Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US likely already sent new light JLTV ‘Tomahawk’ launchers to Neo-Nazi junta

By Drago Bosnic | October 8, 2025

Supplying the “Tomahawk” cruise missiles to the Kiev regime has been “on the table” for years. The troubled Biden administration never delivered them, despite repeatedly suggesting it would. Interestingly, Donald Trump regularly criticized such moves as escalatory, insisting that the United States shouldn’t be involved and that it’s only antagonizing Russia. Ironically enough, as soon as he took office, this stance changed dramatically. In a matter of weeks, Trump’s initial promise of “ending the war in 24 hours” degenerated into the same sort of belligerent rhetoric (and moves) as during the Biden era. The new US administration increased American involvement, with military sources suggesting that the Pentagon is close to delivering the aforementioned “Tomahawk” missiles.

Worse yet, some claim that this has already happened and that Washington DC even raised the stakes by supplying new light launchers for the US-made cruise missiles. Namely, since 2019, the Pentagon has been acquiring the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), better known as the Oshkosh Light Combat Tactical All-Terrain Vehicle (L-ATV). It was designed to replace the AM General High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), better known as the Humvee. One version of the JLTV has been modified for use by the US Marine Corps (USMC) under the Long Range Fires (LRF) program, designed to launch cruise missiles, specifically the infamous “Tomahawk”. The Pentagon intended to give the USMC similar capabilities to those of the US Army, which has the ground-based “Typhon”.

There’s been some confusion even in the US Congress regarding the official designation for the program, with some documents referring to it as the Long Range Precision Fires (LRPF), while others still use the LRF. Either way, the US military’s ability to use operational and strategic weapons on such a small platform can certainly provide it with a significant advantage in terms of risk mitigation. Namely, because the launcher is essentially a modified JLTV truck that’s now in wide use (well over 20,000 have been delivered so far), it makes it very difficult to detect “Tomahawk” carriers. This enables shoot-and-scoot (sort of like hit-and-run) strikes at targets that are 1,600 km away, although some sources claim that it’s 2,500 km for the latest Block V iteration of the “Tomahawk”.

The latest reports suggest that these cruise missiles have already been delivered to the Neo-Nazi junta forces through the main logistics hub for NATO-occupied Ukraine in Rzeszów, southeastern Poland, and are now waiting for the “zero hour” somewhere in Western Ukraine. The Kiev regime lacks the necessary ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) capabilities to effectively use the “Tomahawk” to the maximum, meaning that the US/NATO would need to provide the targeting data. This has already been the case with other Western cruise missiles, most notably the Anglo-French “Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG” and the German “Taurus” (the latter is yet to be officially delivered and deployed). Both types are newer and more advanced than the 1980s-era US-made “Tomahawk”.

However, the aforementioned Block V would certainly give them a run for their money, especially if deployed from the highly mobile JLTV trucks. Its ability to move quickly through heavily forested areas makes it extremely difficult to detect, meaning that it could effectively act as some sort of a single-shot “Iskander-K” (uses the 9M728/R-500, with a range of up to 500 km and the Novator’s 9M729, which Western sources claim has a staggering range of up to 5,500 km). The launcher could instantly deploy at virtually any firing position, while its relatively low cost offers the key advantage in terms of mitigating losses. Military sources report that the US could produce 100-200 such units per month, while the number of missiles supplied in each batch can reach over 500 units.

In other words, such a mass production would make it a much bigger challenge than the expensive and overhyped Western European missiles that the United Kingdom, France and Germany can produce in single or double digits, at best. Obviously, this is not to say that the Russian military could be defeated solely with the use of “Tomahawks”, but it could certainly complicate logistics and other operations far behind the immediate frontline. The Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) and its surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems have accumulated extensive experience in countering various types of missiles and drones; however, the mass deployment of different kinds of cruise missiles can pose a significant challenge. Namely, Russia is the largest country on the planet, making it extremely difficult to defend all of its territory.

Thus, the aviation, air defenses and ISR assets will need to work together and closely coordinate their actions in order to defend the most critically important areas (military-industrial facilities, bridges, thermal and nuclear power plants, substations, etc). A&WAC (airborne early warning and control) aircraft such as the A-50U will play a crucial role in this, as they can detect and track very low-flying cruise missiles. The sheer range of the “Tomahawk” puts virtually all of European Russia within striking distance, while the Block V expands that well into Western Siberia, putting even ICBM fields in jeopardy, including the Dombarovsky Red Banner Division of the 31st Missile Army of the Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN). This unit is armed with the monstrously destructive R-36M2 “Voyevoda” ICBMs (and likely the RS-28 “Sarmat”).

These missiles are also capable of deploying the Yu-71/74 “Avangard” HGVs (hypersonic glide vehicles), the world’s most advanced hypersonic weapon. The US calculus is pretty clear – deploying these missiles in NATO-occupied Ukraine puts Russia into an incredibly dangerous strategic position. It’s very similar to the geopolitical impact of having “Tomahawk” missiles permanently deployed in the Philippines and Japan, as these put Beijing and most major Chinese cities in range.

Thus, America has the capacity to strike both (Eur)Asian giants with medium-range weapons, while the two can only respond with their strategic arsenals. Although this effectively gives Washington DC the ability to dictate the pace of potential escalation, it still makes the world a far more dangerous place, forcing Moscow and Beijing to contemplate immediate strategic retaliation in order to defend themselves.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

October 8, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia ratifies military deal with Cuba amid US escalation

Al Mayadeen | October 8, 2025

Russia’s Federation Council, the upper house of parliament, ratified an intergovernmental agreement on military cooperation with Cuba on Wednesday, formalizing a framework for strengthened defense collaboration between the two nations.

Legal framework for bilateral cooperation

The explanatory note accompanying the draft highlighted that ratification will facilitate the development and expansion of military cooperation, provide the necessary legal basis to define objectives, directions, and forms of collaboration, and ensure the protection of Russian personnel operating in Cuba from local jurisdiction.

The agreement allows both nations to coordinate military activities while safeguarding the interests of their personnel and national security objectives. It is worth noting that the agreement was originally signed in March 2025.

Moscow’s response to US threats

Military expert Alexander Stepanov, from the Institute of Law and National Security at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, told TASS that the ratification represents a symmetrical response to Washington’s threats to supply Tomahawk cruise missiles to the Kiev government.

“This is about a symmetrical response to the potential supply of Tomahawks,” Stepanov explained.

“The ratified agreement maximally expands our military cooperation and allows, within the framework of bilateral interaction and in coordination with the government of the Republic of Cuba, to deploy virtually any offensive systems on the island’s territory.”

Strategic implications

The move comes amid heightened tensions over US plans to enforce Ukraine’s long-range strike capabilities. Moscow has warned that supplying Tomahawk missiles would represent a new level of escalation, prompting Russia to secure its strategic interests and regional alliances.

Earlier on Thursday, US President Donald Trump signaled a tougher stance toward Moscow, declaring that Washington would “get Russia taken care of somehow” as part of efforts to end the ongoing war in Ukraine. His remarks, delivered in an interview with One America News Network, come amid a deepening stalemate in peace talks between Moscow and Kiev.

“We’ll get Russia taken care of somehow. We’re going to get that [conflict done],” Trump said, suggesting a shift toward a more assertive US posture as the conflict enters a new and volatile phase.

October 8, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Revealed: Charlie Kirk had decided to leave pro-Israel lobby 48 hours before assassination

The video is queued to begin where Candace Owens discusses the group chat
Press TV – October 7, 2025

A prominent American political commentator reveals how Charlie Kirk, a controversial far-right activist as well as a dedicated pro-Trump and pro-Israel lobbyist, had chosen to “leave the pro-Israel lobby” two days before his assassination.

Candace Owens made the revelation in a livestreamed episode on her YouTube channel on Tuesday, citing the contents of a group chat involving nine people, including Kirk, which took place 48 hours before the assassination.

She shared a screenshot of the chat, in which Kirk had explicitly spoken of his decision to ditch the lobby after expressing frustration at it and its extensive grip and efforts to expand control on American politics, including his own political activities.

Joining the chat, Kirk had noted that an unidentified Zionist billionaire had withdrawn his support for him after he refused to “cancel” debating with Tucker Carlson, a political commentator, who had criticized the lobby and its wealthy Zionist supporters.

‘I won’t be bullied like this’

Kirk had then expressed resentment at how the “donors play into all the stereotypes.”

“I cannot and will not be bullied like this,” he had said, adding that the situation was “leaving me no choice, but to leave the pro-Israel cause.”

The revelation has sent shockwaves among netizens worldwide.

Social media frequenters have expressed alarm at the sheer contrast between Kirk’s previous staunch support for the Israeli regime and the powerful Zionist lobby in the United States versus his decision on the eve of the assassination.

They have noted how Kirk’s support for the regime had seen him go as far as denying the October 2023-present US-backed war of genocide that Tel Aviv has been waging on the Gaza Strip.

Comments have run the gamut of reactions, including expression of appreciation for Kirk’s unprecedented decision to turn against the lobby, despite the sheer predictable consequences that the move would have on his career and continued approval by President Donald Trump.

Commenting on the chat, Owens said the conversation was “irrefutable” evidence that Kirk had been “very clear” and “very explicit” about his frustration with the pro-Israel lobby and his subsequent decision towards a turnaround.

Elsewhere in the group chat, a participant tries to dissuade Kirk from inviting Owens, given her similar criticism of the lobby, which is known by its acronym as AIPAC.

Owens has previously suggested that AIPAC was responsible for the assassination of former US president John F. Kennedy. She also once pointed to the existence of a “cult” that engages in “pedophilia and incest,” saying there were “tens of thousands of pedophiles [who] hide from justice in Israel.”

“Please don’t invite Candace. That might feel good short term, but it is not good long term,” the participant had told Kirk.

Some netizens identified the Zionist billionaire, who had withdrawn support from Kirk, as “Robert J. Shillman,” who was irate at an apparent intention by Kirk to platform Tucker and Owens.

Kirk was assassinated on September 10, when a single shot targeted him as he was sitting under a tent during a campus debate at Utah Valley University in the city of Orem.

Armature footage showed him collapse after the bullet hit him in the neck, while the activist, who used to be known for his extreme right-wing leanings, was fielding questions about gun violence.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Iran to respond as US moves to target commercial shipping: Source

Al Mayadeen | October 7, 2025

Indicators point to escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, sources told Al Mayadeen, as Washington reportedly prepares to obstruct Iranian commercial shipping under the pretext of renewed sanctions on Iran.

According to the sources, any such move by the US would provoke a swift and decisive response from Tehran, citing the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps Navy and the Iranian Army’s possession of capabilities that can neutralize any threat posed to Gulf maritime security and the Sea of Oman.

They emphasized that Iran’s naval fleet and missile bases, deployed along the country’s southern coastline, are ready to respond immediately to any hostile action targeting its commercial or civilian vessels.

The sources added that any attempt to target Iranian ships would trigger a direct response, underscoring Iran’s readiness to defend its maritime interests, further confirming that regional countries have been explicitly warned: any cooperation with the US in actions that obstruct Iranian commercial shipping will not go unanswered by Tehran.

In event of mishap, Navy to respond with all might: IRGC chief

On October 5, IRGC Commander Major General Mohammad Pakpour inspected naval units situated at Gulf bases, assessing their combat preparedness as high during his visit to the operational units stationed on the islands.

Addressing the naval units, the IRGC commander stated, “Just as the armed forces brought the Zionist regime and the United States to their knees in the 12-day imposed war, if any movement is made by the enemies in the sea and islands, the IRGC Navy will respond with all might.”

He also credited the forces’ high morale and profound faith as a key strength that intimidates “Israel” and the US. General Pakpour additionally oversaw the sailing of a United States ship in the Gulf during his tour.

This comes amid rising tensions in the region, as the United States ups its military build-up in countries neighboring Iran.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

US sent $21.7 billion to Israel to back Gaza genocide: Study

Press TV – October 7, 2025

An academic study has revealed that the United States has funneled $21.7 billion in financial and military assistance to Israel since the onset of the Gaza genocide on October 7, 2023.

The report released on Tuesday by the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs details how the US State Department and the newly renamed Department of War, under both Joe Biden and Donald Trump administrations, have collectively transferred at least $21.7 billion to support Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

According to the study, the United States supplied $17.9 billion to Israel in the first year of the genocide, during former US president Joe Biden’s tenure, and $3.8 billion in the second year.

A large portion of the assistance has already been delivered, while the remainder will be distributed in the coming years, the report added.

The study notes that Washington is expected to allocate tens of billions of dollars in future funding to Israel through various bilateral deals.

Another analysis, also published by the Costs of War Project, states that the United States has spent approximately $9.65 – $12.07 billion on military operations in West Asia over the past two years.

US spending in the region, such as strikes on Yemen in March and May 2025 and attacks on Iranian nuclear sites on June 22, estimates total costs between $9.65 billion and $12 billion since October 7, 2023, including $2 billion to $2.25 billion for operations against Iran.

Although both reports rely on open-source data, they present detailed assessments of US military support for Israel and estimates of the cost of direct American involvement in the region.

Meanwhile, the State Department has not commented on the amount of military assistance given to Israel since October 2023. The White House referred inquiries to the Pentagon, which oversees only a part of the aid that is given to the Zionist entity.

The studies argue that without US backing, the regime would have been unable to maintain its genocidal campaign in Gaza for two years.

The principal study was produced in collaboration with the Washington-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

Pro-Israel groups have accused the institute of isolationism and anti-Israel bias, allegations the organization firmly denies.

Meanwhile, Israel’s war machine continues its campaign of destruction, claiming countless civilian lives across Gaza and the wider region.

Since October 7, 2023, when Israel launched its genocidal war on the besieged Gaza Strip, more than 76,000 Palestinians, including over 20,000 children and 12,500 women, have been killed or gone missing, while in its 12-day war with Iran last June, the regime killed at least 1,604 people.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US admits F-35 program failure after decades and trillions spent

Al Mayadeen | October 7, 2025

Nearly 25 years after awarding Lockheed Martin the contract to build the Joint Strike Fighter Program, Responsible Statecraft analyst Dan Grazier says that the US government has finally admitted that the F-35 will never achieve the combat capabilities it was designed to deliver.

A new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released last month details the program’s ongoing issues and includes a key acknowledgment: “The program plans to reduce the scope of Block 4 to deliver capabilities to the warfighter at a more predictable pace than in the past.”

Grazier says that this statement, while phrased bureaucratically, is a quiet admission that the F-35 will not meet its original goals. “Reducing the scope of Block 4” effectively means that planned combat capabilities are being abandoned.

The Joint Strike Fighter Program began in the early 2000s as the Pentagon’s most ambitious weapons development initiative, a single aircraft platform meant to serve multiple branches of the US military and allied nations.

However, as the GAO report notes, many of the F-35’s core design elements remain incomplete. Officials were unable to finish the jet’s baseline development on time or within budget. Instead of admitting failure, they rebranded the process as the “modernization phase,” also known as Block 4, to mask ongoing design work.

Grazier says “reducing the scope” of this modernization effort confirms that many of the F-35’s touted features in areas like electronic warfare, weapons integration, and navigation will never materialize.

Lockheed Martin’s ‘modernization’ phase masks ongoing failures

The decision marks a stunning reversal for the Pentagon, which for years defended the F-35 as the future of aerial warfare. With costs exceeding $2 trillion, the program has become the most expensive weapons project in history.

For two decades, Lockheed Martin and US military officials promised a revolutionary fighter jet that would ensure American air superiority for generations. Instead, the GAO findings reveal a project mired in delays, performance shortfalls, and spiraling expenses.

The report also highlights how the Pentagon reclassified unfinished development work as “modernization” to secure continued funding and avoid scrutiny from Congress.

Fallout for US allies and global weapons sales

Grazuer states that the ramifications of the F-35’s shortcomings go beyond wasted money. 19 countries have purchased or plan to operate the aircraft, including the United Kingdom, Norway, and Italy, many of whom were partners in the program from the outset.

These nations invested heavily, expecting the world’s most advanced fighter jet. Instead, they now face rising costs and reduced performance. For allies that committed billions based on Washington’s assurances, the admission could strain future defense spending cooperation and arms sales.

If the US military cannot deliver the promised technology, Grazier says skepticism toward future US weapons programs may grow, reducing trust in the country’s defense industry.

A symbol of flawed defense spending and mismanagement

The Responsible Statecraft report says the F-35 program has become a cautionary tale of overreach, that of an effort to design one aircraft to meet the needs of multiple branches and allies, while serving political and industrial interests at home.

As critics note, trying to build a single jet to satisfy at least 15 militaries worldwide was doomed from the start. What was intended as a triumph of innovation has turned into a $2 trillion emblem of waste, inefficiency, and failed accountability in US defense policy.

For the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin, Grazier says the F-35 may not stand as the future of warfare, but as a monument to the limits of ambition and the dangers of unchecked defense spending.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

China Slams Remarks by US Ambassador to Panama About Canal

Sputnik – 06.10.2025

BEIJING – The Chinese embassy in Panama on Monday criticized the remarks by US Ambassador to Panama Kevin Marino Cabrera about Beijing’s alleged meddling in matters concerning the Panama Canal.

On Sunday, Cabrera said in an interview with the Contrapeso newspaper that China had “malign” influence on the Panama Canal, accusing Beijing of cyberattacks and corruption and threatening visa cancellations for those who cooperate with Chinese enterprises.

“The statements of the US Ambassador about China have no factual basis and scientific justification, they are aimed at provoking conflict between China and other countries in the region. Depriving these countries of their diplomatic independence serves the geopolitical interests of the United States, causing more criticism and opposition,” the Chinese embassy said in a statement.

China adheres to the principle of “joint consultation, joint construction and joint use” in mutually beneficial cooperation with all countries, the statement read.

“The projects of Chinese companies in Panama and other Latin American countries make a significant contribution to social-economic development. High-quality Chinese goods at a low price are popular. The US ambassador’s statement casts doubt on the ability of countries in the region to think sensibly and ridicules the local population,” the embassy said.

Beijing urges Washington to put aside arrogance and bias and “focus on the matters that truly contribute to the development of the countries of the region and the well-being of their peoples,” the embassy added.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

Free Speech After Charlie Kirk: an American Lesson for Pam Bondi, Donald Trump & Netanyahu

By Ilana Mercer | LewRockwell.com | October 4, 2025

Let us be clear about what freedom of speech à la America truly means:

The words people speak, chant, write and tweet; the beliefs they are known to hold, the flags they fly or burn, the symbolic, non-violent ceremonies and rituals they enact, the insignia, paraphernalia; the goose-stepping, Hitler salutes they muck around with—provided no physical aggression is involved (violence against animals included), all this counts as protected speech, licit in natural law.

So long as oddities and idiosyncrasies, whether performed alone or in groups, thoughts harbored privately or shared in public—so long as no violence accompanies such speech or behavior; so long as your mitts stop at the next man’s face (or at the next mutt’s fury face, Kristi Noem): SPEECH. It’s all speech. It should be free, unfettered and as wild and as wanton as can be.

At their worst, expressions of ostensible antisemitism, Naziism, racisms or other antipathies amount to thought crimes, nothing more, if expressed as a belief system severally or collectively, rather than in palpably violent actions.  Whether your thoughts are spoken, chanted, written or preached; be they impolite or impolitic: they are, at worst, no more than thought crimes.

Thought crimes are nobody’s business in a free society. Thought crimes ought to be ferociously protected by a free people. By logical extension, any accusations of antisemitism, Naziism or other antipathies and racisms, are especially suspect when emitted as a meme from American institutionalized power structures.

One such obscenely wealthy and worthless power structure is the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), or Defamation League—a more apt moniker once suggested by Elon Musk, before he joined the ADL in severely censoring some speech on the X platform. The ADL is a meddlesome shakedown operation, in the mold of the Southern Poverty Law Center (“Smear Artists for the Total State,” wrote Tom DiLorenzo). It has taken it upon itself to decide who lives and who dies socially and financially on the basis of the unfortunate individual’s ideas, spoken and written.

In the American tradition, thoughts and words spoken or written that are politically impolite—again, racism; Naziism, antisemitism—retain protected status as speech beyond the adjudication of law-makers, bureaucrats, mediacrats, educrats and technocrats.

Sniffing out racists or anti-Semites is an absolute no-no for any and all self-respecting, libertarian-minded Americans, or any American, for that matter. Like creedal libertarians, Americans don’t, or should not, prosecute thought crimes or persecute thought “criminals.”

Ours should be The Skokie Standard of free speech and thinking (which I articulated in August 2022). What is The Skokie Standard of free speech? In 1978, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) took a stand for free speech by defending a neo-Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie, where many Holocaust survivors lived. The Skokie Standard of free speech is one that champions unpopular expression, and vigorously defends all marginalized speakers and thinkers, rather than purveying and protecting state and corporate ideology du jour.

Let me repeat what the Skokie Standard of free speech stands for here: However which way they are grouped, the words people individually or collectively speak, chant, write and tweet; the beliefs they are known to hold, the flags they fly or stomp, the symbolic, non-violent ceremonies, rituals and protests they perform; the insignia, paraphernalia, the goose-stepping, Hitler salutes they dick around with—provided no physical aggression is involved, all that counts as protected speech.

Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk, RIP, got it. On May 2, 2024, Kirk wrote the following: “Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.”

Trump’s Attorney General Pam Bondi doesn’t get it. No wonder even Glenn Greenwald, once a practicing constitutional attorney—and a man of manners and decorum—regularly appends “dumb” and “lacking any grasp of constitutional law” to any mention of Bondi, who said this after Kirk’s murder:

The Justice Department would “absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech… There’s free speech, and then there’s hate speech. And there is no place—especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie — [for that] in our society,” Bondi told a podcaster likewise cerebrally compromised.

If you thought the nation’s chief law enforcement officer had blurted out on an impulse such promises of unconstitutional hate-speech prosecutions; I’m sorry to say that Bondi only doubled down. In scant regard for the letter and spirit of American constitutional law, she advised employers, on September 15, of their “obligation to get rid of people who are saying horrible things.”

While “The First Amendment doesn’t stop private employers from choosing to fire people for speech; it can be illegal for the government to use its power to pressure a private company into firing a staff member.” In America, not even do celebrations of Kirk’s assassination count as threats of violence or incitement to violence. In fact, “government retribution for speech,” lambasted U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, “is directly forbidden by the First Amendment.”

For our libertarian purposes, moreover, speech should never be defended by deploying a contents-driven defense, such as that a book, an utterance or their author must be spared on account that the person is good and his words are not racist and are against bigotry.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content. Racism, (alleged) antisemitism or Naziism in targeted literature or in protests should always and everywhere be a peripheral issue. Or, preferably, no issue at all.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing not over the contents of publications like Mein Kampf or the merit of protests for Palestine, but for their publication and practice irrespective of their contents. Which is why I say freedom’s argument is an argument from process, not content.

Freedom makes the case for an unfettered free market in ideas, good and bad. Freedom argues for politically impolite books to be published and read freely. It demands that all offensive literature be available to the free men and women who inhabit the free society. And not because of history; so that we don’t forget it or repeat it. Rather, freedom needs no justification. It is an end unto itself. You are deficient in American solidarity if you don’t stand up for non-violent protest and all speech.

Liberty is a simple thing. It’s the unassailable right to shout, flail your arms, and verbally provoke people in power, unmolested. Tyranny is when those small things can get you assaulted, incarcerated, injured, deported, even killed.

Ultimately banning books or proscribing speech and speakers as the kangaroo courts of Britain, Europe and Canada do legally, assumes a lack of choice and agency among ostensibly “free” human beings. It’s also predicated on the acceptance of a higher authority which decides for the rest of us which cultural products are fit for our consumption.

I thus put it to you, dear reader, left and right, that speech restrictions stateside in the form of the Antisemitism Awareness Act mirror the worst of British and western Europe’s anti-speech tribunals. Tabled by a Republican and a Democrat, S. 4127, which mercifully is still in committee, would embed state agitprop throughout American education. For posterity. Aside being in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Antisemitism Awareness Act would utterly enervate discourse in our country and criminalize vast tracts of speech as well as proscribe actions that are licit in constitutional and natural law.

Left, Right and libertarian; we can and must, then, join in unapologetically rejecting the very idea of policing, purging, persecuting or prosecuting people for holding and expressing politically unpopular ideas in action or in speech.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Hamas official welcomes Arab-Islamic support for movement’s response to Trump plan

MEMO | October 6, 2025

Izzat al-Rishq, a member of Hamas’s Political Bureau, on Monday welcomed a joint statement issued by the foreign ministers of several Arab and Islamic countries, describing it as “important support” for efforts to end Israeli military operations in Gaza and advance negotiations toward a ceasefire.

Speaking to Quds Press, al-Rishq said the ministers’ declaration reinforced the Palestinian position in ongoing talks and could help secure a permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of Israeli forces, and the entry of humanitarian aid, paving the way for reconstruction under a Palestinian administration backed by Arab and Islamic states.

“We look forward to further Arab and Islamic support to stop the aggression and genocide against our people in Gaza, to end the occupation, and to achieve the aspirations of our people for an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital,” he added.

In their joint statement, the foreign ministers of Jordan, the UAE, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt welcomed Hamas’s steps in response to US President Donald Trump’s proposal. The plan calls for ending the war in Gaza, releasing detainees on both sides, and launching immediate negotiations on implementation mechanisms.

The ministers also praised Hamas’s announcement that it is ready to hand over the administration of Gaza to a transitional Palestinian committee of independent technocrats. They stressed the urgency of moving forward on all elements of the proposal to end the humanitarian and political crisis in the enclave.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Oracle execs: Love Israel or maybe this isn’t the job for you

Employees who disagreed were reportedly referred to company mental health services

By Eli Clifton | Responsible Statecraft | October 3, 2025

TikTok’s impending sale to a group of U.S. investors led by Oracle was supposed to alleviate concerns about foreign influence over the popular social media platform. But a series of statements in Israeli media outlets by company executives including Executive Vice Board Chair and former CEO Safra Catz, reveal the company’s commitment to Israel is “unequivocal” and is not shy about squelching criticism of Israel internally.

These statements raise questions about how Oracle might exercise its impending ownership role at TikTok, a platform popular with young adults who are often critical of U.S. support for Israel’s war in Gaza and Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians, which a U.N. commission recently characterized as a “genocide.”

In 2021, Catz visited Israel as her first trip outside the U.S. after the COVID-19 pandemic. Calcalist, an Israeli publication, reported on remarks by the Oracle CEO:

When asked about the protests against Israel organized by employees at Google and Apple, Catz said that “when you connect with Oracle you understand that we are committed to the U.S. and Israel. We are not flexible regarding our mission, and our commitment to Israel is second to none. This is a free world and I love my employees, and if they don’t agree with our mission to support the State of Israel then maybe we aren’t the right company for them. Larry (Ellison, co-founder of Oracle) and I are publicly committed to Israel and devote personal time to the country and no one should be surprised by that.”

In a 2024 interview with Calcalist, Catz emphasized that one of her first actions after the October 7th 2023 Hamas attack was to send the message to Oracle’s clients around the world – including, presumably, in many countries where Oracle holds government contracts – that the technology company prioritizes Israel. She said:

“So what we did was first sort of hug our employees, hug my Oracle employees by doing everything we could think of and put on our website ‘We stand with Israel’, not only on our Israeli website or even on our American website, but on our websites around the world in the local language. And as you know, we operate in a lot of countries. And it was very important for us to make sure we made a powerful message about how important Israel is and what the difference is between good and evil.”

Head of Oracle Israel Eran Feigenbaum reinforced the messages delivered by Catz in a 2023 interview with the Israeli publication Ynet. Feigenbaum said:

“I couldn’t fathom a global company offering more support to Israel than Oracle. It’s an incredible opportunity to lead the Israeli branch with the backing of a global powerhouse. Oracle’s leadership, including the fact that Larry himself has an Israeli origin, has consistently demonstrated unequivocal support for Israel. So much so, that employees not aligning with support for Israel may find Oracle isn’t the right fit.”

The message from higher ups at Oracle that anything less than total prioritization of Israeli interests is unwelcome behavior appears to be reinforced through the company’s human resources department. An anonymous Substack, Oracle For Palestine, written by a group of Oracle employees, claims that “our leadership’s unquestioning public support for Israel” has led to a failure of the company to address the one-sided political positions taken by top management and the discrimination faced by employees who don’t share the political views of management.

“In response to legitimate concerns, many of us have been referred to internal mental health resources rather than having those concerns addressed appropriately,” said the group in a post last year.

Catz’s comments as well as the anecdote about Oracle staff being referred to mental health resources were all celebrated in a Times of Israel blog post by Oracle employee Ivan Bassov.

“Oracle has been refreshingly clear and consistent under the leadership of our CEO, Safra Catz,” wrote Bassov. “She has repeatedly articulated both her personal commitment and Oracle’s commitment to Israel.”

Bassov appeared to corroborate the anonymous Substack’s claims and endorsed Oracle’s treatment of his “anti-Israel” colleagues, writing, “Well, if sending these ‘activists’ to therapy instead of resetting the company’s moral compass counts as ‘repression,’ then maybe the company’s judgment was sounder than they think.”

Earlier this week, Responsible Statecraft reported on a leaked email from the hacked email account of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. “We have all been horrified by the growth of the BDS movement in college campuses and have concluded that we have to fight this battle before the kids even get to college,” said an email appearing to originate from Catz to Barak in 2015. “We believe that we have to embed the love and respect for Israel in the American culture.”

Sources familiar with the matter “could not confirm the authenticity of the email” and Oracle declined to comment about Catz’s statements. However, review of Catz’s public statements, as well as those from another executive at Oracle, reveal similar biases in favor of Israel and even clearer expressions of Oracle’s prioritization of Israel over any other countries or corporate interests.The track record of Oracle executives demanding commitment to Israel from staff around the world raises a number of questions:

How does Oracle address situations in which U.S. interests, or the interests of any other country in which the company operates, are in conflict with Israel’s interests?

Will these statements of unequivocal support for Israel translate into restrictions on speech critical of Israel on TikTok under Oracle’s ownership?

An Oracle spokesperson did not respond to these questions.

Eli Clifton is a senior advisor at the Quincy Institute and Investigative Journalist at Large at Responsible Statecraft. He reports on money in politics and U.S. foreign policy.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Trump, Hamas, and the future of Palestine

By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 6, 2025

The unprecedented statement

It is October 4, 2025: a few days before the second anniversary of the new war for the liberation of Palestine occupied by the Zionist entity Israel, the Hamas leadership has released a decisive statement regarding U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan for peace in the region.

Here is the full text:

In order to stop the aggression and war of extermination to which our steadfast people in the Gaza Strip are subjected, and in accordance with national responsibility, and to preserve the principles, rights, and supreme interests of our people, the Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas” has conducted in-depth consultations with its leadership institutions, extensive consultations with Palestinian forces and factions, and consultations with mediators and fraternal friends, in order to arrive at a responsible position in dealing with the plan of U.S. President Donald Trump.

After thorough study, the movement has made its decision and delivered its response to the mediators as follows:

  • The Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas appreciates the Arab, Islamic, and international efforts, as well as those of U.S. President Donald Trump, calling for an end to the war on Gaza, the exchange of prisoners, the immediate entry of aid, the rejection of occupation, and the rejection of the displacement of our Palestinian people.
  • In this context, and in order to achieve a ceasefire and complete withdrawal from Gaza, the movement announces its approval for the release of all Israeli prisoners, dead or alive, according to the exchange formula included in President Trump’s proposal, provided that conditions on the ground allow for the exchange process.
  • In this context, the movement confirms its readiness to immediately enter into negotiations through mediators to discuss the details.
  • The movement also renews its approval of the handover of the administration of Gaza to a Palestinian body of independents (technocrats) based on Palestinian national consensus and with Arab and Islamic support.
  • As for the other issues mentioned in President Trump’s proposal relating to the future of Gaza and the inherent rights of the Palestinian people, these are linked to an overall national position based on relevant international laws and decisions. They will be discussed within an overall Palestinian national framework, of which Hamas will be a part and to which it will contribute responsibly.

These words have shaken all those who support the struggle for the liberation of Palestine and the Axis of Resistance, but what exactly do they mean?

Behind the words

Hamas’ statement is very cleverly worded. At first glance, it may seem that the organization accepts Trump’s plan, but in essence this is not the case.

First, we must note that the wording of Hamas’ statement was chosen very carefully, with every word weighed. Thanking Trump, accepting the release of prisoners, even of bodies, accepting an independent technocratic government in Gaza, all seem at first glance to be a retreat on the part of Hamas; but if we look deeper, we see that all this is bound and conditioned by “conditions on the ground,” meaning that until Israel is ready to withdraw completely, there will in fact be no exchange.

Secondly, accepting the administration of Gaza by a technocratic government also seems like a retreat by Hamas, but if we pay attention, Hamas is talking about a collective Palestinian administration and, considering the predominantly Islamic and religious community in Gaza, a government of technocrats will not make sense and cannot really exist.

Third, Hamas has said it is ready and willing to accept the agreement, but issues relating to the future of Gaza, Palestinian rights, and the national framework must be examined at the national level, which means that even if Trump wanted to impose his totalitarian project, Hamas would oppose it as it would go against the terms of the agreement and jurisdiction, as these issues require general consensus.

Fourth, Hamas has not said it will leave, so its presence in Gaza’s political future is confirmed, and there is no mention of disarmament.

In fact, Hamas has very cleverly reformulated all its previous conditions on the negotiating table but, to use Trump’s own words, has returned the ball to Trump and left it in the American camp without giving any grounds for accusing Hamas of sabotaging the ceasefire, either in the media or in public opinion in Gaza.

Hamas responded to Trump’s plan with a response that is actually a conditional consent to put everything back in the blood-stained hands of the American Potus.

Looking at Trump’s plan

To better understand, let’s look at Trump’s plan. The national plan was to transfer the population of Gaza and transform the territory into a tourist area, a proposal clearly supported by the Zionist regime. However, in the new 20-point plan, Trump backtracked and accepted some decisive issues, such as those concerning the rights of the Palestinian population, reconstruction, the formation of a transitional government, a plan that even the American and Israeli media criticized as “difficult to sustain” even for Bibi Netanyahu.

The most important flaw in this plan, however, was that it completely ignored the key role of Hamas. Trump was trying to launch a “simulated peace” to save Netanyahu with the support of the collective West and even some compromised Arab countries, under strong public pressure, but the Sumud Flotilla incident exposed his plan and once again placed the regime at the center of global hatred. Therefore, Hamas’ response is also of great importance in terms of timing, as it demonstrates its political and media intelligence.

It should be reiterated that the statement issued by Hamas contains some key points:

  1. Accepting the ceasefire to demonstrate its opposition to war;
  2. Postponing the details to negotiations, thus leaving the final decision to Trump, which also means responsibility before the whole world;
  3. The absolute refusal to disarm;
  4. The future role in the Palestinian state.

An action that is perhaps the pinnacle of Hamas’ intelligence.

Hamas’ reaction explained by Hamas

Some senior Hamas leaders explained the response to the peace plan.

Musa Abu Marzouk explained the movement’s position on the proposed plan to end the Gaza war in an interview with Al Jazeera Qatar and outlined Hamas’ priorities in these negotiations, the first of which is to stop the massacre, stating: “Our priority is to stop the war and the massacre, and from this perspective, we have approached the plan in question with a positive attitude. We have examined the points of Trump’s plan directly related to the Hamas movement with a positive approach,“ adding that ”The implementation of the plan’s provisions requires details and understanding, and this plan cannot be implemented without negotiations. We will begin negotiations on all issues related to the movement and weapons.”

Describing part of the proposed plan as unrealistic, Abu Marzouk said, “The issue of handing over prisoners and bodies within 72 hours is theoretical and unrealistic in the current circumstances. The United States of America should look optimistically to the future of the Palestinian people.” Regarding the national agreement for the administration of Gaza, he said, “We have reached a national agreement on handing over the administration of Gaza to independent individuals (technocrats), and the authority for this administration will be the Palestinian National Authority. Outlining the future of the Palestinian people is a national issue that Hamas cannot decide on its own. We have agreed to the regional and international plan presented by Egypt, which includes answers regarding peace and the future.“

Marzouk also strongly reiterated that Hamas is a national liberation movement and that the definition of ”terrorism” contained in this plan cannot be applied to this movement under any circumstances: “We have agreed in principle and in general with the main points of the plan, but its implementation requires negotiations.”

This also has to do with the future of the weapons of resistance. The Hamas official specified that “We will hand over the weapons to the future Palestinian government, and whoever governs Gaza will have the weapons in their hands.” This line is consistent with what the Movement has always maintained.

Osama Hamdan, another senior official, told Al Arabi Channel that the Hamas movement is ready to immediately begin talks on the prisoner exchange operation, stressing that Hamas will not accept under any circumstances that a party outside Palestine take over the management of the Gaza Strip. The official also noted that the situation and facts on the ground regarding Israeli prisoners (both living and dead) must be taken into account in future negotiations. Hamdan added that the prisoner exchange process will take more than 72 hours and that this issue can only be resolved by reaching an agreement between the parties, reiterating that the entry of any foreign administration or force into Gaza is unacceptable under any circumstances.

Taher al-Nunu, media advisor to the head of Hamas’ political office, emphasized the movement’s full readiness to start immediate negotiations: “We are ready for immediate negotiations on prisoner exchange, ceasefire, and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.”

These statements were made in the hours immediately following the official announcement.

This has nothing to do with “taking a step back” or, worse still, abandonment: we are witnessing a strategic move that forces the Zionist regime and the corrupt West to show their cards by making the first move.

Game. Set.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

FBI Breakup Ends SPLC and ADL Direct Influence

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | October 5, 2025

The FBI has officially ended its partnership with both the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), following years of mounting concern over the influence of partisan organizations in shaping federal intelligence and domestic “extremism” policy, which has resulted in online censorship.

FBI Director Kash Patel condemned the SPLC’s direction, describing it as a “partisan smear machine” and calling its involvement in federal intelligence work unacceptable.

He pointed specifically to the group’s so-called “hate map,” which has long been used to label mainstream conservative and Christian organizations as equivalent to violent hate groups.

“Their so-called hate map has been used to defame mainstream Americans and even inspired violence,” Patel stated. “That disgraceful record makes them unfit for any FBI partnership.”

The bureau confirmed it no longer shares information or maintains any intelligence products from the SPLC.

It has also cut off contact with the ADL, a group that, while ostensibly focused on combating antisemitism, has frequently advocated for censorship of speech it deems problematic, particularly online.

Both organizations were previously consulted by the FBI in identifying and monitoring alleged extremist threats.

That practice came under fire after the bureau’s Richmond office cited the SPLC in a controversial 2023 memo suggesting that traditional Catholics could be tied to radical activity.

The document called for agents to cultivate informants within Catholic churches.

The backlash led Patel to publicly reject the use of ideologically driven outside groups in FBI operations.

“I made it clear that the FBI will never rely on politicized or agenda-driven intelligence from outside groups—and certainly not from the SPLC,” Patel said. “All ties with the SPLC have officially been terminated.”

Originally known for battling white supremacist groups through litigation, the SPLC has since shifted its focus toward labeling conservative advocacy organizations as dangerous.

Over time, its “hate map” has become a blacklist used by corporations, financial services, and online platforms to restrict access and support for those groups.

More recently, the group listed Turning Point USA shortly before the assassination of its founder, free speech advocate Charlie Kirk.

The SPLC has maintained that not all Christian groups are included in its listings. For years, it pointed to Focus on the Family as an example of one that was not. That changed in 2024 when Focus was added to the map.

The ADL supported the STOP HATE Act, which seeks to pressure online platforms to remove “disinformation” and what it calls “hate speech.” The bill’s language raises obvious concerns about vague definitions and potential abuse.

Both organizations have held sway not just over federal agencies, but also over powerful private institutions.

Amazon, Eventbrite, Hyatt Hotels, and PayPal have all relied on the SPLC’s hate designations to determine which groups can use their services.

The now-discontinued AmazonSmile program excluded organizations listed by the SPLC, while major charitable foundations have blocked funding to those targeted by the group.

Federal agencies under the Biden administration have also shown a willingness to coordinate with the SPLC.

In a 2021 donor meeting, the group’s then-president said that many agencies had proactively reached out to solicit its input on shaping domestic terrorism policy.

That cooperation continued even after the SPLC labeled the parental rights group Moms for Liberty a hate group in 2023, followed by a briefing with the Department of Justice.

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »