About International Guarantees that Shed Lebanese’ Blood
By Ali Shoeib, translated by Al-Manar English Website | August 9, 2025
On August 10, 2006, the story of the “Marjeyoun Survival” turned into a dark page in the history of the conflict with the Israeli enemy.
The Israeli occupation army raided Marjeyoun barracks on that day, when Lebanon was subjected to a brutal Israeli war that lasted for 33 days. The occupation forces took over the barracks without any resistance from the Lebanese troops and security forces who laid down their arms.
It was agreed that the town, which is 8 km away from the border with occupied Palestine, would be safely evacuated, and that the Israeli enemy would not attack the convoy, as stipulated by the guarantees presented via the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
These guarantees, brokered by the United States and France, were allegedly intended to remove the Lebanese forces who were detained at the barracks, along with stranded civilians, from the danger zone. But what happened was a resounding shock!
The convoy had set out on August 11 (2006). It was escorted by two UNIFIL vehicles.
Instead of escaping, Israeli enemy aircraft pursued the convoy of approximately 759 vehicles after it reached the Western Bekaa Valley, brutally targeting them and turning their path into a massacre.
The attack, which was conducted with nine bombs, resulted in the deaths of at least seven people, wounding of at least 36 and the destruction of a number of vehicles.
That attack in 2006 was a harsh lesson that says it all about the conflict with an enemy that does not abide by any covenant or pact, as the false US-French guarantees given to the Lebanese government at the time were merely an illusion and a deception.
The Marjeyoun convoy attack confirms a solid fact: The enemy cannot be trusted, and all international guarantees or regional promises aimed at disarming the resistance are merely a temporary cover for achieving the enemy’s goals, which seeks nothing but a moment of weakness that will enable it to achieve what it has been unable to achieve during the latest war in late 2024.
Our history is replete with examples that show that surrendering power is an open invitation to aggression. When the resistance is disarmed, the homeland is left exposed to the enemy’s ambitions.
Weapons are not just a combat tool, but rather a “symbol of the national will to defend the homeland and protect the sovereignty,” and resistance is the last line of defense.
The Marjeyoun convoy attack has proven that relying on international promises, in the absence of a real deterrent force, is a bet on defeat. Anyone who places their security in the hands of the enemy is willingly committing suicide, and we do not want to commit suicide.
Scott Ritter: Russia Ends Limits on Intermediate-Range Missiles & Changes the Balance of Power
Glenn Diesen | August 8, 2025
Scott Ritter is a former Major, Intelligence Officer, and UN Weapons Inspector. Ritter argues that the balance of power in Europe will shift as Russia announces it will no longer abide by the self-imposed restrictions on the deployment of nuclear-capable intermediate-range missiles.
RFK Jr. Ends Financial Incentives for Hospitals That Report Staff Vaccination Rates
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | August 4, 2025
The federal government will no longer financially reward hospitals for reporting the vaccination rates of their staff, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on Aug. 1. According to the press release, the incentive system was “coercive and denied informed consent.”
U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said:
“Medical decisions should be made based on one thing: the wellbeing of the person — never on a financial bonus or a government mandate. … Doctors deserve the freedom to use their training, follow the science, and speak the truth — without fear of punishment.”
The move repeals a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) inpatient payment policy created during the Biden administration that tied hospital reimbursement to COVID-19 vaccination reporting.
Under the old policy, hospitals didn’t just collect the data and hold it internally. They published the data on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network — the “nation’s most widely used healthcare-associated infection tracking system,” where it was used “as a tool for public shaming, not public health,” the press release said.
CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz applauded the repeal.
“Doctors and other providers should have the same autonomy to choose what’s right for their own individual health care needs as the patients for whom they care,” Oz said. “Today’s announcement helps put that power back in their hands.”
HHS said the repeal is part of the agency’s broader efforts to “restore medical autonomy in federally funded programs and root out financial and regulatory pressures that incentivize physicians towards pre-scripted medical decisions rather than individualized, evidence-based care.”
CMS estimated that the annual burden of collecting the data across 3,050 hospitals was between $1,378,600 and $1,608,570.
Trial Site News noted that HHS’ press release didn’t cite evidence supporting the allegation that requiring hospitals to report vaccination data had been used to shame them, but said such evidence may exist.
According to Trial Site News :
“This policy rollback is more than bureaucratic housekeeping — it’s a reflection of a national reckoning. The American people grew weary of the top-down, one-size-fits-all vaccination regime advanced by HHS agencies like the FDA and CDC during the COVID-19 era.
“What was framed as public health became, in the eyes of many, a vehicle for coercion, censorship, and loss of personal agency. … The rise of RFK Jr. to lead HHS isn’t a fluke; it’s a clear mandate from the public demanding medical freedom, transparency, and an end to government overreach disguised as science.”
Jon Fleetwood wrote in a Substack post today that the change suggests HHS may be restructuring how it relates to the medical community. The agency “now favors decentralization and professional freedom over command-and-control enforcement,” he said.
Many hospital workers resisted COVID vaccine
The issue of COVID-19 vaccination mandates for hospital staff has been contentious.
Earlier this year, the Court of Appeals of the State of Kansas ruled that Saint Luke’s Health Systems improperly fired an employee when it rejected her request for a religious exemption from the hospital system’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
In 2021, over 100 hospital workers in Texas sued their employer for requiring them to get a COVID-19 shot, alleging the mandate forced them to “subject themselves to medical experimentation as a prerequisite to feeding their families.”
The same year, a New Jersey hospital system fired over 100 employees who refused to get a COVID-19 shot.
In 2023, CMS eliminated COVID-19 mandates for healthcare workers. Since then, healthcare worker COVID-19 vaccination rates have dropped.
Last fall, roughly 85% of healthcare workers declined a COVID-19 booster, according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary.
Will HHS eliminate vaccine incentives for pediatricians?
The HHS policy change didn’t reference an incentive program that rewards pediatricians who follow the CDC childhood immunization schedule. Kennedy raised the issue last month during an interview with Tucker Carlson.
But Polly Tommey, program director for Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) CHD.TV, brought it up during her testimony last month at a U.S. Senate hearing on vaccine injury.
“We need our pediatricians to stop getting bonuses for vaccinating our children,” said Tommey, whose son was injured by a childhood vaccine.
CHD Chief Scientific Officer Brian Hooker, who also has a vaccine-injured son and testified during the Senate hearing, said pediatricians can receive hundreds of dollars for each fully vaccinated child, depending on certain factors.
CHD CEO Mary Holland said in a recent interview with OAN News that vaccine incentives for pediatricians have “completely distorted” pediatric care.
“A pediatrician with a large practice of thousands of children in it can earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, really serious money, by having a 90% or a 95% uptake rate,” Holland said.
AAP tells doctors it’s ok to drop patients if parents refuse to follow vaccine schedule
A recent investigation by The Defender found that high vaccination rates are key to a profitable pediatric practice, according to data from insurance incentive structures and an analysis of a pediatric practice’s income.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), in a 2016 report on “Countering Vaccine Hesitancy,” told pediatricians that it was an “acceptable option” to dismiss families who refused to vaccinate their children.
The AAP receives funding from numerous vaccine makers, including AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, GSK, Merck, Moderna and Pfizer, according to data compiled by White Rose Intelligence.
Last month, the AAP sued Kennedy and other HHS officials over the decision to no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for healthy kids and pregnant women.
On July 28, the AAP issued a policy statement urging states to eliminate all non-medical exemptions to vaccination requirements for school kids, including religious and conscience-based exemptions.
When The Defender asked HHS if it planned to eliminate financial pressure tied to pediatric vaccination reporting, an HHS spokesperson said the agency “continues to evaluate solutions that align with current public health priorities and the best available scientific evidence.”
Related articles in The Defender
- Court Rules Against Hospital That Fired Woman for Refusing COVID Vaccine
- Are Vaccines Big Money-Makers for Pediatricians? RFK Jr. Comment During Interview With Tucker Carlson Sparks New Debate
- ‘We Get Paid to Vaccinate Your Children’: Pediatrician Reveals Details of Big Pharma Payola Scheme
- Pediatricians Get Paid to Push Vaccines — and It’s No Small Amount of Cash
- CHD Funds Lawsuit Against CDC Over Program That Forces Pediatricians to Give COVID Vaccines to Kids on Medicaid
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
New Delhi between sanctions and sovereignty
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 8, 2025
In a world where the international order is increasingly shaped by the struggle between a declining unipolarity and an emerging multipolarity, sanctions have become the main weapon of a superpower that can no longer dictate the course of global affairs by consensus. What was once an exception — economic punishment against states clearly involved in illegal activities or blatant violations of international norms — has become a systemic, arbitrary, and politically motivated practice. And India is now the latest target of this coercive apparatus that defines the foreign policy of the United States.
The repeated use of sanctions by Washington reveals, above all, the exhaustion of its diplomatic capacity. Instead of building bridges with strategic partners, the U.S. chooses to punish, isolate, and sabotage any country that dares to follow an autonomous path.
Sanctions policy as a mechanism of domination
U.S. unilateral sanctions — almost always imposed outside the UN Security Council and in defiance of international law — have become a systematic policy of intimidation. Iran, Cuba, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Russia, and China have been the most well-known targets. But the list keeps growing. And India, previously seen as a potential Western ally in the Indo-Pacific, is now beginning to feel the weight of this punitive system.
The logic is simple: the U.S. identifies an “unacceptable” behavior — such as India’s refusal to join the sanctions against Russia — and from there constructs a narrative to justify pressure measures. It could be the defense of “human rights,” the “fight against terrorism,” or, as is now being done with India, the “war on drugs.” The content of the narrative is secondary; what matters is the effect: to break the sovereignty of the targeted country and force it to align with Washington’s foreign policy.
India: the new frontier of coercion
In recent days, Donald Trump has announced sanction packages of up to 50% against India, citing the “need” to punish trade partners of the Russian Federation. These coercive measures came after months of open threats toward India — some directly referencing the Indo-Russian partnership, others hiding behind the mask of the “fight against fentanyl.”
Although the recently announced sanctions are explicitly directed at Indo-Russian energy trade, there’s no guarantee that the U.S. will abandon the fentanyl rhetoric altogether. The “drug control” excuse may easily be revived at any moment to impose further sanctions on New Delhi, especially considering that this was Washington’s initial justification before Trump finally admitted the real motive: punishing India for its ties with Russia.
It must be emphasized that what brought India into Washington’s sanction crosshairs was not any real connection to fentanyl trafficking, but rather its strategic resilience in the face of Western efforts to isolate Russia. Since 2022, India has maintained firm energy and military cooperation with Moscow, refusing to take part in the U.S. and EU-led anti-Russian crusade. This pragmatic position — based on Indian national interests rather than ideological dogma — deeply irritated the Washington establishment.
In response, the U.S. began floating the idea that chemical exports from India could be diverted for fentanyl production — a claim made without solid evidence, but politically convenient. In a classic move, they attempt to turn a country with no proven role in fentanyl trafficking into part of the “drug problem,” paving the way for tariffs and trade restrictions.
This is Washington’s new modus operandi: transform internal crises — in this case, the collapse of the U.S. healthcare system and the opioid epidemic — into diplomatic weapons to force other nations to serve its strategic interests.
Rapprochement with Russia and China: India’s geopolitical response
In the face of this escalation, India appears to have understood the game — and is beginning to react astutely. Not only has it maintained and expanded its agreements with Russia, but it has also signaled a renewed openness to dialogue with China, having Prime Minister Modi announced a visit to Beijing.
This is a geopolitically significant move. India and China have long had a tense relationship, especially concerning the Himalayan border. But in the face of a common enemy — the global regime of unilateral sanctions that threatens the sovereignty of both — realism is starting to prevail. India already plays an active role in forums such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the G20, but now signals a willingness to deepen its coordination with both Beijing and Moscow.
This marks the emergence of a “new” strategic triangle in the Global South — not based on ideological affinity, but on a shared need to resist the economic coercion promoted by the West. India is not becoming an automatic ally of China, but rather a situational partner in building a multipolar order, where the right to chart one’s own path is no longer subject to Washington’s approval.
Fragmentation of the global system and alternatives to the dollar
This strategic reconfiguration is happening in parallel with the fragmentation of the global financial system. As more countries begin operating outside the SWIFT system, pursue bilateral trade agreements in local currencies, and strengthen alternative development banks, the power of unilateral sanctions is beginning to erode. India has already signed agreements with Russia, Iran, and the UAE to trade in rupees, bypassing the U.S. dollar. BRICS+, with the potential creation of a common currency, is moving in the same direction.
By abusing sanctions as a tool, Washington is accelerating this process. In its attempt to maintain control, it ends up stimulating the formation of new centers of economic and diplomatic power — exactly the opposite of its intended outcome.
The end of the American consensus
The attempt to punish India over a crisis that is, above all, the result of domestic failure in the U.S., is not only an act of hypocrisy but also a major strategic miscalculation. Instead of isolating India, the U.S. is driving it deeper into multilateral frameworks that challenge Western hegemony.
New Delhi has made it clear it will not be turned into a geopolitical vassal. India is a civilizational power with its own interests and will not hesitate to forge partnerships — even with historical rivals — if it means securing strategic autonomy.
Sanctions, once presented as instruments of international justice, have become the primary mechanism for imposing a failed global order — one that seeks to preserve historical privileges at the expense of national sovereignty. The economic attacks on India over its strategic ties with Russia are just one example of this broader reality.
But a new world is taking shape. A world where countries like India, Russia, and China are building bridges over ruins — converging not out of ideological alignment, but from the urgent need to resist the systemic coercion of a declining empire. National sovereignty, more and more, will be asserted not through submission, but through coordinated resistance to the language of sanctions.
India understands this. And by responding with dignity and pragmatism, it shows that the path to strategic independence necessarily involves rejecting the arbitrary use of sanctions as a weapon of economic warfare. The multipolar world is under construction — and there is no room in it for domination disguised as moralism.
Panic and production cuts at Pentagon suppliers as China tightens exports
Inside China Business | August 7, 2025
Forever wars in the Middle East, and now in Ukraine, have drained NATO arsenals. But while the US and NATO countries have made giant pledges to boost defense spending, China’s export bans on critical materials are blowing up supply chains for Pentagon weapons makers.
Resources and links:
Wall Street Journal, China Is Still Choking Exports of Rare Earths Despite Pact With U.S. https://www.wsj.com/world/china/china…
Wall Street Journal, China Is Choking Supply of Critical Minerals to Western Defense Companies https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/china-…
Zerohedge, China’s Grip On Critical Minerals Disrupts U.S. Defense Supply Chain https://www.zerohedge.com/military/ch…
78% of US military weapon systems vulnerable to China’s critical mineral dominance https://theoregongroup.com/commoditie…
Nearly one in 10 ‘Tier 1’ subcontractors to defense primes are Chinese firms: Report https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/n…
China Adds 28 U.S. Defense Companies to Export Controls List https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/ch…
Defence expenditures and NATO’s 5% commitment https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/to…
Antimony Is A Strategic Metal That Is Critical For The Defense Industry & The West Doesn’t Have Much https://robertsinn.substack.com/p/ant…
How real is the U.S. rhetoric of a ‘Unified Syria’?
By Erkin Oncan | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 7, 2025
The recent statements by the U.S. Special Envoy for Syria, Thomas Barrack, may at first glance appear to reflect diplomatic commitment, but developments on the ground and the U.S.’s covert alliances reveal that this rhetoric is largely a propaganda maneuver.
Speaking to the Associated Press, Barrack emphasized that the “deaths and massacres” on both sides of the conflict in southern Syria are unacceptable, stating: “I believe the current Syrian government, which is a new government with very few resources to address the emerging issues, is doing the best it can.”
However, if we are to speak of “territorial integrity” in the context of a new Syria, it is clear that the U.S.’s de facto policy in Syria actually serves to strengthen structures that weaken the country’s territorial unity. On the ground, the U.S. has established a fragile balance between Syria’s new government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). While this balance may give the appearance of localized stability in the short term, it carries the potential to pave the way for Syria’s long-term fragmentation. These entities are ideologically, ethnically, and politically at odds, with starkly conflicting expectations for a new Syria.
Red Lines in the Damascus—SDF Talks
The Damascus administration’s plans to integrate the SDF into the New Syrian Army, dismantle its autonomous structure, and transfer control of northeastern resources (oil, borders, educational institutions) to the Syrian state are clear.
The SDF, meanwhile, although it continues its contacts with the new Syrian administration, maintains a series of “red lines”: preserving autonomous administration, integrating its forces into the army independently of the central command, receiving a share of resources, and maintaining control over the borders.
In this scenario, the U.S. — a power that has provided extensive military and political support to both sides over time — appears to be attempting to “gloss over” this deeply uncertain process with diplomatic statements and messages of goodwill.
Israel’s Proxy Strategy
Israel, which has effectively “entered” the Syrian arena through the Suwayda clashes, likely sees the criticisms voiced by its greatest ally’s special envoy as a mere formality. Israel’s main strategy here is to sever southern Syria from Damascus and create new zones of control via proxy forces under the pretext of border security.
In other words, while there is rhetorical emphasis on a “Unified Syria,” what is being built on the ground is an increasingly entrenched multi-structure reality. A possible agreement between the SDF and HTS (Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham), for example, is not just about two armed groups sitting at the negotiating table; it encapsulates the conflicting interests of regional and global actors.
The negotiations between the SDF and HTS do not only involve these two actors; the balance includes the intervention of the U.S., Israel, and Turkey. Turkey, operating on the assumption that these negotiations will proceed parallel to the PKK’s disarmament process, seeks to secure its “share” in the governance of the new Syria.
The SDF, which received the most comprehensive support from the U.S. during the Trump era, is aware that such direct military and political backing may not continue under the Democrats. Furthermore, Washington’s regional priorities have shifted. Therefore, the SDF is striving to secure a balanced but strong position against HTS, with the primary goal of ensuring its continued existence. It is among the claims reported in Israeli and regional media that the group has engaged in a series of meetings not only with the U.S. but also with Israel.
Israel, for its part, is determined to exploit the “power vacuum” emerging in the new Syria to the fullest extent. What began under the guise of border security has now merged with Israel’s structural expansionist policy. Should Israel decide to “accelerate” its operations in Syria, it is well aware that Damascus may not be able to mount a serious resistance.
Is the Damascus Government Falling Short?
The new government led by Shara has so far failed to demonstrate the capacity to bear the role of “new leadership.” It faces a governance crisis, ethnic massacres that have sparked international condemnation, ongoing clashes with Israel, and severe economic issues.
Thus, the Damascus government finds itself compelled to “find middle ground” with the SDF, the U.S., and even Israel in order to secure its hold on power.
Within this equation, the perception of Iran as the “primary threat” on a regional level offers significant clues about the future of current power struggles.
The “Iran Threat” Will Determine the Balance
Despite suffering a severe blow with the fall of the Assad regime, Iran remains one of the strongest actors in the region. The SDF’s potential to serve as an “independent balancing force” against Iran perfectly aligns with the interests of the Tel Aviv—Washington axis. Therefore, in negotiations between the SDF and Damascus, the scenario in which the SDF’s demands gain weight and the central government’s power is curtailed is highly probable.
Despite the U.S.’s diplomatic calls for “unity,” the SDF’s de facto autonomy, its capacity to continue negotiations with Damascus thanks to current power balances, and the U.S.—Israel strategy of positioning against Iran all stand in the way of any real unification of Syria. Under current circumstances, it is nearly impossible for the new Syrian government under Shara to evolve into a stable and functioning structure. Ongoing military, political, and economic crises, coupled with the overarching “main threat is Iran” strategy, necessitate the continuation of the existing fragmented structure.
In conclusion, Washington’s rhetoric of a “Unified Syria” is largely propagandistic when viewed in light of the multilayered web of interests and covert alliances on the ground. With the U.S. and Israel seeking to expand the anti-Iran front, the scenario in which the SDF continues to play a strong role outside the framework of the central government remains the most likely outcome.
The US wants Lebanon, Gaza and Iraq to disarm and will fail
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | August 7, 2025
The US Trump administration not only believes it can disarm Hezbollah, the PMU, and Hamas, but that they will all do so voluntarily. To add to this delusional approach, they continue to demonstrate that by abandoning their weapons, the people of the region will be subjected to endless instability.
Washington based think-tanks are pushing for the dismantlement of the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance through disarmament, the policy being clearly designed to isolate the Islamic Republic in order to also force it into capitulation. However, the approach to achieving this goal is so incredibly out of touch that it may achieve the very opposite results.
Using its Arab Regime allies, particularly the Gulf States, to apply pressure, US envoy Steve Witkoff has attempted to demand of Hamas that it fully disarm. This has been combined with calls from the Pentagon and Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, for Iraq to dismantle the Popular Mobilization Forces and prevent them from integrating fully within the fold of Baghdad’s security apparatus. Then we have the attempt to disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon, an effort led by US envoy Tom Barrack.
Starting with Gaza, the request in and of itself is simply not serious. The al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas would never simply disarm without any guarantees or processes to ensure the protection of the people of the Gaza Strip.
In fact, if we look at the resistance in its entirety in Gaza, they fight as one unit that is inseparable from the people’s popular will. Hamas is no longer just a political party, the al-Qassam Brigades armed wing of Hamas is now the resistance of a people suffering through a genocide.
Also, the Palestinian people have the example of the West Bank and what the situation looks like when the resistance is disarmed and abandons the struggle. When Israeli settlements expand, annexation orders are imposed, and ethnic cleansing begins, there will be nobody to even fight back.
The lessons taught to the Palestinian factions in Gaza were learnt in 1982. When the Israelis invaded Lebanon, killing around 20,000 Lebanese and Palestinians, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) eventually decided to hand over its weapons and its leadership to flee to Tunisia.
Almost immediately afterwards, a series of bloody civilian massacres took place against Palestinian refugees and the Shia Lebanese, killing thousands at a time when no considerable resistance force existed to fight back. Then, the Israelis occupied southern Lebanon.
Hezbollah was born in 1985 out of this experience, as an organic southern resistance which would eventually expel the occupiers in 2000. After the 2006 defeat inflicted on the Zionist regime, the Israelis dared not launch any major aggression against Lebanon for the best part of 17 years.
In the case of Iraq, the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) were formed in order to put down the Daesh insurgency and liberate the country from a wave of Takfiri death squads. It is a massive force today which exists as a protective mechanism that deters the return of such groups from the country.
Attempting to disband the PMU in Iraq is impossible by force and would lead to a civil war style situation, which could end up resulting in Iraqi groups securing even greater power and popular support inside of the country.
In the case of Lebanon, the fall of Syria’s former government and the way the US has so far handled the situation, has taught the diverse population valuable lessons. Even if the Lebanese leadership will work alongside the US in an attempt to seize Hezbollah’s weapons, it is clear to the populace that disarmament leaves Lebanon open to invasion from Syria and places the country at the will of the Zionist Entity.
If we look over to neighboring Syria, immediately upon the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, the Zionists invaded and have been attacking at will inside Syria ever since, with no resistance whatsoever. The new regime in Damascus even works alongside the Israelis as they steal more of its land, instead choosing to allow their allied militias to butcher minority communities throughout Syrian lands.
Everything we have seen occur across the region over the past 22 months, with the full support of the United States, teaches the Arab public that capitulation spells the end of their nations and leaves them vulnerable to endless abuses.
It appears, however, that officials and pro-war think-tanks in Washington are not capable of grasping what the reality on the ground truly looks like and how this could very quickly spiral out of control; and not in the US’ favor. None of these groups which form the Axis of Resistance are going to abandon their own people by simply handing over their weapons, especially given the overtly stated intentions of their enemies.
John Fetterman, a hawkish US senator who represents Americans but speaks for Israel

By Musa Iqbal | Press TV | August 7, 2025
It is no secret that the political apparatus of the United States is teeming with Zionists.
While some politicians are sleek in their support for the Zionist Occupation (with politically convenient cries for ‘civility’ in Palestine and the rest of the region), others are completely devoted to a maximalist Zionist agenda – advocating for Zionist expansion, aggression, and total servitude to Israeli interests – no matter their maximalist goals.
Among the latter is US Senator John Fetterman, a hawkish politician who once campaigned as a “progressive,” but has now turned into the Israeli occupation’s most darling Democratic cheerleader and an unofficial mouthpiece and apologist of the genocidal child-murdering regime.
Fetterman’s unwavering support for Israel, which comes with belligerent calls for war against Iran, betrays the very principles he once claimed to champion.
During the election cycle that put him into power, progressive groups had rallied around Fetterman as a “working man” that most Americans could relate to. They could not have been more wrong.
Fetterman, often skulking the halls of the US Capitol in a hoodie and gym shorts, has become the poster child for the US political establishment’s subservience to the Zionist project and its reckless drive toward regional hegemony in Western Asia.
Fetterman has shown total support with each new act of Zionist terror, something his constituents are increasingly condemning.
His rhetoric, particularly his enthusiastic endorsement of Israel’s military actions and his calls for US involvement in illegal and unprovoked strikes on Iran, is not only a betrayal of his constituents but a dangerous escalation that threatens to give more support to an increasingly belligerent Israeli occupation entity as it faces an existential crisis.
He has draped himself in the Israeli flag on several occasions—literally and figuratively—while dismissing calls for a ceasefire and championing Israel’s so-called “right to defend itself” against a besieged, starving population.
Perhaps as a hat-tip to his pro-Israeli donors, his office walls are covered with posters of Israeli captives held by the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, further serving as a shrine to a one-sided narrative that erases the decades-long suffering of Palestinians under occupation.
To compare, there are tens of thousands of Palestinian hostages in Zionist prisons, a sizeable amount of them being Palestinian youth.
Speaking of donors, Fetterman has unapologetically collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Zionist lobby. Based on the data organized by Track AIPAC, Fetterman has received over $370,000 in donations from Israeli-associated PACs and donors, with one of his top donors being JStreetPAC, which donated $175k in 2024 alone.
Donations of this caliber suggest extreme levels of loyalty to furthering Israeli settler-colonial interests in the power corridors of Washington – from domestic policy fighting against Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) efforts to foreign policy warmongering on behalf of the American-Israeli axis of evil.
It also aligns with Fetterman’s refusal to acknowledge the Palestinian death toll—over 150,000 by some estimates, including thousands of children—while fixating on Israeli victims reveals a moral bankruptcy that aligns him with the most hawkish elements of the US political spectrum.
Fetterman ghoulishly refuses to acknowledge the catastrophic loss of life, insisting that “now is not the time to talk about a ceasefire.”
Clearly, Fetterman’s loyalty to the Zionist cause goes as far as deliberate endorsement of collective punishment of innocent Palestinians, including children and women, a policy that violates international law.
Of course, being in line with the Zionist occupation’s expansionist interests, Fetterman’s zeal for Israel does not stop at Gaza. He has cheered on for US military aggression against Iran, celebrating the bombings against Iran’s peaceful nuclear program and threatening that Israel can continue to assassinate its nuclear scientists with his and other US politicians’ approval.
In his March 2025 visit to the occupied territories, Fetterman told journalists in Jerusalem al-Quds that he supports “partnering with Israel to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities,” urging the US to “blow it up.”
His rhetoric continued to escalate, including in June 2025, when he called for Israel to assassinate the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei. Such statements are not the musings of a principled senator but the ravings of a warmonger eager to appease the Zionist war machine and its patrons in Washington.
Fetterman’s rhetoric must be seen in the context of the broader US-Israel agenda to neutralize Iran as a regional power, especially as the latter secures critical economic alliances such as a place in BRICS and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization).
For decades, the US and its Zionist ally have sought to undermine Iran’s sovereignty, from crippling, high-pressure sanctions to covert sabotage operations and outright military threats.
Fetterman’s calls for illegal and unjustified strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, which Iran maintains are for peaceful energy purposes, echo the same discredited playbook used to justify the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the bombing of Libya, the destruction of Yugoslavia, etc.
The threat of a nuclear bomb armed Iran is a propaganda campaign orchestrated by Washington and Tel Aviv to justify aggression while ignoring Israel’s undeclared nuclear arsenal, a violation of international norms, and a total means to destabilize the region.
The hypocrisy of Fetterman’s position declares the official US policy for the area: Israel’s nuclear capabilities are strategic and protect American interests, but Iran’s pursuit of energy independence is an intolerable existential threat.
Fetterman, in his blind allegiance to Israel, seems unperturbed by the realities of what the execution of this US-led policy would look like, choosing to ignore the total rupture of the region, plunging the US into a war it would not understand or be prepared for – Iran is not Iraq, Libya, or Afghanistan.
It is a regional power with a sophisticated military and an alliance with resistance groups that would be eager to defend their ally against American aggression.
By endorsing Israel’s strikes on Iran and advocating for US aggression, Fetterman is perpetuating a cycle of violence that benefits only the US ruling class and its Zionist beneficiaries.
The US has spent trillions on wars in the West Asia region, leaving behind shattered societies that will take decades to redevelop.
Fetterman’s call to “take out” Iran’s leadership and nuclear program is a recipe for more of the same- a reckless gamble with lives and resources that the US can ill afford, and would further plant the seeds of disdain for US policy both at home and abroad.
The American people, weary of endless wars and economic hardship, deserve a senator who prioritizes their interests over those of a foreign power tied to genocidal crimes and occupation.
Fetterman’s betrayal of his “progressive” voter base that elected him into power is not just a personal failing but a symptom of a deeper, more sinister alignment in US politics, where loyalty to Israel and the war machine comes before anything else, if anything else at all.
It is incumbent on the global community to reject the likes of Fetterman and their imperialist agendas, as there are war mongers like Fetterman, or worse, spread throughout different Western governments.
While they are considering replacements, they can also add someone who knows how to dress themselves as a requirement. Indeed, the bar has never been lower.
US has made ‘acceptable offer’ – Kremlin aide
RT | August 7, 2025
Russia has received an “acceptable” offer from the US on settling the Ukraine conflict, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said, following a visit by US special envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Ushakov commented on the talks between Witkoff and Russian President Vladimir Putin, noting that Moscow had received a “proposal from the Americans” which it is ready to consider, without providing further details.
Ushakov also noted that Russia and the US have topics to discuss, while agreeing with the view of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who earlier described the talks as “a good day.” Rubio had added that “we still have a ways to go, but we’re certainly closer [to peace] today than we were yesterday – when we weren’t close at all.”
The Kremlin aide earlier called the Putin-Witkoff meeting “business-like and constructive,” adding that “Russian-American ties could develop according to a completely different, mutually beneficial scenario,” as compared to the long-running tensions over Ukraine.
He also revealed that Putin could meet Trump as soon as next week. The Russian president later suggested that the United Arab Emirates could potentially host the summit.
Unit 8200 taps Microsoft to spy on millions in Palestine

Al Mayadeen | August 6, 2025
In late 2021, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella met with Yossi Sariel, the commander of “Israel’s” military surveillance agency Unit 8200, at Microsoft’s Seattle headquarters. Sariel sought support for a plan to move vast amounts of classified intelligence data into Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform. This arrangement would provide Unit 8200 with a dedicated, customized space within Azure, offering nearly unlimited storage capacity.
Equipped with Azure’s immense storage capabilities, Unit 8200 developed a sweeping surveillance system that records and stores millions of mobile phone calls made daily by Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. This cloud-based system, operational since 2022, allows the agency to retain a vast archive of calls over extended periods.
Microsoft has claimed that Nadella was unaware of the specific nature of the data being stored. However, leaked documents and interviews with 11 sources from Microsoft and Israeli military intelligence reveal that Azure has been central to storing this expansive trove of Palestinian communications.
According to three Unit 8200 insiders, the Azure cloud platform has been instrumental in preparing deadly airstrikes and shaping military operations in both Gaza and the West Bank. While “Israel” has long intercepted calls in the occupied territories thanks to its control over Palestinian telecommunications, the new system indiscriminately records calls from a far larger group of ordinary civilians.
‘A million call an hour’
One intelligence source explained that Unit 8200 turned to Microsoft after realizing its own servers lacked the storage capacity and computing power needed to handle the sheer volume of phone calls, a volume captured by the unit’s internal mantra: “A million calls an hour.”
The surveillance system was designed to run on Microsoft’s servers, protected by enhanced security layers developed jointly by Microsoft engineers and Unit 8200 according to the unit’s specifications. Leaked Microsoft files indicate that much of this sensitive Israeli military data now resides in company data centers located in the Netherlands and Ireland.
Employees, investors concerned about ties to ‘Israel’s’ military
This revelation about Microsoft’s Azure platform’s role in the surveillance effort emerges amid increasing pressure on the tech giant from employees and investors concerned about its ties to “Israel’s” military and how its technology has been deployed during the 22-month genocide in Gaza.
In May, a Microsoft employee protested during CEO Satya Nadella’s keynote speech by shouting, “How about you show how Israeli war crimes are powered by Azure?” This public outcry followed earlier revelations in January by The Guardian and others about “Israel’s” reliance on Microsoft technology during the Gaza genocide.
In response, Microsoft commissioned an external review of its relationship with the Israeli military. The company stated the review “found no evidence to date” that Azure or its AI tools were “used to target or harm people” in the territory.
A senior Microsoft source said the company had discussions with Israeli security officials, specifying how its technology should be used in Gaza, emphasizing that Microsoft systems must not be involved in identifying “targets” for lethal strikes.
Despite Microsoft’s assurances, sources from Unit 8200 revealed that intelligence gathered from the vast archive of phone calls stored in Azure has been used to identify bombing “targets” in Gaza. One source explained that when planning an airstrike in densely populated areas, officers would use the cloud system to review calls made by people nearby.
Use of the system reportedly increased during the ongoing genocide in Gaza, which has resulted in the killing of over 60,000 Palestinians, including more than 18,000 children.
Arrests without excuse made feasible
Originally, the system focused on the West Bank, home to about 3 million Palestinians under Israeli military occupation. According to Unit 8200 sources, the information held in Azure formed a rich intelligence repository used to blackmail individuals, justify detention, or even killings after the fact.
“When they need to arrest someone and there isn’t a good enough reason to do so, that’s where they find the excuse,” said one source, referring to the cloud-stored data.
Microsoft claimed it had “no information” regarding the specific data Unit 8200 stored in its cloud. The company alleged that its “engagement with Unit 8200 has been based on strengthening cybersecurity and protecting Israel from nation-state and terrorist cyber-attacks.”
They added, “At no time during this engagement has Microsoft been aware of the surveillance of civilians or collection of their cellphone conversations using Microsoft’s services, including through the external review it commissioned.”
‘Tracking everyone, all the time’
The driving force behind this cloud surveillance initiative was Yossi Sariel, the commander of Unit 8200 from early 2021 to late 2024. Described by one insider as a “revolution” within the unit, Sariel was a career intelligence officer who strongly championed large-scale projects like this.
Sariel expanded the scope of communications interception by Unit 8200. His strategy was to begin “tracking everyone, all the time,” said an officer who worked under him.
‘The entire public was our enemy’
Moving beyond targeted surveillance, Sariel’s approach employed mass surveillance across the occupied West Bank, combined with innovative AI tools to extract actionable insights. One source said, “Suddenly the entire public was our enemy,” reflecting how the project aimed to predict which individuals posed security threats.
Among the tools developed during this time was a system that scanned all text messages between Palestinians in the West Bank, automatically assigning risk scores based on suspicious keywords. Known as “noisy message”, it remains in use and can detect texts discussing weapons or expressing a desire to die.
When Sariel became Unit 8200 commander in early 2021, he prioritized building a partnership with Microsoft that would allow the unit to extend its capabilities and capture the content of millions of phone calls daily.
Storing Palestinian phone calls dubbed ‘sensitive workloads’
At his meeting with Satya Nadella later that year, Sariel didn’t explicitly mention plans to store Palestinian phone calls in the cloud, instead referring to “sensitive workloads” containing secret data, according to internal meeting records.
However, documents indicate that Microsoft engineers understood the data would include raw intelligence like audio files. Some Microsoft staff based in “Israel”, including former Unit 8200 members, seemed aware of the project’s goals. As one source said, “You don’t have to be a genius to figure it out. You tell [Microsoft] we don’t have any more space on the servers, that it’s audio files. It’s pretty clear what it is.”
Microsoft’s spokesperson maintained, “We are not aware of Azure being used for the storage of such data,” stressing that Unit 8200 was a customer of cloud services and that Microsoft “did not build or consult with Unit 8200” on a surveillance system.
Still, in early 2022, Microsoft and Unit 8200 engineers collaborated closely to develop advanced security measures in Azure to meet the unit’s standards. One document described the collaboration’s “rhythm of interaction” as “daily, top down and bottom up.”
Secrecy, scale of data storage
Within Microsoft, the project was highly secretive, with engineers instructed not to mention Unit 8200 by name. Under the plan, vast amounts of raw intelligence material would be stored in Microsoft data centers overseas.
Files indicate that by July 2025, approximately 11,500 terabytes of Israeli military data, equivalent to around 200 million hours of audio, will be held on Microsoft’s Azure servers in the Netherlands, with a smaller portion stored in Ireland. It’s unclear whether all this data belonged to Unit 8200, as some might belong to other Israeli military units.
According to the documents, Unit 8200 informed Microsoft that it intended to eventually migrate over 70% of its data, including secret and top-secret information, to Azure. The unit was “willing to ‘push the envelope’ with the kind of sensitive and classified information that intelligence agencies normally held on their own servers.” As one executive noted, “They’re always trying to challenge the status quo.”
When asked about Sariel’s meeting with Nadella, Microsoft’s spokesperson said it “is not accurate” to claim that the CEO personally supported the project. They said Nadella “attended for 10 minutes at the end of the meeting” and that there was “no discussion” of the specific data planned for Azure.
However, internal Microsoft records viewed by The Guardian show Nadella expressed support for Sariel’s ambition to transfer a large portion of Unit 8200’s data to the cloud, described earlier in the meeting as “sensitive intelligence material.”
One record states, “Satya suggested that we identify certain workloads to begin with and then gradually move towards the 70% mark.” It adds that Nadella said, “building the partnership is so critical” and “Microsoft is committed to providing resources to support.”
Sariel’s vision, AI advocacy
Several months before his meeting with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella in 2021, Yossi Sariel published a book on artificial intelligence under a pen name, later revealed by The Guardian to be his own, in which he urged militaries and intelligence agencies to “migrate to the cloud.”
Known within Israeli intelligence as a technology evangelist, Sariel prized what he described to colleagues as a friendly relationship with Nadella. A senior intelligence source said, “Yossi bragged a lot, even to me, about his connection with Satya.” (Microsoft has denied that Nadella and Sariel had a close relationship.)
Another former intelligence colleague added, “He sold [the partnership] internally and got a huge budget. He claimed it was the solution to our problems in the Palestinian arena.”
Sariel declined to comment and referred questions about the project to the Israeli occupation forces (IOF). An IOF spokesperson claimed that their cooperation with companies like Microsoft was based on “legally supervised agreements.” The spokesperson alleged, “The IDF operates in accordance with international law, with the aim of countering terrorism and ensuring the security of the state and its citizens.”
Microsoft’s commercial interests, protests
For Microsoft, the multi-year collaboration with Unit 8200 represented a significant commercial opportunity. Executives anticipated earning hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue and described the partnership as “an incredibly powerful brand moment” for their Azure cloud platform, according to leaked files.
One executive noted that Unit 8200’s “leadership hopes to expand the mission-critical work tenfold in the coming years.”
As Unit 8200 began utilizing Azure’s storage capabilities in 2022, intelligence officers quickly realized the scale of the new tool’s potential. One source familiar with the system described it simply: “The cloud is infinite storage.”
Calls stored in the system, including those made by Palestinians to Israeli and international numbers, are generally kept for about one month, although the storage capacity can be extended to hold calls for longer periods when necessary. Several intelligence sources explained that this allows officers to retrieve past phone conversations of persons who later become of interest. Previously, surveillance targets had to be pre-selected for their calls to be intercepted and stored.
However, the system notably failed to stop Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
Following October 7, Sariel faced criticism for prioritizing “addictive and exciting” technology over traditional intelligence methods. Critics argued this focus contributed to the intelligence failure. Sariel resigned the following year, acknowledging “8200’s part in the intelligence and operational failure.”
Use of AI tools and Gaza genocide impact
During the subsequent genocide war, the cloud system Sariel developed has been frequently used alongside new AI-driven target recommendation tools that were also introduced under his leadership. These technologies have played a key role in military operations that have caused widespread devastation and a severe humanitarian crisis for civilians.
While “Israel’s” destruction of Gaza’s telecommunications infrastructure has decreased the volume of phone calls, sources say the data stored in the cloud remains valuable. One source noted that intelligence officers working on Gaza have become increasingly enthusiastic about the system as the conflict continues, believing the military is “heading towards long-term control there.”
Broader implications
The expansive surveillance program reveals how technology firms like Microsoft can become deeply entangled in complex geopolitical conflicts. Despite Microsoft’s claims that its technology is not used to target Palestinians or support lethal strikes, internal sources and leaked documents paint a different picture of extensive intelligence gathering on Palestinians.
As protests grow and employees voice concerns, with one shouting during a keynote, “How about you show how Israeli war crimes are powered by Azure?,” the debate intensifies over the ethical responsibilities of tech companies working with military and intelligence agencies.
The case of Unit 8200 and Microsoft illustrates the immense power and risks of cloud technology, raising urgent questions about privacy, accountability, and the future of surveillance in war zones.
The verdict of history: How political calculations betrayed Gaza
By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | August 6, 2025
The Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem released a comprehensive report on 27 July describing the Israeli war on Gaza as genocide. However, the delay in publishing such an indictment is troubling and adds to an existing problem of politically motivated decision-making processes that have, in their own right, prolonged the ongoing Israeli war crimes.
The report accused Israel of committing genocide, a conclusion reached after a detailed analysis of the military campaign’s intent, the systematic destruction of civilian life, and the government-engineered famine. This finding is significant because it adds to the massive body of legal and testimonial evidence affirming the Palestinian position that Israel’s actions in Gaza constitute a genocide.
Moreover, the fact that B’Tselem is an Israeli organization is doubly important. It represents an insider’s indictment of the horrific massacres and the government-engineered famine in the Strip, directly challenging the baseless argument that accusing Israel of genocide is an act of antisemitism.
Western media were particularly interested in this report, despite the fact that numerous first-hand Palestinian reports and investigations are often ignored or downplayed. This double standard continues to feed into a chronic media problem in its perception of Palestine and Israel.
Claims by Palestinians of Israeli war crimes have historically been ignored by mainstream media or academia. Whether the Zionist militia’s massacre of Tantura in 1948, the actual number of Palestinians and Lebanese killed in the massacres of Sabra and Shatila in Lebanon in 1982, or the events resulting in the Jenin massacre in the West Bank in 2002, the media has frequently ignored the Palestinian account. It often gains a degree of validation only if it is backed by Israeli or Western voices.
The latest B’Tselem report is no exception. But another question must be asked: why did it take nearly two years for B’Tselem to reach such an obvious conclusion? Israeli rights groups, in particular, have far greater access to the conduct of the Israeli army, the statements of politicians, and Hebrew media coverage than any other entity. Such a conclusion, therefore, should have been reached in a matter of two months, not two years.
This kind of intentional delay has so far defined the position of many international institutions, organisations, and individuals whose moral authority would have helped Palestinians establish the facts of the genocide globally much earlier.
For example, despite the ICJ’s historic ruling on 26 January 2024, that determined that there are plausible grounds for South Africa’s accusation of Israel of committing genocide, the court is still unable, or unwilling, to produce a conclusive ruling. A definitive ruling would have been a significant pressure card on Israel to end its mass killing in Gaza.
Instead, for now, the ICJ expects Israel to investigate itself, a most unrealistic expectation at a time when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promises his extremist ministers that Israel will encourage the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.
The same indictment of intentional and politicised delays can be attributed to the International Criminal Court. While it issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defense minister on November 21, 2024, no concrete action has been taken. Instead, it is the Chief Prosecutor of the court, Karim Khan, who finds himself attacked by the US government and media for having the courage to follow through on the investigation.
Individuals, too, especially those who have been associated with ‘revolutionary’ politics, the likes of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders, among others, have been reluctant to act. On 22 March 2024, Ocasio-Cortez refused to use the term genocide in Gaza, going as far as claiming that, while she saw an “unfolding genocide,” she was not yet ready to use the term herself.
Sanders, on the other hand, who has spoken out repeatedly and strongly against Netanyahu, describing him in an interview with CNN on 31 July as a “disgusting liar,” has had repeated moral lapses since the start of the war. When the term genocide was used by many, far less ‘radical’ politicians, Sanders doubled down during a lecture at a university in Ireland. He said that the word genocide “makes him queasy,” and he urged people to be “careful about it”.
These are not simply lost opportunities or instances of moral equivocation. They have had a profound and direct impact on Israel’s behavior. The timely intervention of governments, international institutions, high courts, media, and human rights groups would have fundamentally changed the dynamics of the war. Such collective pressure could have forced Israel and its allies to end the war, potentially saving thousands of lives.
Delays born of political calculation and fear of retribution have given Israel the critical space it needed to carry out its genocide. Israel is actively exploiting this lack of legal and moral clarity to persist in its mass slaughter of Palestinians.
This must change. The Palestinian perspective, their suffering, and their truths must be respected and honored without needing validation from Israeli or other sources. The Palestinian voice and their rights must be truly centered, not as an academic cliché or political jargon, but as an undeniable, everyday reality.
As for those who have delayed their verdict regarding the Israeli genocide, no rationale can possibly absolve them. They will be judged by history and by the desperate pleas of Gaza’s mothers and fathers, who tried and failed to save their children from the Israeli killing machine and the world’s collective silence or inaction.

If you regard the United States as perhaps flawed but overall a force for good in the world . . .