A Message to Georgians: America Will Not Protect You
No offense, but Georgia’s interests are just none of my affair. It’s such a long way from here.
I know my government has been messing around there since the 1990s, picking winners and losers, making big promises and causing lots of trouble.
Keeping Russia out of their former sphere of influence was thought by Washington to be its most important goal.
Under the Bill Clinton administration, it was decided that building the BTC Pipeline across Georgia was the highest priority – to prevent Azeri gas from flowing north through Russia or south through Iran.
Under George W. Bush, it was decided that the government of Edward Shevardnadze was too close to Russia, compromising with them over Abkhazia, making deals with Gazprom, and joining the CIS, and had to go.
USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and the rest of the regime change industry poured in tens of millions of dollars to support the groups supporting Mikhail Saakaashvili’s rise and the Rose Revolution of 2003, which installed him in power. This included a Soros front called the Liberty Institute – not to be confused with the Libertarian Institute, I assure you.
As I’m sure you all know, former President Salome Zourabichvili was born in France, not Georgia, and was just parachuted in by the new regime to take over as Finance Minister after the overthrow of 2003. She later explained that:
“These institutions were the cradle of democratization, notably the Soros Foundation. … The NGOs which gravitate around the Soros Foundation undeniably carried the revolution. However, one cannot end one’s analysis with the revolution and one clearly sees that, afterwards, the Soros Foundation and the NGOs were integrated into power.”
Soros’s business partner Kaka Bendukidze became the new economy minister. Alexander Lomaia, the director of Open Society Georgia, was made education minister. At the same time, Giga Bokeria, co-founder of the Liberty Institute, became the leader of the National Movement party in the parliament. In the name of fighting against corruption, they stayed on Soros’s payroll. Saakashvili too.
“I’m delighted by what happened in Georgia, and I take great pride in having contributed to it,” Soros told the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe.
How y’all let her become the president of the country is a mystery. Oh yeah. All the foreign money.
I sure hope that Mr. Saakashvili’s trial was more fair than his opponents received while he was in power. And that Saakashvili is not being tortured in prison the way his regime tortured people. No human deserves to be treated in such a barbarian fashion.
Do I believe Georgia country is better off under the domination of Russia or any other significant power?
Of course not. But I do mean that American intervention is not in the interest of either country.
I’ve read that current Georgian leaders have expressed frustration that they have not been able to reach the new Trump administration to see if they can get a reset in America’s Georgia policy. Be careful what you wish for. Georgians are more likely to be better off when America does not have a Georgia policy at all than even a favorable one, with strings attached.
As far as the difficulties Georgia may face in maintaining full independence as a small country in a world of major competing powers and Georgia’s advantageous or disadvantageous geographic position relative to important resources, I could not say what your best solution must be.
I could say that at the end of the day, America will not guarantee Georgia’s independence, which is why there is no major U.S. troop presence there, and why NATO membership has not moved forward since W. Bush’s foolish declaration at Bucharest in April 2008.
Perhaps maintaining Tbilisi’s neutrality in these major contests could be the path to maintaining independence from outright control.
Even after Russia intervened to reverse Saakashvili’s attempt to forcefully reintegrate South Ossetia in 2008, Moscow did not sever the BTC, nor roll its tanks into Tblisi, thank goodness. Though Putin and Medvedev had plenty of counter-incentives, they certainly had the pretext to go that far if they had chosen to do so.
President Bush, in his lame-duck year, had already chosen not to intervene, despite the protests of then-Vice President Cheney, who insisted on strikes against Russian forces coming through the Roki tunnel, risking World War III.
Thank goodness the cool, patient wisdom of George W. Bush, relative to Cheney anyway, prevailed that day.
Surely Russia would have escalated in kind, and Tbilisi would have lost its independence to the Federation after Bush had inevitably backed down. Thank goodness it did not come to that.
Making sure the Russians continue to feel like such a move would be unnecessary and unreasonably costly would probably be the best course of action.
Of course, USAID, NED, IRI, NDI, and all the usual suspected Soros-backed groups have spent a ton to keep the current ruling party out of power. I’m sure the permanent professional protestors — analyst Brad Pearce calls their rallies an “organized labor protest by the foreign influence industry” — have some real concerns, just as I’m sure that any protestor receiving the backing of a foreign regime can only be taken so seriously by anyone else.
Again, ultimately, America is too far away and has too little to lose if Tbilisi’s status were to truly change to truly be motivated to do anything about it. When Russia came across the mountains in 2008, many Americans were terrified – they thought that our Georgia was under attack, the state between South Carolina and Florida. They either had never heard of your country, or they could not fathom why it being invaded should be top news in Colorado or Illinois. That Russia would attack America out of the blue seemed to them more plausible, at first glance, at least.
That being the case, Georgians are almost certainly better off choosing the proper course forward for their country with that in mind. Because chances are that if worse comes to worst, no one over here is coming to intervene over there.
Long live Georgia and its independence, good luck.
And may liberty always remain your highest political goal.
Thank you.
Legacy media has a meltdown after RFK Jr fires the CDC’s vaccine panel
By Maryanne Demasi, PhD | June 10, 2025
Yesterday, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired every single member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—the influential group of experts that decides which vaccines are added to the childhood schedule.
Today, he set fire to the media’s hysterical reaction.
Within 24 hours, legacy outlets and public health institutions lost their collective minds. Former CDC directors, industry-funded doctors, and conflicted public health groups lined up to denounce Kennedy’s move as reckless, anti-scientific, even deadly.
“This is a dangerous and unprecedented action that makes our families less safe,” said former CDC director Dr Tom Frieden.
“Unilaterally removing the entire panel of experts is reckless,” said paediatrician Dr Tina Tan to The New York Times.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) said it was “deeply troubled and alarmed.” It claimed the move would “stoke distrust in lifesaving vaccines”—this from the same organisation that has spent decades pushing the childhood vaccine schedule while taking money from the very companies that profit from it.
Others framed it as a political purge, a blow to science, or a “coup” that would bring back measles and polio.
But within hours, Kennedy hit back—and this time, he wasn’t the outsider being easily dismissed. He was the Secretary of Health and Human Services. And he came armed with evidence, receipts, and a brutal takedown of the media’s favourite falsehoods.
In a searing post on X, Kennedy explained the decision.
He said the clean sweep was necessary because ACIP had demonstrated its “stubborn unwillingness to demand adequate safety trials before recommending new vaccines for our children.”
And despite the media’s insistence otherwise, Kennedy argued that no routine injected childhood vaccine on the CDC’s schedule had ever been approved based on a placebo-controlled trial using an inert substance.
CNN had tried to prove him wrong last week—claiming it had found “257 placebo-controlled studies” of vaccines on the schedule.
Kennedy dismantled it in forensic detail.
“CNN is wrong,” he wrote. “No routine injected vaccine on CDC’s schedule was licensed for children based on a placebo-controlled trial. That is not conjecture. It is a fact based on FDA’s clinical trial data.”
Then came the body blows.
He pointed out that most of the 257 studies used active substances like aluminium, antibiotics, or other vaccines—not inert placebos.
He linked directly to FDA definitions of “placebo” and to official clinical trial records. Of the few studies that may have used saline controls, none were relied on by the FDA to license a single routine vaccine for American children.
Some studied products that were never approved in the US. Some occurred after licensure. Others involved discontinued vaccines. “CNN’s list ironically proves the lack of adequate safety trials,” Kennedy wrote in a stinging rebuke.
The post was devastating.
It was a clinical takedown of an industry riddled with deception—and it landed—because this time, Kennedy wasn’t being filtered through a hostile press.
He was speaking directly to the public, as a government official, with all the links to back it up. And the media couldn’t handle it.
Predictably, the media rolled out the same tired “experts” to recycle the same tired script—Paul Offit quotes, panic about “undermining trust,” warnings that children would die.
But Kennedy turned the whole thing inside out.
“We’ve gone from three routine injections by age one in 1986 to 25 in 2025,” he wrote. “And not one of them was licensed using a placebo-controlled trial.”
He said it plainly for the cameras: “That is just malpractice. So the people who are in charge of that are now gone.”
For years, the press had written Kennedy off as an anti-vaxxer and moved on. Now, they’ve thrown everything at him—and he threw it right back. Only now, he has the authority, data, and reach.
Kennedy told his followers he’d be announcing replacements in the coming days—no “ideological anti-vaxxers” just “highly credentialed physicians and scientists” committed to evidence, objectivity, and common sense.
Legacy media may still control the headlines, but they can no longer suppress the debate.
And perhaps that’s what really has them rattled.
They’re not defending science. They’re defending a regime of experts who signed off on decades of vaccine approvals without ever insisting on rigorous, inert-placebo safety trials.
When Kennedy calls them out, their only defence is to scream “danger!”—and hope no one checks the fine print.
Yesterday, he fired the gatekeepers. Today, he exposed the game.
US makes sweeping changes to key vaccine group
RT | June 10, 2025
The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has dismissed all the members of a key advisory panel that has helped shape national vaccination policy for decades. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on Monday that the move was necessary to reestablish public trust and address longstanding concerns over conflicts of interest.
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) was created within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the mid-1960s. In an op-ed published on Monday in the Wall Street Journal, Kennedy claimed that the panel has “a history of conflicts of interest, persecution of dissidents, a lack of curiosity, and skewed science.”
The secretary cited reports from a House committee in 2000 and the HHS inspector general in 2009 that detailed financial connections between ACIP members and pharmaceutical companies. He said his decision to replace all 17 current members was driven by the need for a “clean slate.”
“The problem isn’t necessarily that ACIP members are corrupt. Most likely aim to serve the public interest as they understand it,” Kennedy wrote. “The problem is their immersion in a system of industry-aligned incentives and paradigms that enforce a narrow pro-industry orthodoxy.”
ACIP members are appointed to four-year terms, and eight of the most recent appointments were made in the final days of the administration of Joe Biden.
”It was very intentional,” a former senior HHS official told STAT News. “It was our goal to fill every vacancy on every [federal advisory committee] the department has, with particular focus on ones like ACIP where maintenance of our scientific expertise was critical.”
Mandy Cohen, who served as the CDC director under Biden, told NBC News the move “spreads confusion and casts doubt on transparent public health processes that protect Americans.” Richard Besser, who was acting CDC director under Barack Obama, said it “should erase any remaining doubt that he intends to impose his personal anti-vaccine agenda on the American people.”
Kennedy has long criticized aspects of US vaccine programs, arguing they are too closely aligned with industry interests and fail to prioritize public health. His detractors frequently label him an “anti-vaxxer.”
During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy pledged that his decisions would be science-driven. In his WSJ piece, he warned against attributing the American public’s “crisis of trust” solely to “misinformation or anti-science attitudes.”
Trump to Netanyahu: No green light to attack Iran, pursue deal
Al Mayadeen | June 10, 2025
US President Donald Trump has reportedly told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that “Israel” does not have a “green light” to launch a military strike against Iran, emphasizing that diplomacy remains Washington’s preferred path.
According to Israeli Channel 12 sources, Trump stated during a phone conversation on Monday, “You don’t have a green light, there will be a deal with Iran. The attack (on Iran) needs to be taken off the agenda right now.”
The firm statement came in response to Netanyahu’s demand that Trump abandon ongoing negotiations with Tehran and support an Israeli military operation. Netanyahu reportedly insisted that Washington should “cease talks and support direct military action.”
Despite Netanyahu’s warning that “negotiations with Iran are futile, and they are trying to deceive you; all they want is to buy time,” Trump pushed back, reiterating that “nothing closes the door” and that “work is underway to reach an agreement.” Israeli Channel 12 previously reported that Trump expected a “not-so-good response” from Iran but remains committed to diplomacy.
Trump also addressed the war in Gaza during the call, urging Netanyahu to de-escalate. “I want you to work on ending the war in Gaza, not just the Deal of the Century, the war has exhausted itself,” he said.
Intelligence Blow to “Israel” Changes Strategic Calculus
The conversation took place against the backdrop of a major intelligence breakthrough by Iran, which, according to Iranian and regional sources, has obtained thousands of highly sensitive documents detailing “Israel’s” nuclear infrastructure and strategic projects.
On June 7, Al Mayadeen cited Iranian intelligence sources who revealed that the trove includes photos, videos, and technical data on “Israel’s” nuclear facilities, some previously undisclosed. The volume of data, the sources said, was so vast that reviewing it all “would take an exceptionally long time.”
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council announced on June 9 that this intelligence enables Tehran to carry out a proportional retaliatory strike on hidden Israeli nuclear sites if Iran is attacked. “Today, access to this information… has allowed the warriors of Islam to give a clearly proportionate response to a possible attack by the Israeli regime,” it stated.
Meanwhile, Iran has accused the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of leaking confidential communications to Israeli intelligence, claiming this had led to the targeted assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. “These documents clearly show that instead of playing a neutral role, the IAEA has become an instrument serving the objectives of the Zionist regime,” a source told Fars News on June 10.
Broader Implications
The revelations have added urgency to Trump’s diplomatic posture, as US intelligence officials increasingly warn that a unilateral Israeli strike could unravel the fragile state of nuclear negotiations and trigger a regional war. According to the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, “Israel” had been preparing to strike Iran’s nuclear sites but delayed the move at Washington’s request.
Iranian officials, meanwhile, have warned that any Israeli military action will be met with devastating counterstrikes. IRGC Commander Major General Hossein Salami recently said that it is not Iran’s nuclear sites that will be destroyed, but the “targets of the Israeli occupation entity.” Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh echoed that sentiment, stating, “Any hostile action by Israel against Iran would inevitably result in its destruction.”
With Iran holding what it describes as “one of the most significant intelligence blows” ever dealt to “Israel,” and with talks in Washington still on the table, analysts say that Trump’s call to de-escalate may reflect a growing US effort to avoid being drawn into a full-scale conflict.
40 Buses Destroyed: Electric Bus Confirmed as Cause in Philly Fire
StacheD Training | June 7, 2025
On June 5, 2025, a massive fire broke out at SEPTA’s Midvale Depot in Philadelphia, destroying 40 out-of-service buses. Speculation swirled—was it arson, a setup, or just bad luck? Now we know: the fire started in an electric bus. And it’s not the first time a Proterra bus has ignited in Philadelphia. Back in 2022, a similar bus caught fire while charging at SEPTA’s Southern Depot. That incident led to a national recall, but no fix was in place.
Link to NTSB Investigation (HWY23IH002): https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/?NTSBNum…
Training & Consulting: https://www.stachedtraining.com
Most people across 24 surveyed countries have negative views of Israel and Netanyahu
By Laura Silver | Pew Research Center | June 3, 2025
International views of Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are much more negative than positive, according to a Pew Research Center survey of 24 countries conducted this spring.
Israelis, for their part, tend to say their country is not respected internationally: 58% say Israel is not too or not at all respected around the world, while 39% think it is.
In 20 of the 24 countries surveyed, around half of adults or more have an unfavorable view of Israel. Around three-quarters or more hold this view in Australia, Greece, Indonesia, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and Turkey.
Views of Israel are fairly divided in India (34% favorable, 29% unfavorable).
In Kenya and Nigeria, around half of adults or more have a favorable view of Israel.
How views have changed in recent years
The recent survey is not the first time Pew Research Center has asked about international views of Israel. We have asked about views of Israel before in some countries – including in the United States, where the share of adults with a negative view of Israel rose 11 percentage points between March 2022 and March 2025.
In 10 other countries, we last asked this question in 2013. In seven of these countries, the share of adults with a negative view of Israel has increased significantly. In the United Kingdom, for example, 44% had an unfavorable view of Israel in 2013, compared with 61% now. (In Nigeria, both the share of adults with a negative view of Israel and the share with a positive view have increased since 2013, due to a decline in the share saying they don’t know.)
Views by age
In some countries, younger people are more likely than older people to have an unfavorable view of Israel. This is particularly the case in the high-income countries surveyed: Australia, Canada, France, Poland and South Korea and the U.S. In fact, the U.S. has one of the largest age gaps in views of Israel. … Full article
Who’s behind LA Anti-ICE Riots?
Sputnik – 09.06.2025
President Donald Trump called the Los Angeles protests “paid”, but who could be behind the havoc?
Soros in the shadows
“Allegations of funding links to [Soros’] Open Society Foundations have been raised,” Dr. Marco Marsili, researcher at Cà Foscari University of Venice, tells Sputnik.
The protests aren’t spontaneous, there’s “a structured strategy” behind them, he claims.
The color revolution playbook
Marsili outlines hallmarks of a Soros-style uprising:
*Protesters linked to well-funded, Democrat-aligned NGOs
*Liberal media frame riots as “moral resistance”
*Symbolic activism—hashtags, slogans—spreads rapidly
*Federal agencies portrayed as “oppressive”
Your tax dollars at work
One group behind the LA unrest, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA) got $34M in US government grants in 2023 alone.
It’s also linked to Soros-funded programs like the Soros Justice Fellowships.
‘Fake protests’ go viral
US author Scott Adams denounced the LA protests as “fake” and “paid” by wealthy Democrats and Soros-linked organizations in a video post on X.
He believes the real goal is to create chaos and undermine Trump.
Who dropped the bricks?
Conservative X influencers spotlighted pallets of bricks conveniently dropped at protest sites across Los Angeles.
Bricks, rocks and Molotov cocktails are used against law enforcement.
Organized?
LA Council Member Eunisses Hernandez: “When they show up, we got to show up even stronger.”
Conservatives say she all but admits on camera that the ICE riots are Democrat-organized.
BLM 2.0 with a twist
Observers say it’s the repetition of the 2020 BLM riots.
Conservative blogger Andy Ngo notes Antifa’s back in the mix too.
Desperate move to stop Trump?
Zero Hedge alleges the LA protests are a last-ditch Democrat effort to sabotage Trump after their DOGE-fueled unrest flopped. The goal? Spark a fresh national riot wave.
UNIFIL denies talks on ending its mission in south Lebanon: Exclusive
Al Mayadeen | June 9, 2025
Any discussion about the future of UNIFIL falls solely under the authority of the UN Security Council, the spokesperson for UNIFIL clarified to Al Mayadeen, noting that the force remains committed to coordinating with the Lebanese Army and insists on the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon.
UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti told Al Mayadeen, “There are currently no talks about UNIFIL’s future,” adding that “any such discussion would take place within the UN Security Council.”
Meanwhile, a US State Department spokesperson told Al Mayadeen in a short briefing that the recent reports claiming the United States intends to end the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in southern Lebanon are inaccurate.
Tenenti stated that UNIFIL continues its operations in southern Lebanon in full cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces. He emphasized that Israeli forces should withdraw from their occupied positions in the area, noting that the UN Security Council alone holds the authority to assess whether UNIFIL’s ongoing presence remains necessary and effective.
“Restoring stability to southern Lebanon depends on Israel’s withdrawal from recently occupied positions,” he added.
Lebanese Army is adhering to resolution 1701
Tenenti also affirmed that the Lebanese Army remains committed to implementing UN Resolution 1701, deploying to required areas in close coordination with UNIFIL forces.
When asked about French troops, he responded: “I don’t distinguish between the role of French forces and UNIFIL, all are fulfilling their duties under Resolution 1701.”
The statement follows reports in Israeli media claiming the US and “Israel” agreed to terminate UNIFIL’s operations in southern Lebanon.
The Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom cited sources claiming that “the United States and Israel have agreed to end UNIFIL’s operations in southern Lebanon.” According to the report, the US administration is “not interested in renewing UNIFIL’s mandate,” and “Israel, frankly, isn’t pushing hard to convince them otherwise.”
US, Israel agree to end UNIFIL mandate in south Lebanon: Report
The Cradle | June 9, 2025
The US and Israel have agreed that the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) must cease its operations in the country’s south, according to Hebrew media outlets.
Washington has decided not to renew UNIFIL’s mandate, and Israel “did not try to convince them otherwise,” the report said.
A vote on the UNIFIL mandate is expected to take place at the UN Security Council within the next few months, likely in August.
Another report in Israel Hayom said the US is considering pulling support for UNIFIL. Sources told Times of Israel that the “option is on the table.”
“The US has not yet made up its mind regarding its future support for UNIFIL, but it wants to see major reforms, which could mean pulling support,” the sources added.
No officials from the US, Israel, or the UN have publicly commented on the matter yet.
UNIFIL, which was established in 1978 and expanded after Israel’s war on Lebanon in 2006, currently includes more than 13,000 uniformed personnel tasked with monitoring hostilities along the Blue Line and ensuring humanitarian access.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pushing for UNIFIL’s removal from Lebanon since as far back as October 2024.
Analysts have said that the move is intended to eliminate international observers who could monitor or document Israeli military activity in southern Lebanon. During the latest war, UNIFIL forces came under Israeli fire several times.
“The exclusion of outside observers, whether it is journalists or UN peacekeepers, seems a deliberate strategy to limit the scrutiny of Israeli forces at a time when they are most needed,” Shane Darcy, professor at the Irish Centre for Human Rights, said last year during Israel’s ground operation in Lebanon.
Other reports and analyses have said that Washington is looking to pressure Beirut into accepting a new mandate for UNIFIL, including changes that would see the interim force actively work against Hezbollah’s presence in the south and destroy infrastructure without needing to coordinate with the Lebanese army.
Such changes to the UNIFIL mandate are advocated for by Israeli reservist and former head of the Israeli army’s Strategic Planning Division, Assaf Orion, in a 29 May piece for the Washington Institute. “The time has come for UNIFIL to either adapt or disband,” Orion says.
The Israeli media reports about UNIFIL’s future in Lebanon come days after Tel Aviv launched its largest attacks on the Lebanese capital since the start of the ceasefire.
Since the truce was reached in November 2024, Israel has violated the deal over 3,000 times with constant attacks. Israeli forces also maintain an occupation of five locations inside Lebanon, which they established themselves in after the ceasefire, in violation of the agreement.
Hezbollah and the Lebanese state have abided by the agreement. The resistance has handed over weapons and military positions to the Lebanese army south of the Litani River.
Yet it rejects US and Israeli pressure for full disarmament.
On 6 June, Israel’s Defense Minister, Israel Katz, threatened Lebanon with an escalation of attacks if Hezbollah is not disarmed.
“There will be no calm in Beirut, and no order or stability in Lebanon, without security for Israel,” he said.
US silent on Russia’s missile moratorium proposal – Lavrov
RT | June 9, 2025
The US has so far ignored Moscow’s call to impose limits on its deployment of intermediate-range missiles, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.
Speaking at the Future Forum 2050 on Monday, Lavrov stated that Washington had not responded to an offer Putin had made to establish reciprocal moratoriums after the collapse of the Cold War-era Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty.
“It’s already clear they will not react to our call, in the absence of the treaty, to establish two parallel, non-interlinked moratoriums,” he said.
The INF Treaty, signed in 1987 by the US and the Soviet Union, banned land-based ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. Washington withdrew from the deal in 2019, citing alleged violations by Moscow.
Russia has denied the claims, accusing the US of developing the banned missiles, but pledged not to deploy such systems unless the US did so first.
Last year, the US announced that it would field the multipurpose Standard Missile-6 (SM-6), the Tomahawk land-attack cruise missile, and a hypersonic weapon that is still in development in “episodic deployments” in Germany starting in 2026. The two systems would have been banned by the INF Treaty, assuming they were deployed on land.
Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov signaled that Russia would not be constrained by any limitations if it ends its self-imposed moratorium. “One way or another, Russia will have to respond to NATO’s expansionist and aggressive actions,” he explained.
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov also noted that Moscow would soon be forced to walk back its current policy. “Russia’s restraint in the post-INF period was not appreciated by the US and its allies and was not met with reciprocity,” he said. “We have openly and directly stated that the unilateral moratorium is approaching its logical end.”
He also rebuked the US for an apparent reluctance to alter its course. “We do not see any fundamental change, let alone reversal, in US plans to forward-deploy ground-based intermediate and shorter-range missiles in various regions,” he said. “On the contrary, practical steps taken by the US military have convinced us that such activity will only intensify.”
The Silence of the Bears
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 9, 2025
Russia’s leadership is in ‘conclave’ determining its riposte.
Trump has been silent for two days. Unprecedented. In the last days, Ukraine and its facilitators attempted a massive attack on Russia’s strategic nuclear bomber-force; succeeded in collapsing two bridges onto civilian trains heading to Moscow; attacking the Kerch Bridge; and assassinating a Russian general via explosive body bomb.
As Clausewitz noted two centuries ago, the point of military force is to compel an outcome: i.e. that an adversary finally does what is wanted of him. Thus, in respect to military adventures there is need for clarity of thought from the outset. It must have a realisable political objective that has a prospect to be implemented.
What then, was the objective behind these Ukrainian ‘irregular’ attacks? One certainly was demonstrative – PR exercises to say that Ukraine and allied services are still capable of mounting special forces style, innovative operations. And are therefore worthy of continued support. As Colonel Doug Macgregor cautions:
“For the most part it was a PR stunt to try and convey the impression that Ukraine is capable of carrying on the war. Anything you hear from the Western outlets … are probably untrue or at least grossly exaggerated … We damaged ourselves and our relationship – what there is left of it – with Moscow … that’s the real fallout from this”.
Okay. But PR stunts are no strategy, nor do the attacks hold any prospect for a shift in the overall strategic military paradigm. It doesn’t say that the West or Ukraine has suddenly discovered a political strategy towards Russia per se. That doesn’t exist. For the most part, the innumerable western declarations come as a hodge-podge of fantasies.
The second objective however, may indeed have had a clear strategic end-state – and has demonstrated feasibility and the possibility to compel a desired outcome: The various attacks have imposed on Trump the uncomfortable reality that he, as President, does not control U.S. foreign policy. The collective Deep State has just made that plain.
As General Mike Flynn has warned:
“The Deep State is now acting outside of the control of the elected leadership of our nation … These persons in our Deep State are engaged in a deliberate effort to provoke Russia into a major confrontation with the West, including the United States”.
In effect, the likes of Generals Keith Kellogg and Jack Keane, with their adolescent narratives that only through pressure, more pressure and pain will compel Putin (always presumed to be weak) to accept a frozen conflict in the hope that it can obvert from an American defeat in Ukraine.
The British during WW2 similarly believed that the Nazi regime was not strong, and could be overthrown by strategic bombing, intended to bring about the collapse of German society. Today, General Kellogg advocates ‘bombing’ Russia with sanctions – mirroring the British conviction that such tactics ‘must be bad for morale’.
Trump’s advice from his Generals either did not meet the criterion of political realism – because it was based on fantasies of incipient Russian collapse and a hopeless misreading of Russia and its Army. Or perhaps his Advisers, either inadvertently or deliberately, ‘shafted’ Trump and his agenda of normalising relations with Russia.
What will Trump say now to Putin? That he was indeed forewarned (recall his writing just days ago that “bad things – if it were not for me – I mean REALLY BAD things would already have happened to Russia” ) and claim that his advisers did not give him the full details; or will he candidly admit that they deceived him? Alternatively, will he take the line that the CIA was merely operating to an old Presidential ‘Finding’ that authorised attacks into the depth of the Russian hinterland?
All such putative answers would spell one thing – that Trump is not in control. That he and his European allies (such as Britain) cannot be trusted.
Either way, Trump’s advisers will have understood that Zelensky and by extension his NATO enablers, were exploiting the SALT/START Treaties’ vulnerability – in order to use concealed drones, hidden in civilian containers, to attack the very bombers covered by USA-Russia treaties: Article XII of the START treaty specifically requires “a display in the open of all heavy bombers within the airbase”. This provision was a confidence building act (visible monitoring) to guard against a surprise ‘first strike’ nuclear attack.
START 1 cut long-range or strategic nuclear arsenals by 30-40 percent. New START slashed accountable deployed strategic arms by another three-quarters. In 2021, Presidents Biden and Putin extended New START until February 2026.
Of course, these unidentified enablers understood the gravity of striking the strategic nuclear force of a major rival nuclear weapons power.
How would the U.S. respond if an adversary (perhaps a non-state actor) launched a strike against strategic long-range nuclear capable bombers in the USA using cheap and easily available drones hidden in containers? We are in a new era of risk – one in which pagers and cell phones can be weaponised as bombs – and of ‘sleeper’ drones that can be remotely activated to attack airfields, either civilian or military.
Larry Johnson has observed that after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941, intended to destroy the U.S. aircraft carriers berthed there, the Japanese Admiral Yamamoto reportedly said the following in the aftermath of Japan’s great victory at Pearl Harbour: “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve … We have won a great tactical victory at Pearl Harbour and thereby lost the war”.
The silence of the bears will soon be ended and we will know more about Russian resolve; but a relationship in which Trump is understood to ‘mean what he says, and does what he says’ likely is over. The Russians are furious.
What happens next is unknown.
APPROVE NOW, STUDY LATER: IS THIS SAFE?
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | June 5, 2025
As alarming new data reveals a spike in sudden heart attacks and strokes, the FDA has greenlit Moderna’s latest mRNA COVID shot—no placebo trials, no independent long-term safety data, and post-market studies delayed until 2029 and 2034. Once again, speed trumps caution. Is safety giving way to speed again, or are post-marketing placebo trials a step in the right direction?
Featured Video
Houthis Don’t Have to Conquer Saudi Arabia to Make It Pay
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
A Lesser “Grade” of Human
By Michael Hoffman | Revelation of the Method | January 3, 2024
Will the more than 100 Iranians killed by terrorist bombs today be mourned in the West as victims of terrorism? Certainly not. Allied doctrine has it that the killing of Israeli or American civilians is a crime of cosmic proportions, while shedding the blood of “enemy” women and children is perfectly acceptable; indeed commendable.
The West does not memorialize the hundreds of thousands of civilians bombed by the U.S. in Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan and every major German city 1943-1945. America’s fire-bombing of the city of Tokyo by General Curtis LeMay in March 1945 was followed by Harry Truman’s atomic incineration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of that year. Truman never had a moment of doubt or regret over the murder of more than a 100,000 Asian children, mothers and non-combatant boys and men. It was business as usual for the “noble” Allies during the “Good War.”
In the West human rights signifies passionate concern only for civilians designated as truly human: Israelis first, then Americans and British, followed by their satraps.
This inhumanity is the legacy of Talmudic ideology, beginning with tractate Sanhedrin 57a from 400 A.D., concerning liability for capital punishment: “If a Jew murders a gentile, he is exempt.”
This teaching of contempt was reiterated in the dogma of Chabad Lubavitch founder Rabbi Shneur Zalman in the 18th century. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Houthis Don’t Have to Conquer Saudi Arabia to Make It Pay
- MOE: Nearly 22,000 Students and Education Workers Killed
- Guterres in Islamabad: Genocide, cowardice, and the cage of Imran Khan
- Johnson, Marandi say Yemen holds upper hand over Saudi Arabia
- False flags won’t save aggressors, Iran FM spokesman says
- The Makkah Pact Enters Into Force: The End of American Dominance or Its New Form?
- NATO’s top generals gather in Kiev
- EU’s continuing expansion – greater threat to Russia
- US Senator Murphy says Pentagon denied him entry to US base in Qatar
- Israel expands “incitement” charge to target Palestinian education and memory
- If Americans Knew
- Three Years of Genocide: How America’s Israel-First Media Filtered Out the Truth
- Israeli war chief briefs ministers on potential war against Palestinian Authority
- New Report: Israel Killed nearly 21,000 Palestinian Students and Education Workers in Past Three Years
- Israel’s flailing chatbot army
- Five Palestinians Killed, Others Injured by Israeli Fire in Gaza
- Israel is rewriting the Palestinian curriculum in East Jerusalem to erase Palestinian identity
- Three years of genocide: Israel turned prisons into killing grounds and torture sites
- Three years of genocide. Words fail. Daily Update
- ‘I’d rather die than go back’: A Palestinian teen’s 10-month nightmare in Israeli jail
- How Jared Kushner’s firm’s investment in an Israeli company could be a major conflict of interest
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
- Green Energy Debacle: German Expert Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Warns Of Severe Economic And Social Consequences
- Two More Paleo Reconstructions Affirm Meters-Higher Sea Levels Across Ireland, Brazil 7000-6000 Years Ago
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
- 2025 Nature Paper Claiming Worsening Global Drought Gets RETRACTED …Heavily Flawed
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
