failed to recover bullet cases reportedly found at the scene, failed to obtain a timely photographic record and failed to examine the weapon used to shoot Daniel and Christopher.

Taken together, the HET said it showed the authorities unquestioningly accepted the soldier’s accounts.

‘Serious Questions’

In 2007, the British government apologised to the Hegarty family for describing Daniel as a terrorist and a Ministry of Defence document, assessing the Army’s role in Northern Ireland (“Operation Banner), also corrected its claim that the 15-year-old was armed.

Paul O’Connor, of the Pat Finucane Centre, said: “There was complicity between the MoD, police, NIO, Prime Minister’s office and the Attorney General who were all aware of the disputed circumstances of the shooting.

“The BBC itself has serious questions to answer since it self-censored an item that should have rung alarm bells. The admission that the NIO ‘managed to get the item removed’ is clear evidence of a concerted effort to hide the truth.”

Ironically, there was never any question locally of Danny Hegarty being one of the large group of young rioters in Derry at the time.

His father, Alexander, explained to the HET that Daniel had often helped him and the police in informal early morning patrols of the Creggan estate to head off trouble before it erupted.

Further, Alexander Hegarty told the HET that , two years before he was shot, Daniel had assisted police in the recovery of stolen arms.

By killing his son and giving a false account of the circumstances of the shooting, the British Army seems to have alienated the rapidly dwindling number of Derry citizens willing to give them a fair wind.

Anne Cadwallader has been a journalist in Ireland, North and South, for the last 40 years, working for the BBC, RTE, The Irish Press, and Reuters. She was previously an advocacy case worker at the Pat Finucane Centre, a non-party political, anti-sectarian human rights group advocating a non-violent resolution of the conflict in Ireland.

August 15, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , | Comments Off on BBC censored film on British Army killing child

British taxpayers unknowingly subsidize therapy for Israeli soldiers: Report

The Cradle | August 14, 2026

UK taxpayers are unknowingly subsidizing “therapeutic healing” and psychological treatment of Israeli soldiers who served in Gaza, Declassified UK reported on 13 August.

The investigation revealed that an undisclosed sum reached the Yahalom Foundation, an Israeli veterans group serving the Israeli military engineering unit, through a British charity, with the government adding a further 25 percent under the Gift Aid scheme.

That additional quarter comes from the British government, which administers Gift Aid through His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

Barred as a foreign organization from claiming Gift Aid itself, the foundation instructs its British supporters to send money instead through UK Toremet, a charity registered in Britain.

Emails written by its head of fundraising call Toremet a “registered partner platform” that handles donations on the foundation’s behalf, telling donors that giving this way secures “full tax recognition and enabled Gift Aid.”

The projects put to British donors include a £5,000 (around $6,746) “therapeutic healing journey” for soldiers coming out of Gaza, individual psychological treatments, and a £100,000 (around $134,909) hall commemorating dead Israeli soldiers.

Records from two years earlier show British money also flowed toward equipment for troops still in service, with one fundraising page telling donors their help would buy more specialized kit to supply to the soldiers. Whether Gift Aid was added to those donations is unclear.

The Charity Commission has previously warned that raising funds for a soldier of a foreign military is neither lawful nor acceptable for a charity.

The disclosures deepen the scrutiny already surrounding UK Toremet, which since 2016 has been the subject of three regulatory compliance cases brought by the Charity Commission over its work in occupied Palestine.

The regulator has since opened an inquiry into eight British charities operating in illegal Israeli settlements.

UK-registered charities are promoting programs that send young British Jews into illegal settlements in occupied Palestine and put them through Israeli army training, according to an investigation by Middle East Eye (MEE) published in July.

The United Jewish Israel Appeal (UJIA), whose stated aim is to inspire young Jews to build a relationship with Israel, routes participants into Marva, an army-run course in which they spend weeks living on a military base and undergoing basic training. Bnei Akiva, meanwhile, houses its gap-year students in a West Bank settlement and drills them for military service.

The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) told MEE that the activities breach international law, describing Marva as closer to “pre-enlistment military training” than cultural exchange.

The pattern is not new, with The Guardian reporting in July last year that the Kasner Charitable Trust had moved £5.7 million (around $7.69 million) to a religious school inside the illegal settlement of Susya near Hebron through the conduit charity UK Toremet, in donations made between 2017 and 2021.

The Charity Commission told the outlet that operating in the occupied Palestinian territories is not in itself a criminal offense or a breach of charity law.

August 14, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , | Comments Off on British taxpayers unknowingly subsidize therapy for Israeli soldiers: Report

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »