Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US congresswoman labels Zelensky ‘dictator’

RT | July 23, 2025

US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has labeled Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky “a dictator” and called for his removal, citing mass anti-corruption protests across Ukraine and accusing him of blocking peace efforts.

Her comments came after Zelensky signed a controversial bill into law that places the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) under the authority of the prosecutor general.

Critics argue that the legislation effectively strips the bodies of their independence. The law has sparked protests across Ukraine, with around 2,000 people rallying in Kiev and additional demonstrations reported in Lviv, Odessa, and Poltava.

“Good for the Ukrainian people! Throw him out of office!” Greene wrote Wednesday on X, sharing footage from the protests. “And America must STOP funding and sending weapons!!!”

Greene, a longtime critic of US aid to Kiev, made similar comments last week while introducing an amendment to block further assistance. “Zelensky is a dictator, who, by the way, stopped elections in his country because of this war,” she told the House.

“He’s jailed journalists, he’s canceled his election, controlled state media, and persecuted Christians. The American people should not be forced to continue to pay for another foreign war.”

Her statements come amid mounting speculation over Zelensky’s political future. Journalist Seymour Hersh has reported that US officials are considering replacing him, possibly with former top general Valery Zaluzhny.

Senator Tommy Tuberville also called Zelensky a “dictator” last month, accusing him of trying to drag NATO into the conflict with Russia. Tuberville claimed that Zelensky refuses to hold elections because “he knew if he had an election, he’d get voted out.”

Zelensky’s five-year presidential term expired in 2024, but he has refused to hold a new election, citing martial law, which has been extended every 90 days since 2022.

US President Donald Trump has also questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy, calling him “a dictator without elections” in February.

Russian officials have repeatedly brought up the issue of Zelensky’s legitimacy, arguing that any agreements signed by him or his administration could be legally challenged by future leaders of Ukraine.

July 23, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

It’s a HOLOHOAX (Don’t Be Fooled) Pt5

Renegade Tribune | March 4, 2020

Note: This blog series is derived from “Did Six Million Really Die?” book by Richard E. Harwood (1974) with many additional sources, originally presented in DJ Noble Protagonist’s E-book (The Battle to preserve Western Civilization):  https://archive.org/details/@nobleprotagonist

Note: Core reference material: https://holocausthandbooks.com/

Also in German: http://holocausthandbuecher.com/

“NAZI DEATH CAMPS”

It is true that in 1945, Allied propaganda did claim that all the concentration camps, particularly those in Germany itself, were “Death Camps,” but not for long. On this question the American historian Professor Harry Elmer Barnes wrote, “These camps were first presented as those in Germany, such as Dachau, Belsen, Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen and Dora, but it was soon demonstrated that there had been no systematic extermination in those camps. Attention was then moved to Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzec, Chelmno, Jonowska, Tarnow, Ravensbruck, Mauthausen, Brezeznia and Birkenau, which does not exhaust the list that appears to have been extended as needed.”

What had happened was that certain honest observers among the British & American occupation forces in Germany, while admitting that many camp inmates had died of disease & starvation in the final months of the war, had found no evidence after all of “gas chambers.”    

As a result, eastern camps in the Russian zone of occupation, such as Auschwitz & Treblinka, gradually came to the fore as horrific centers of “extermination”, though no one was permitted to see them. This tendency has lasted almost to the present day.

Here in these camps it was all supposed to have happened, but with the Iron Curtain brought down firmly over them it was difficult to verify such charges. The Communists claimed that four million people died at Auschwitz in gigantic gas chambers accommodating 2,000 people, and no one could argue to the contrary.

THE LEUCHTER REPORT

In 1984 in Toronto, Canada, German-born publisher, Ernst Zundel, distributed his own edition of the pamphlet, “Did Six Million Really Die?”, and sent copies out to Canadian Members of Parliament; members of the clergy; journalists and broadcasters. A year later he was subsequently put on trial and sentenced to 15 months imprisonment followed by automatic deportation, after a Jewish complaint under an obscure law prohibiting the publication of “false news”.

This sentence was passed even though both the defense and the prosecution agreed that the bulk of “Did Six Million Really Die?” was correct and only small points were in dispute.

“The Leuchter Report” was actually commissioned by Ernst Zundel, to act in his defense, after his 1985 conviction was overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1987, and a retrial was ordered to commence in January, 1988.

In February 1988, the first forensic examination of the alleged execution gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, was conducted by Fred Leuchter and subsequently published as “The Leuchter Report”.

Fred Leuchter, was an engineer who specializes in the design & fabrication of execution hardware used in prisons throughout the United States. One of his projects was the design of a new gas chamber at the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City.

In essence Fred Leuchter took samples from the walls of the alleged gas chambers and also from the walls of the de-lousing chambers so he could compare the claim that rather than Zyklon B being used to gas inmates of the various camps, it was actually used to de-louse the inmates clothing of lice in order to prevent outbreaks of typhus.

Leuchter’s results were overwhelming. He could find no trace of Zyklon B in the walls of the alleged gas chambers, yet it was overwhelmingly prevalent in the walls of the de-lousing chambers where the inmates’ clothing was cleaned of lice.

The Leuchter Report concludes, “After reviewing all the material and inspecting all of the sites at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, your author finds the evidence overwhelming; there were no execution gas chambers at any of these locations. It is the best engineering opinion of this author that the alleged gas chambers at the inspected sites could not have been, or now, be utilized or seriously considered to function as execution gas chambers.”

Despite Fred Leuchter’s neutral position in questioning the official version of the “Holocaust” and his evidence based upon the exact science of forensic chemistry, Ernst Zundel was once again found guilty, albeit this time he was given a nine month sentence as opposed to the 15 month one he was given previously. He was granted bail after signing a “gag order”, promising not to write or speak about the “Holocaust”.

In 2003, Ernst Zundel was arrested at his quiet home in the mountain region of eastern Tennessee.  U.S. authorities seized him on the pretext that he had violated immigration regulations, or had missed an interview date with US immigration authorities, even though he had entered the US legally, was married to an American citizen, had no criminal record, and was acting diligently, and in full accord with the law, to secure status as a permanent legal resident.

After being held for two weeks, he was deported to Canada. For two years he was held in solitary confinement in the Toronto West Detention Centre as a supposed threat to national security.

In 2005, Zundel was deported to Germany, just as Jewish groups had been demanding. Upon his arrival at Frankfurt airport, he was immediately arrested and taken to Mannheim prison to await trial for the “thought crime” of “denying the Holocaust.”

A few months later, the public prosecutor in Mannheim formally charged Zundel with inciting “hatred” by having written or distributed texts that “approve, deny or play down” genocidal actions carried out by Germany’s wartime regime, and which “denigrate the memory of the (Jewish) dead.”  .

Zundel’s three-month trial concluded in 2007, when a court in Mannheim sentenced him to five years imprisonment for the crime of “popular incitement” under Germany’s notorious “Holocaust denial” statute. The court upheld efforts by German authorities to punish individuals for writings that are legal in the country (Canada) where they are published. Jewish groups quickly, and predictably, expressed approval of the verdict.

Zundel was released from prison in 2010.  Banned from returning to either Canada or the United States, he went to his family home in Germany’s Black Forest region, where he resided until his death.

Meanwhile, Fred Leuchter was also “persecuted” & blacklisted by promoters of the Holohoax.  In 1991, he was arrested & jailed in Germany for giving an anti-Holocaust lecture for Günther Deckert, a well-known political party leader. Leuchter was allowed out on bail.  He returned to the U.S. and chose not to go back to Germany to stand trial.  Nonetheless, he lost his livelihood as a result.

The Allied Committee of Inquiry has to date proven that no poison gas was ever used to kill prisoners in the following concentration camps… Bergen-Belsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, Flossenburg, Gross-Rosen, Mauthausen, and satellite camps.. Natzweller, Neuengamme, Niederhagen, Ravensbruck, Sachsenhausen, Stutthoff, Theresienstadt. In all cases where gassings were alleged, it could be proven that torture was used to extract confessions, and witnesses have lied. Any former inmate who, during their debriefing continues to allege that Poison gas was used to murder people, in particular Jews, are to be reported to this office, and if they insist on lying further, they are to be charged with perjury.” – Major Miller, Commanding Officer Allied Military Police Vienna

Note: In a 1985 court case, Dr. William Lindsey testified under oath that the Auschwitz gassing story is physically impossible. Based on his careful examination of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, and on his years of experience, he declared, “I have come to the conclusion that no one was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B in this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible.”

Note: When American & British forces overran Western & Central Germany in the spring of 1945, they were followed by troops charged with discovering and securing any evidence of German war crimes. Among them was Dr. Charles Larson, one of America’s leading forensic pathologists, who was assigned to the US Army’s Judge Advocate General’s Department. As part of a US War Crimes Investigation Team, Dr. Larson performed autopsies at Dachau and some twenty other German camps, examining on some days more than 100 corpses. After his grim work at Dachau, he was questioned for three days by US Army prosecutors.  In a 1980 newspaper interview Dr. Larson confirmed that there “never was a case of poison gas uncovered.”

FINAL FORENSIC NAIL IN THE COFFIN – AUSCHWITZ STORY

Germar Rudolf was born on October 29, 1964, in Limburg, Germany. He studied chemistry at Bonn University, where he graduated in 1989 as a Diplom-Chemist. From 1990-1993, he prepared a PhD thesis at the Max Planck Institute for Solid State research in conjunction with the University of Stuttgart. Parallel to this and in his spare time, Rudolf re-examined Auschwitz, Birkenau and other installations and buildings, testing brick and mortar samples of delousing chambers & alleged “gas chambers” for traces of Zyklon B.

Following the pioneering work of Fred Leuchter, Germar put the final forensic nail into the coffin of the Auschwitz story with his 1993 expert report, The Rudolf Report, which proved the “Holocaust” to be a Holohoax.  Even though this book on Auschwitz was scientific in nature and utterly apolitical, Rudolf’s home & office were raided three times; his computers & papers seized.

In 1994 & 1995 he was charged and tried in Germany for his expert report.  As a scientist, he found the “gassing” claims to be scientifically untenable. Rudolf was found guilty and convicted to 14 month imprisonment. As a result, the University of Stuttgart denied him to pass his final PhD exam.

Rudolf tried to avoid serving this prison term by going into British exile with his young wife and two babies. There he started a small revisionist outlet for German language material, Castle Hill Publishers, and VHO.org, a multilingual website, which within a few years outgrew other revisionist websites by size & traffic.  In early 1999, due to the permanent persecutorial pressure, his wife filed for divorce and returned to Germany with their two babies.

When Germany wanted to have Rudolf extradited from Britain in 1999, he fled to the United States, where he applied for political asylum. While his case wound its way through the U.S. legal system, Rudolf expanded his publishing activities into English language material, for instance by launching the ambitious “Holocaust Handbook Series” [linked at the top of this article].

In 2004 Rudolf married again, this time a U.S. citizen, and soon became the father of a young baby daughter.  Immediately after this marriage was recognized as genuine by the U.S. Immigration Services in October 2005, and at a time when a hearing of his asylum case was just being scheduled by a U.S. Federal Court, the U.S. government had Rudolf arrested and deported to Germany.

Hence, his asylum hearing which took place in absentia a few months later was nothing but a farce. In Germany, Rudolf was duly arrested and put on trial again for his revisionist publishing activities abroad. Although Rudolf’s activities had been perfectly legal both in the United Kingdom and the United States, Germany nevertheless applied German censorship laws and sentenced Rudolf to another 30 months imprisonment.

On July 5, 2009, Rudolf was released from prison. After a legal battle against the U.S. government lasting almost two years, Rudolf finally succeeded in obtaining an immigrant visa for the U.S.  He has been reunited with his wife & daughter since August, 2011.

Note: In 1995, one of France’s most influential & respected magazines, L’Express, acknowledged that “everything is false” about the Auschwitz “gas chamber” that for decades has been shown to tens of thousands of tourists yearly.

Note: On page 541 of (Jewish historian) Olga Wormser-Migot’s thesis on the system of National Socialists concentration camps, there is a passage on the “gas chambers”.  There, the reader will find three additional surprises.  According to Olga, the “problem” lies in attempting to determine whether the “gas chambers” at Ravensbrück (Germany) & Mauthausen (Austria) ever existed; she concludes that they didn’t.

GAS CHAMBERS WERE NOT CREMATORIES

Stephen F. Pinter, who served as a lawyer for the United States War Department in the occupation forces in Germany & Austria for six years after the war, made an astonishing statement in the widely read Catholic magazine, Our Sunday Visitor, on June 14, 1959.

Pinter admitted, “I was in Dachau for 17 months after the war, as a U.S. War Department Attorney, and can state that there was no gas chamber at Dachau. What was shown to visitors & sightseers there and erroneously described as a ‘gas chamber’ was a crematory. Nor was there a gas chamber in any of the other concentration camps in Germany. We were told that there was a gas chamber at Auschwitz, but since that was in the Russian zone of occupation, we were not permitted to investigate since the Russians would not allow it. From what I was able to determine during six postwar years in Germany & Austria, there were a number of Jews killed, but the figure of a million was certainly never reached. I interviewed thousands of Jews, former inmates of concentration camps in Germany and Austria and consider myself as well qualified as any man on this subject.”

Pinter tells a very different story from the customary propaganda. He is very astute on the question of the crematory being represented as a chamber.  This is a frequent ploy because no such thing as a “gas chamber” has ever been shown to exist in these camps, hence the deliberately misleading term “gas oven”, aimed at confusing a gas chamber with a crematorium. The latter, usually single furnace and similar to the kind of thing employed today, were used quite simply for the cremation of those persons who had died from various natural causes within the camp, particularly infectious diseases.    

This fact was conclusively proved by the German arch bishop Faulhaber of Munich. He informed the Americans that during the Allied air raid on Munich, in September 1944, 30,000 people were killed. The archbishop requested the authorities at the time to cremate the bodies, but was told that, unfortunately, this plan could not be carried out; the crematorium, having only one furnace, was not able to cope with the many bodies of the air raid victims.

Clearly, therefore, the crematorium could not have coped with the 238,000 Jewish bodies which were allegedly cremated there. In order to do so, the crematorium would have to be kept going for 326 years without stopping and 530 tons of ashes would have been recovered.

The figures of Dachau casualties are typical of the kind of exaggerations that have since been drastically revised. In 1946, a memorial plaque was unveiled at Dachau by Philip Auerbach, the Jewish State-Secretary in the Bavarian Government who was convicted for embezzling money, which he claimed as compensation for non-existent Jews. The plaque read, “This area is being retained as a shrine to the 238,000 individuals who were cremated here.”

Since then, the official casualty figures of Dachau have had to be steadily revised downwards, and now stand at only 20,600; the majority, from typhus & starvation only at the end of the war.

Note: Dachau was one the first concentration camp set up soon after the National Socialists came to power. These first camps were in reality large prisons to which inmates had been sentenced by the ordinary criminal courts to fixed terms of imprisonment. Membership in the Communist Party was a frequent criminal offense. Jews were largely involved in communist activities, and were imprisoned accordingly.

Battle for the West (Website): http://www.battleforthewest.com/    

Battle for the West (BitChute): https://www.bitchute.com/channel/65cDI4QdHali/

July 23, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

West Doubles Down on Failed Wars in Ukraine & Middle East

Glenn Diesen | July 22, 2025

Larry Johnson is a former intelligence analyst at the CIA, who also worked at the US State Department’s Office of Counterterrorism. Johnson discusses why the West is doubling down on the failed wars in Ukraine and the Middle East.

Rumble

July 22, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

AOC Tries to Defend Vote Against Amendment to Cut $500 Million in Israeli Military Aid

By James Rushmore | The Libertarian Institute | July 22, 2025

U.S. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is trying to explain away her “no” vote on an amendment to the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The amendment, introduced by Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), would have cut $500 million in U.S. funding for nuclear-armed Israel’s missile defense programs.

“People exploding this false messaging that I voted for a bill [and] funding that I quite literally voted NO on. The threat environment this morning is scary,” the progressive lawmaker wrote on Bluesky Monday afternoon. “Doesn’t help anyone. Drag me for the position if you disagree but don’t lie. It’s out of control. Saying I voted for this funding is false.”

“If you believe neo-nazis [sic] are welcome and operating in good faith, you can have them!” she added on X.

Earlier in the day, NBC 4 New York reported that Ocasio-Cortez’s Bronx congressional office was doused with red paint overnight. A sign was posted outside that read “AOC FUNDS GENOCIDE IN GAZA.”

Ocasio-Cortez joined 421 of her colleagues in the House of Representatives in voting against the Greene Amendment, which only received six votes. The amendment would have prevented the Department of Defense from strengthening Israel’s air and missile defense systems, including the Iron Dome. It would also have prevented Congress from effectively abrogating the Symington Amendment to the International Security Assistance and Arms Exports Control Act of 1976, which bans the provision of U.S. military aid to any country that develops nuclear weapons technology in contravention of safeguards imposed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Ocasio-Cortez’s latest comments come days after she initially tried to head off concerns about her vote. “Marjorie Taylor Greene’s amendment does nothing to cut off offensive aid to Israel nor end the flow of US munitions being used in Gaza. Of course I voted against it,” she wrote on X Saturday morning. “What it does do is cut off defensive Iron Dome capacities while allowing the actual bombs killing Palestinians to continue. I have long stated that I do not believe that adding to the death count of innocent victims to this war is constructive to its end.”

“I remain focused on cutting the flow of US munitions that are being used to perpetuate the genocide in Gaza,” she added.

Ocasio-Cortez’s “no” vote earned her a rebuke from the Democratic Socialists of America. “An arms embargo means keeping all arms out of the hands of a genocidal military, no exceptions. This is why we oppose Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ [sic] vote against an amendment that would have blocked $500 million in funding for the Israeli military’s Iron Dome program,” the DSA wrote on Saturday.

July 22, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

More Reckless Than Ever: NATO’s Proxy War with Russia

By Ted Galen Carpenter | The Libertarian Institute | July 22, 2025

The strategy that the United States and its European allies have adopted to use Ukraine as their military proxy in a war to weaken Russia has always involved a sizable element of risk. At some point, Russian leaders might no longer be content with just attacking the puppet that NATO members were using to torment their country. Instead, Russian President Vladimir Putin and his colleagues could decide to attack one or more of the puppeteers. The chances of such an escalation are increasing. Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, Putin’s principal deputy, issued a warning on July 17 that his country might launch “preemptive strikes” if the Western powers continued to boost their support for Ukraine’s military efforts.

Medvedev’s statement occurred just after President Donald Trump executed a major U.S. policy reversal regarding Ukraine. Instead of phasing out military aid to Kiev, the administration announced a resumption of weapons shipments, including Patriot air defense missiles that other NATO members would purchase from the United States. Such a stance was reminiscent of President Joe Biden’s enthusiastic support for Ukraine’s war effort, and it stood in stark contrast to Trump’s rhetoric throughout the 2024 presidential election campaign and the initial weeks of his second term that indicated a determination to end Washington’s entanglement in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Unfortunately, the new sale of Patriots is just the latest in a long series of provocations that the United States and NATO have conducted against Russia since full-scale fighting between Moscow and Kiev began in February 2022. Both Medvedev and Putin have contended previously that NATO is already at war with their country, given the extent of military assistance that alliance members have extended to Kiev—especially the provision of long-range missiles. Medvedev specifically raised the prospect of Russian retaliatory strikes on NATO bases.

Their charge has merit. Not only have NATO members collectively provided a tsunami of weapons to their military proxy, but also several of them have assisted Ukraine’s war effort in other crucial ways. There is credible evidence that both British and American intelligence agencies (and possibly those of other NATO countries) have provided crucial data to Ukrainian forces attacking Russian military transport planes and other targets. A similar form of assistance apparently was given to Ukrainian forces that attacked Russian naval vessels in the Black Sea.

Providing such assistance to one party in an ongoing war could quite reasonably be interpreted as an act of war against the opposing party. Yet several alliance members are incurring such risks. A German general justified his country’s decision to send long-range missiles to Ukraine. But as one critic noted, what the general conveniently left out “is that these weapons will be operated by German personnel from Wiesbaden. In other words, Germany is turning one of its own cities into a legitimate target for Russian retaliation.”

Although the evidence of committing an act of war is less definitive in other cases, there were strong indications that one or more NATO member states were involved in the destruction of Russia’s Nord Stream pipeline. The accounts that American and European media propaganda campaigns circulated certainly lacked even minimal credibility. The original cover story that Russia (for reasons that remained both vague and implausible) destroyed its own multi-billion-dollar pipeline did not even pass the proverbial laugh test. Even U.S. and other NATO officials quickly backed away from that attempted explanation. However, the substitute version was even more preposterous. That iteration asserted that a band of Ukrainian activists (but activists who had absolutely no connection to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s government) conducted the sabotage raid using a civilian yacht manned by divers not in the country’s military.

Since those attempts at a plausible cover story flopped, NATO officials and their pet media outlets have gone strangely silent. Hopes by the transatlantic foreign policy “blob” that the pipeline story will just go away are understandable, since Moscow would have grounds for regarding the attack on its pipeline as a brazen act of war.

More recently, murkiness surrounds Ukraine’s bold move deploying swarms of drones to attack Russia’s strategic bomber fleet stationed at four air bases deep inside Russia. Kiev understandably bragged about such a military and propaganda victory. However, Washington’s possible role in this episode remains a matter of conjecture. Media outlets friendly to Ukraine asserted that the United States knew about the operation and expressed no objection. The White House initially contended that Ukraine had given no advance notice, but the U.S. account has become less clear with the passage of time.

It is an important detail. It seems unlikely that Ukrainian forces could have carried out such a complex operation so deep inside Russian territory without intelligence information similar to that given to Kiev in its earlier assaults against Russian troop transports and warships. The probable conclusion is that Kiev likely was aided by either U.S. intelligence operatives or operatives from another NATO. In either case, it would be yet another act of war committed against the Russian Federation. One can readily imagine the reaction from the United States if Russia (or any other adversary) waged an attack on the U.S. strategic bomber fleet and destroyed a significant portion of the fleet.

Even in the unlikely event that Ukraine acted totally alone, that scenario would mean that NATO’s proxy had gone rogue and is now acting on its own. In mid-July, President Trump raised tensions with the Kremlin even more. With typical Trumpian verbal incontinence, he asked Zelensky if (apparently in light of the successful raid on the bomber bases), Ukraine could strike a target such as Moscow deep inside Russia. It appeared to be an unsubtle hint that the United States would not be displeased by such a move. Trump did say many hours later that he was not calling on Ukraine to attack Moscow, but that poisonous idea was now firmly planted. On July 20, Ukraine launched a drone assault on Moscow.

The United States and its NATO allies are engaging in irresponsible behavior that could turn the already dangerous Ukraine proxy war against Russia into a direct armed conflict between the Alliance and Russia. Even during the worst days of the Cold War, Soviet and American leaders had the good sense to implicitly keep their respective homelands off limits. The current crop of “leaders” on the Western side are not exercising such wisdom or basic prudence. They are playing the international equivalent of Russian roulette.

July 22, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

How close was Jeffrey Epstein to Israel’s Mossad?

The Grayzone | July 18, 2025

The Grayzone’s Anya Parampil and Max Blumenthal discuss allegations that late financier and trafficker Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli intelligence asset.

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Video, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

Al-Tanf and the Yinon Plan for Syria: Israel’s Fortress of Fragmentation

21st Century Wire | July 21, 2025

Oded Yinon, author of the 1982 paper “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s,” is often cited regarding Israel’s aim to divide neighboring Arab and Muslim areas into ethnic mini-states. Yinon was a former advisor to Ariel Sharon, a former senior official with the Israeli Foreign Ministry, and a journalist for The Jerusalem Post. Although Yinon downplays the paper’s direct relevance to current geopolitics, its ideas have arguably become foundational to Zionist policy; balkanization was crucial for Israel’s establishment and continues to be a strategy for its military dominance in the Middle East, especially in Syria. His paper is commonly known as the “Yinon Plan.” Within it, you can read:

“The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today.”

The fragmentation of Syria was always an integral part of the Yinon plan, with its operational headquarters not in Tel Aviv but at the US Al-Tanf base, located at the tri-border area between Syria, Jordan, and Iraq, and along one of the main highways between Baghdad and Damascus.

Syrian journalist and TV presenter, Haidar Mustafa, wrote for The Cradle on December 2, 2024, about the importance of the Al-Tanf base, one of the most strategic military garrisons for the US occupation in Syria, which acted as a launching platform for countless Israeli overt and covert operations:

“The US coalition’s mission against the Islamic State quickly evolved into a broader strategy of occupying parts of Syria, with the Al-Tanf base crucial to securing its influence and supporting Israeli interests amid growing local resistance.”

In a recent post on X, Lebanese analyst Ibrahim Majed articulated several points about the Al-Tanf base and the immense role the American base has played in advancing Israel’s Yinon Plan, describing it as a “Strategic Outpost for Greater Israel and Israel’s Fortress of Fragmentation.” His post inspired the title of our post today.

Recently, we covered the “David’s Corridor”, a land route in Israel that extends from the occupied Golan Heights through southern Syria to the Euphrates. This route represents Israel’s most crucial foothold in the centre of West Asia, which ultimately benefits from the protection provided by the Al-Tanf base. Should Israel manage to gain control over the southern provinces of Syria, it will be considerably closer to connecting with the territories held by the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the east, through the American Al-Tanf base located near the Iraqi border, achieving several goals including the non-negligible control of the corridor, the fragementation of Syria and in time the replacement of the “Shiite Crescent” by an “Israeli Crescent”.  Israel aims to establish a secure route that begins in the Golan Heights, traverses through the Suwayda province, continues across the eastern Syrian desert where the US base at Al-Tanf is situated, and extends to the Kurdish-controlled area of Hasakah, ultimately reaching Iraqi Kurdistan along the Iranian border. This explains the continued US military presence in north-east Syria and why last week, on two occasions, a large CIA delegation found itself at the Qasrak base in Al-Hasakah. This is how Israel intends to permanently cut off the Tehran-Beirut road.

Regarding the Druze community in Syria, Israel uses them primarily as a geographic instrument, a human “Maginot Line” of some sort, where the demographic acts as a human shield that, on one hand, hinders Sunnis’ expansion, while simultaneously stopping the Shiites from consolidating on the other. Local groups like Druze, Kurds and Bedouin tribes are all supported directly or indirectly with Western and Israeli logistics and intelligence, and it will remain so, as long as their presence helps Israel fill the vacuum.

The situation in Syria is no longer up for debate—it is laid bare, with each chapter shedding light on the Greater Israel Plan, or the so-called Yinon Plan. This plan provides neither peace nor solutions, nor does it reflect any sense of humanity; instead, it ensures chaos for geopolitical and financial profit, leading to the downfall of a nation we once recognised as Syria. Lebanon is undoubtedly next on Israel’s fragmentation map, and it is with great concern that one must anticipate Israel’s next move…

Darrin Waller writes Fountainbridge Substack…

Understanding the Yinon Plan: Syria is Gone — Is Lebanon Next?

The fall of Syria marks the beginning of a new era of Levantine chaos.

As I wrote when Assad fell, Syria ceased to exist. Fourteen years of sectarian carnage — unleashed by a Salafist proxy terrorist militia, trained by the US, UK, Israel, and Turkey in camps across Jordan and Turkey, and funded by Persian Gulf petrodollar monarchies to the tune of three trillion dollars — extinguished the last secular Levantine nation in December 2024.

As Hassan Nasrallah warned:

“If Syria were to fall into the hands of these groups, its present and future would spiral into chaos… a scene of endless infighting among factions devoid of reason or culture, drowning in extremism, bloodshed, sectarian rivalries…”

It is done. Sold to us as a revolution. A popular uprising.

Another regime change operation — brutally executed over 14 years — culminated in the installation of a mercenary leader: the Saudi-born takfiri Jolani, now styling himself as President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

What we are seeing is the prosecution of the Yinon Plan — a 1982 geopolitical blueprint calling for Israeli regional dominance through the fragmentation of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt along ethnic, sectarian, and tribal lines.

IMAGE: Project Balkanisation: Oded Yinon and an Enduring Plank of Israeli Foreign Policy (Source: Katehon)

It argues that Israel’s long-term survival hinges on one core premise: “The dissolution of all existing Arab states into small units.”

On the surface, the geopolitical win by the US-UK-Israel military-intelligence trifecta — backed by Turkey and the Persian Gulf monarchies — appears seismic. A Shīʿī-led country now falls under Sunni Salafism, severing the contiguous Shīʿī-controlled corridor linking Tehran to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Another barrier to China’s Silk Road ambitions into the Mediterranean has been firmly set in place. Any revival of the ancient Via Maris — a trade corridor that once ran the Levantine coast, linking Asia to Europe and North Africa — remains a pipe dream.

Severed by the establishment of Israel and now buried beneath the rubble of Syria’s destruction, it ensures that any vision of unity from the Maghreb to the Arabian Peninsula remains just that — a vision.

But perhaps of greater immediate import — Israel’s ethno-supremacists and their vision of a ‘Greater Israel’ have just taken a giant leap forward. Southern Syria — and crucially, Mount Hermon, which overlooks Damascus and the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, granting strategic military dominance over both — is now firmly under Israeli control. As is the tri-border area between Syria, Jordan, and Iraq — Al Tanf.

Yet there’s more. Israel now moves to establish its self-styled ‘David’s Corridor’ — a contiguous land route stretching from the occupied Golan Heights through southern Syria to the Euphrates. It cuts through the governorates of Deraa, Suwayda, Al-Tanf, and Deir Ezzor, reaching the Iraqi-Syrian border at Albu Kamal — granting Israel a strategic foothold deep in the heart of West Asia.

The corridor was already partially activated during the 12-day war with Iran, enabling standoff air strikes deep into Iranian territory.

With a direct land route to Iraq now viable, expect covert destabilisation efforts within the Shīʿī heartlands of Karbalāʾ and Najaf, alongside renewed backing for Kurdish separatists in both Iraq and Syria. Further vicious sectarian conflict across the region is now being baked in.

Whilst Israel’s bombing of the Defence Ministry and the Presidential Palace in Damascus was supposedly to protect the Druze community from Jolani’s Salafist mercenaries, no such protection was afforded to the Alawites, Armenians, Assyrians, or any of Syria’s other religious or ethnic minorities, who were left to be slaughtered.

The strikes on the Defence Ministry and Presidential Palace were telegraphed well in advance — and were thus performative. A warning to Jolani — Southern Syria is now firmly under Israel’s purview. No Syrian military forces will be allowed.

Meaning: Jolani and his hired guns are expendable, especially now that they’ve completed their task — extinguishing Syria’s sovereignty. As Hadi Nasrallah ruefully put it:

“You mean to tell me the very ones armed by Israel, treated in Israeli hospitals, coordinating with the IOF, shaking Netanyahu’s hand and thanking him for bombing Lebanon — are now being bombed by Israel after serving their purpose? Who would’ve thought?”

And yet, it remains far from clear if Jolani has outlived his usefulness, or if he still has his uses, at least from a US perspective.

Only days ago, whilst Jolani was in Baku, Syrian and Israeli officials were reportedly in talks. Rumours even swirled of a deal wherein Syria would launch attacks against Lebanon’s Shiʿī communities — either independently or in coordination with Israel.

Little wonder, then, that US envoy Tom Barrack warned Lebanon to ‘disarm Hezbollah or risk Syrian occupation’ — signalling that Lebanon, too, is likely slated for division and balkanisation.

The port of Tripoli and the Bekaʿa Valley, Lebanon’s agricultural heartland and a Shīʿī stronghold, are now in play. The only question is whether Ankara or West Jerusalem will seize them first, come to blows over Lebanon’s spoils, or quietly divide them, with Turkey taking the port and Israel the Bekaʿa.

But full control may yet require the chaos of full-on civil war. Syria and Lebanon edge closer — division and balkanisation becoming ever easier to enforce, until little remains but manageable fragments. The Yinon Plan made manifest.

“The attack on Lebanon is going to happen without a doubt… the question is when, and the other question is how. Is Israel going to do a ground invasion at the same time or just attack from the air?” (Ibrahim Majed)

Doubtless, the architects of today’s chaos are already patting themselves on the back, expecting handsome dividends to roll in. More division. More balkanisation. A weaker, fractured Arab world — and a stronger, more dominant Israel.

This is what Netanyahu means when he talks about “redrawing the Middle East”.

Yet the US and Israel are unravelling at an accelerating pace. Their seeming victory over the Levant is no triumph of providence — it courts the abyss and beckons the judgment to come.

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US envoy says Hezbollah weapons ‘an internal matter’ during Beirut visit

The Cradle | July 21, 2025

US envoy Tom Barrack said while visiting Lebanon on 21 July that the issue of disarming Hezbollah is an “internal matter,” after months of pressure by Washington on the Lebanese state to secure a surrender of the resistance’s weapons.

“Disarming Hezbollah is an internal matter,” he said, adding that “ideas and assistance” are being offered to the Lebanese state.

“We are not forcing anyone to do anything … we are trying to help,” he added.

He stressed that Hezbollah “is a terrorist organization” in the eyes of the US, and that Washington does not engage in dialogue with it. “We have no skin in the game,” Barrack said.

He claimed Lebanon faces no “consequences” or “threat” if Hezbollah does not disarm, but that it will be “disappointing.”

When asked by a reporter about guarantees that Israel will withdraw its forces from Lebanon and end its attacks on the country, Barrack said, “We cannot compel Israel to do anything, can we?”

Barrack is in Lebanon to discuss with officials Beirut’s response to a US proposal for disarming Hezbollah.

Sources cited by Reuters in early July said that Barrack warned that Hezbollah must be disarmed by November or the end of this year at the latest – in exchange for a withdrawal of Israeli troops from the five points they occupied in south Lebanon after the ceasefire, in violation of the deal. Earlier this month, the US envoy warned that Lebanon risked being occupied by Syria’s extremist-dominated military if Beirut did not move quickly to disarm Hezbollah.

Barrack said during his last trip to Lebanon that he was “satisfied” with Lebanon’s response to the US roadmap, which is expected to be finalized and handed over soon.

Beirut has reportedly demanded that no timeframe for disarmament be set until Israel withdraws and ends attacks.

The resistance group has repeatedly rejected surrendering its weapons. As the government vows to achieve a monopoly over all weapons across Lebanon, Hezbollah says it is ready for internal discussions on the formation of a Lebanese defensive strategy, through which the group’s arms would be incorporated into the state for use in deterring Israel.

The Lebanese resistance group has refused any discussion on the matter until Israeli troops withdraw from Lebanon and end their attacks.

Israeli attacks on Lebanon have continued unabated. Tel Aviv has violated the ceasefire over 3,000 times. More than 200 people have been killed since the deal was signed in November 2024.

Twelve people were killed in an Israeli airstrike in the eastern Bekaa region of Lebanon last week.

Israel has threatened to continue escalating against Lebanon if Hezbollah is not disarmed.

Hezbollah MP Hussein Jachi said on Monday that Hezbollah “will not abandon its weapons for empty US promises.”

“We will not abandon our faith or our strength. We are ready for confrontation. There will be no surrender or submission to Israel, and Israel will not receive our weapons,” Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem said on Friday.

“We know that confrontation is very costly, but surrender leaves us with nothing,” he added, noting that if the “threat is removed, we are ready to discuss the defense strategy and the national security strategy.”

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pentagon Quietly Returns Nuclear Bombs to UK for First Time Since 2008

Sputnik – 21.07.2025

WASHINGTON – The United States has reportedly returned its nuclear weapons, including an unspecified number of B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bombs, to the British Lakenheath air force base in Suffolk, the UK Defense Journal reported, citing multiple sources.

For the first time since at least 2008, the United States has transported weapons from the US Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico to a newly established secure storage facility in Suffolk, UK, the journal reported on Sunday.

The Lakenheath base stored US nuclear weapons during the Cold War, with their removal occurring in 2008 as part of disarmament initiatives. The potential reintroduction of nuclear bombs to Europe coincides with worsening relations between NATO and Russia, particularly due to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the military alliance’s efforts to enhance its readiness.

The B61-12 bomb is an enhanced version of the B61 nuclear bomb, featuring advanced guidance systems and variable yield capabilities. As a key element of the United States’ strategic nuclear arsenal, it is designed for deployment through various delivery systems, including F-35A Lightning II aircraft and other platforms.

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

E3 violated JCPOA, lost right to reinstate UN sanctions against Iran: Russian envoy

Press TV – July 21, 2025

A senior Russian diplomat says Britain, France, and Germany, known as the E3, have repeatedly violated the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal, and thus forfeited their right to trigger the snapback mechanism that would re-impose all UN Security Council sanctions on Iran.

Russia’s Permanent Representative to International Organizations in Vienna, Mikhail Ulyanov, made the remarks in an interview with Izvestia newspaper on Monday, days after the E3, in coordination with the US, threatened to initiate the 30-day snapback process if there is no progress on Iran’s nuclear talks by the end of August.

“As for the threats of Westerners to initiate a mechanism for restoring sanctions, it is quite rightly noted that this idea is illegitimate,” Ulyanov said.

“The Americans themselves withdrew from the JCPOA, renouncing the rights and obligations of a participant in the nuclear deal, and the United Kingdom, Germany and France are violators of both the JCPOA and UN Security Council resolution 2231. This means that they have also deprived themselves of the right to initiate a ‘snapback.’”

He was referring to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the official name of the Iran nuclear accord, which the US ditched in 2018 before returning the illegal sanctions that it had lifted against Iran and launching the so-called “maximum pressure” campaign.

Following the US withdrawal, the European signatories to the JCPOA failed to uphold their commitments and made no efforts to save the agreement.

Also in his remarks, the Russian envoy criticized the Europeans and Americans for using “the tactics of forceful pressure” against Tehran, saying such an approach has no chance of success.

“The habit of Europeans and Americans to set certain deadlines all the time is quite counterproductive,” he said, citing the negotiations aimed at restoring the JCPOA in 2021-2022 as an example.

In an X post on Sunday, Ulyanov emphasized that the E3 “has no legal or moral right” to activate the snapback procedure.

Earlier, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi sent a letter to the UN chief, the Security Council president, and the top EU diplomat, saying the E3 have relinquished their role as “participants” in the JCPOA, rendering any attempt to trigger the snapback mechanism “null and void.”

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Israel seeks a temporary Gaza truce to keep its genocide going

Behind the talk of calm, Tel Aviv is redrawing Gaza’s borders, displacing its population, and laying groundwork for permanent control, one truce at a time.

By Qassem Qassem | The Cradle | July 20, 2025

Twenty-one months into its brutal campaign against the Gaza Strip, Israel is again mulling a temporary ceasefire with the Palestinian resistance. Two brief truces have already collapsed into renewed bloodshed.

But is the genocidal war really coming to a close? This question looms over the proposed truce, raising doubts about whether Israel seeks an end, or simply a pause before its next assault.

This time, mediations led by Qatar and the US, with Egypt playing a minor role, are pushing for a 60-day cessation of hostilities. The deal hinges on a pledge from US President Donald Trump to extend the truce if talks progress.

Tel Aviv’s day-after plans for Gaza

These negotiations reflect a deeper shift in the occupation state’s security doctrine. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly declared his intention to reshape Gaza’s future beyond a temporary lull in fighting.

He insists on disarming the resistance, dismantling Hamas’s authority and control, and eliminating any future threat from the besieged enclave. In Tel Aviv’s vision for the “day after,” there is not even a role for the collaborative Palestinian Authority (PA) in the Strip.

At most, Israel may tolerate an occupation state-backed militia resembling the Yasser Abu Shabab group or deploy Arab security forces to support local merchants or clans in governing Gaza – until the PA is “reformed” to Washington’s satisfaction, with Israel maintaining overarching security and military control.

This plan dovetails with the long-standing aspiration of Israel’s far-right government to re-establish illegal settlements in northern Gaza. Netanyahu is lobbying his army to construct a “tent city” in Rafah to forcibly relocate 600,000 Palestinians, a blatant demographic engineering scheme.

The 60-day truce proposal includes a phased Israeli withdrawal from west to east, a halt to air raids, permission for food and humanitarian aid entry, and a prisoner exchange. Unlike previous ceasefires, Trump’s involvement is being marketed as a guarantee that the occupation forces will not resume attacks once the deadline expires – as they did immediately after the March truce.

Yet despite signs of possible relief for Gaza’s starving and besieged population, Israel still believes it has not achieved its core objective: dismantling Hamas. One unnamed Israeli official was recently quoted as saying: “The flexibility we’ve shown paves the way for an agreement, but Netanyahu clearly doesn’t intend to end the war.”

Any upcoming truce is thus likely a pause to prepare the battlefield for the next round. Still, renewed war could prove challenging given the limits of the occupation army and the deepening cracks in its society.

Reconstruction as leverage and the Morag corridor ploy

As part of ongoing pressure, anti-resistance forces are using Gaza’s reconstruction as leverage. Israel has floated a deceptive offer to allow Qatari and international funds into Gaza during the truce, which is an attempt to lure Hamas into believing the war is truly ending. This is, in reality, a calculated deception by Israel to manufacture the illusion of an approaching end to war and draw Hamas into a false sense of security.

According to a report on 10 July by Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel has “tentatively agreed” to Qatari participation in rebuilding the Strip, provided it does not monopolize the process. Other states are expected to co-fund reconstruction to prevent funds from reaching Hamas, although Saudi Arabia and the UAE have made their commitment to Gaza’s reconstruction conditional on the war’s conclusion.

A major sticking point is Israel’s new “Morag Corridor,” carved between Khan Yunis and Rafah to replicate the Philadelphia Corridor separating Gaza from Egypt. Much like the Netzarim axis that once bisected the Strip, the Morag route is presented by Israel as vital for its security. Tel Aviv plans to use the corridor to isolate the Rafah tent city from northern Gaza—effectively creating a walled-off holding zone for displaced Palestinians.

Palestinian resistance factions have flatly rejected this scheme. Not only does it violate Palestinian sovereignty, but it would turn Gaza into a cluster of disconnected, besieged cantons, with Israel occupying nearly 40 percent of the territory.

On 14 July, Netanyahu’s government submitted a third withdrawal map to mediators. Leaks reveal that Israeli forces plan to remain in a 900-meter belt near Beit Hanoun and a 3.5-kilometer strip east of Rafah. In a post on X, Kan political correspondent Gili Cohen, citing sources familiar with the negotiations, said that Israel is now showing “flexibility” on broader withdrawals from Rafah and the Morag axis.

But Rafah remains the core obstacle to any deal. Israel insists on cramming 600,000 Palestinians into the southern city, either to push them into Egypt, where alarm over Israeli designs is mounting, or force them toward the sea. Tel Aviv and Washington are actively probing third countries to receive Gaza’s expelled population.

A tactical pause, not a peace plan

Netanyahu’s real goal is to secure strategic gains for the post-war phase. During his visit to Washington earlier this month, he sought a written US assurance that would allow Israel to resume its war, even under a formal ceasefire.

He plans to wield this assurance as political cover at home, particularly to placate extremist coalition partners like Itamar Ben Gvir (Jewish Power) and Bezalel Smotrich (Religious Zionism), who demand total war and Hamas’ annihilation.

Netanyahu’s envoy and strategic affairs minister Ron Dermer put it bluntly in a 14 July podcast interview with US columnist and political advisor Dan Senor:

“Right now, what we’re trying to do is get to a ceasefire … the minimum requirement is that the force responsible for the Oct. 7 attack is no more. They have lost control of Gaza due to their decision to act.”

According to Walla News, Netanyahu convinced Trump to delay the agreement by an additional week—bringing the timeline closer to the end of the Knesset’s summer session (late July). The paper noted that Trump is “tired of the war,” but Netanyahu managed to buy time, though what he offered in return remains unclear.

The proposed truce cannot be viewed in isolation from Israel’s broader strategy. Far from signaling the war’s end, it is a calculated intermission. Tel Aviv seeks to redraw Gaza’s demographic and security map, while Hamas focuses on regrouping and fortifying its battlefield presence.

Netanyahu’s recent moves prove that this is no pursuit of peace. What Israel wants is a lull long enough to dismantle Hamas’ political infrastructure, impose buffer zones, and reengineer the population through its “tent city” blueprint.

Palestinian affairs analyst Michael Milstein mocked Tel Aviv’s “day after” vision in a 13 July column in Yedioth Ahronoth, arguing that Gaza has become a constant testing ground for flimsy Israeli schemes that collapse shortly after being proposed. He described Israel’s latest military campaign as a “ferocious effort devoid of dramatic gains,” noting that its aggression in northern Gaza ahead of the last ceasefire produced no lasting achievements. These include past attempts to build isolated ‘bubbles’ of alternate governance in Gaza, and the so-called ‘Generals’ Plan,’ which failed to yield results even amid heavy attacks in the north. He pointed to the long record of failed experiments, from the village leagues in the West Bank, to the occupation’s backing of the Kataeb militias in Lebanon, to the eventual collapse of the South Lebanon Army. These models, he wrote, reflect a deeply flawed understanding of reality, rooted in the belief that brute military force can compel Hamas to disarm, surrender, or abandon Gaza entirely.

He noted two competing camps inside Israel: one that seeks phased withdrawal while postponing Hamas’ fate, and another pushing for full reoccupation based on the racist logic that “Arabs are only deterred by losing land” and that “settlements prevent terrorism.”

Rather than a moment of transition, this seems to be a continuation of Israel’s campaign by other means. So long as Tel Aviv avoids a political reckoning for its war on Gaza, every ceasefire will be a battlefield in disguise. Between a fleeting truce and a deepening occupation, Gaza stands today at a decisive crossroads — one where the illusion of peace masks a relentless colonial project.

July 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russiagate only tip of iceberg in Western demonization of Russia – expert

RT | July 20, 2025

US National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard’s revelations about the role of former President Barack Obama’s administration in the Russiagate scandal are “shocking,” but they expose only the surface of a broader Western anti-Russia campaign, Professor Oliver Boyd-Barrett has told RT.

On Friday, Gabbard released newly declassified documents describing a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials – led by Obama himself – to falsely accuse Donald Trump of colluding with Russia during the 2016 election. The documents indicate that Obama ordered officials to discard intelligence assessments that found no Russian involvement in Trump’s campaign and replace them with claims blaming Moscow based on fabricated data. The scandal led to the years-long Trump-Russia probe known as ‘Russiagate.’

“This is an extraordinary moment, that the head of intelligence in the US has made such a bold, in some ways shocking, statement of the truth,” Boyd-Barrett, a professor at Bowling Green State University and author of an in-depth study of Russiagate, said on Saturday. He noted the moment was especially striking as Gabbard called for prosecution of those involved in what she described as a “coup” attempt.

Boyd-Barrett, however, emphasized that to “fully comprehend” Russiagate, it must be viewed as only a small part of a broader Western campaign to demonize Russia, “that goes decades back.”

“It’s part of a much deeper agenda – we’re talking Russia narrative… the broader context of an anti-Russian campaign that was stoked artificially around the time of the late 90s when the West had so clearly decided that NATO was going to move eastwards regardless of whatever anyone in Russia or anyone in the US had to say,” he said. He also warned against reducing Russiagate to a personal political ploy, noting that blaming it solely on Obama or Hillary Clinton’s election anxiety is “too simple an explanation.”

Moscow has repeatedly denied interfering in the US electoral process.

July 20, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Russophobia | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »