A “calibrated escalation” is likely to follow the overnight US-Iran clash in the Strait of Hormuz, veteran war correspondent Elijah J. Magnier tells Sputnik.
“Return to full-scale war remains possible, but neither side appears eager for an immediate all-out confrontation,” Magnier says.
“What is more likely in the near term is a continuation of calibrated escalation, which means maritime incidents, allies being attacked, cyber operations, targeted strikes, and limited exchanges designed to impose pressure without triggering a wider or regional war.”
Both sides assess different forms of leverage, according to the pundit:
The US can escalate vertically by deploying additional military forces and intensifying confrontation
Iran can escalate horizontally by widening pressure geographically and economically without engaging in direct confrontation
Both sides show restraint, but prolonged escalation increases the risk of miscalculation
“Therefore, one strike causing mass casualties, damage to strategic energy infrastructure, or a direct attack on senior leadership — such as targeted assassinations — could rapidly push both sides beyond the current threshold,” Magnier warns.
Editor’s note: I have long resisted the climate manipulatioin idea but this seems convincing.
Below is an automated translation of an article from the French weekly RIVAROL, one of the last far-right publications in France, which is beset by lawsuits and has lost its press accreditation (and the tax advantages that came with it). It is a paper publication, but it can no longer appear on newsstands, so Rivarol has opted for the PDF format.
The article deals with a subject that we don’t see surfacing much in the American far-right press: drought and climate control as an already existing weapon, discreetly – but intensively – used by the Americans against Iran.
RIVAROL is not a scientific journal, but that being said, the facts are troubling and we must force our opponents to respond:
Why is it that the end of the Iranian drought coincides with the destruction of the ring of American radar installations in the Arabian Peninsula? Doesn’t this confirm what President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had already said long ago about manipulating climate to pursue political interests?
While Iran rains missiles down on its enemies, the rain returns to Iran. Coincidence?
§§§§§
Iran’s first victory against the climate conspiracy
AN ABNORMAL DROUGHT THAT DRAGGED ON
About fifteen years ago, the then-President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, repeatedly claimed that Western powers (under American influence) were “stealing” rain from Persia and much of the Middle East (including Iraq). Naturally, at that time, almost everyone in the West considered the strongman of Tehran a crackpot, a conspiracy theorist who, moreover, had the misfortune, it was assumed, of being a notorious historical revisionist.
Westerners continue to silence or deny what Mahmoud had calmly stated. In 2018, Iran officially accused the United Arab Emirates and Israel of stealing its rains, when the senior official of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Brigadier General Gholam Reza Jalali, declared: “Israel and another country are working together to prevent Iranian clouds from raining.”
The New York Times reported that the country Jalali did not name was the United Arab Emirates, which has launched a cloud seeding program by injecting chemicals into clouds in an attempt to induce rain in its favor, but also to prevent rainfall in Iran.
Today, however, many Middle Eastern elites are talking about the extreme drought and equally abnormal heat that have plagued the region for ages. We also recall that before the war against Iran, the country had suffered for years from a dramatic water shortage that directly endangered the people, especially the nation’s capital, whose inhabitants (and first and foremost the government) were ready to flee rather than become parched or dry out like old stones.
THE RETURN OF THE RAIN
And then, suddenly, a miracle amidst the misfortunes! In Iran, the clouds finally wept, abundantly and regularly, and temperatures returned to normal (dropping by an average of five degrees Celsius). A few days after the first Iranian strikes against American bases located in the United Arab Emirates and elsewhere on the Arabian Peninsula, the regional climate changed completely.
Initially stunned, the population could observe over the following weeks the gradual filling of natural and reservoir lakes, the return of life to rivers, streams, and springs, the greening and re-greening of meadows, and the return of flora and fauna familiar from the past. In five or six weeks, enormous water reservoirs were filled, and large hydroelectric facilities had to release water to prevent overflows.
The authorities finally called on all Iranian farmers to sow as much wheat as possible and to plant without worry, since water would certainly not be lacking during the summer season. The return of a “normal” spring was not an accident, and this understanding is now shared by everyone in Tehran, Baghdad, and Afghanistan.
According to Iranian officials, including ambassadors (stationed in the greater region), this new rain that has nourished the land is not providential but the result of Iran’s bombings of the gigantic American radars which were simultaneously being used as HAARP systems, tools quite capable of locally modifying the climate.
The Iranian embassy in Kabul posted this unambiguous tweet: “Iran, after destroying a secret cloud seeding and climate manipulation center in the United Arab Emirates, saw everything change overnight. Once this secret center was destroyed, the region’s weather map completely reversed, and now it rains every week in Turkey, Iran, and Iraq, with temperatures dropping by 5 degrees. I don’t know if what they’re saying is true, but there’s a change that everyone is noticing, and temperatures in Iraq haven’t been like this for decades.”
Before the war, and Tehran’s audacious response, two major American activities were likely to alter the climate of the Middle East, not inadvertently but intentionally.
CHEMTRAILS AND WAVES
Until the outbreak of the conflict, military aircraft of the United States and their allies released daily, or several times a week (there are many testimonies on this point), trails which are aptly called chemtrails which covered the sky in a few hours with a milky coating generating a scientifically proven greenhouse effect.
Those with a bit of curiosity observe this same phenomenon in Europe and recall that the contrails left behind by all the planes in the last century lasted no more than a few dozen seconds. Never before had these contrails remained in our atmosphere for more than a minute; never had the sky turned whitish after a flurry of flights. Never.
This has been the case regularly since the 2000s, particularly since the deadly heatwave of 2003. Summers have been hotter, all seasons have suddenly been hotter, sometimes extraordinarily dry, to the point of a telluric change in some regions which has caused the fracturing of tens of thousands of houses built on clay soil.
Most of the hundreds of thousands of daily flights around the world do not produce chemtrails. Just a few hundred aircraft (not commercial airliners, of course) are enough to locally alter the climate, here or there, and cause temperatures to skyrocket. Keen observers will have noticed that these trails crisscross the sky in very calm weather, when their sponsors are certain they won’t be too widely dispersed and therefore ineffective.
As unpleasant as they may be, heat waves, droughts, and mild winters are messages meant for the brainwashed Westerners. They must admit that everything is out of whack because of their own activities, that the Earth is dying because of the carbon dioxide they emit with their diesel cars, their gas boilers, their incessant flatulence, and their horrendous meat-based diet.
The message is crystal clear: you small-time European consumers, you see the damage you’re causing, you careless fools! There are no seasons anymore, you bunch of idiots! The carp have no oxygen in the ponds, the trout have no current in the rivers, the grass is yellow in June, Grandma is suffocating in July, we’re dying of heat in Nantes, everything’s gone to hell. Scrap your gas-powered car, scrap your gas appliances, buy an electric car or a heat pump as soon as you can, install solar panels, demand the energy transition for everyone!
THE IRANIAN TARGET
In the Middle East, there was no message. No one was urging its inhabitants to abandon oil and internal combustion engines. Iran and its surrounding regions were simply a target. A target to be weakened, starved, and destabilized. So that only discontent could flourish, so that hatred against the regime could explode. In addition to the countless economic sanctions imposed upon it, Iran had thus been the target of climate attacks for many years.
For decades, military scientists have known how to dry out and heat entire regions by dusting their airspace with tiny metallic particles (aluminum and others) and water vapor. These particles are agitated by radar waves (which travel at the speed of light) and thus heat up. This temperature increase at the core of the clouds prevents the suspended water from freezing, thus preventing precipitation.
By preventing the movement of crop-dusting aircraft and by neutralizing giant radars (by destroying them), Iran has freed itself (momentarily?) from this “climate” trap.
BETWEEN CONSPIRACY AND CONSPIRACY THEORIES, A TRAP AGAINST IRAN
Tehran, long convinced of the existence of this plot orchestrated by the American-Zionist axis, could not, however, intervene sooner. It would have had to attack both the Americans and the United Arab Emirates first. And no one, apart from the Iranian elite and those in the know, would have believed the motive for its attack: a return to normalcy.
In its self-defense, the Persian regime was able to destroy the massive radar systems in a seemingly, ostensibly, rational move. It was the radars themselves that were eliminated, not radars also used as instruments projecting microwaves to deplete Iran’s resources. The damning accusation of conspiracy could not be leveled against it.
By holding out for so long, by resisting for so long the sanctions and social unrest orchestrated by the enemy, by enduring for so long this extraordinary drought, Iran has won the battle against “conspiracy theories” by avoiding appearing as one of its most obsessive proponents.
We know that Iran quite legitimately believed in this conspiracy, but a war waged to officially combat it would not have been accepted by everyone in a world saturated in the media (even outside the West) and the demonization of “conspiracy theories.” Climate warfare could have brought Iran to its knees, but it was its enemy, who needed this war (which it tried by all means to provoke), who struck first. This is Iran’s greatest success to date.
Nevertheless, it is difficult to believe that the American-Zionist axis has surrendered in this war. Is it trying, or will it try, to rebuild radars designed to manipulate the climate in the same way, or will it use other radars located on other continents? Will it use drones to spray its chemical potion? In short, is the climate war truly over?
If it is not already doing so, Iran now has every interest in communicating on this issue so that it is taken seriously by people around the world. A difficult but vital task.
NATO was always destined to be a temporary military alliance, united by a common enemy and threat during the Cold War. Once that threat disappeared with the end of the Cold War and thereafter the collapse of the Soviet Union, the main question asked in the 1990s was: What would be NATO’s new reason to exist? The answer to this question was to pursue unipolarity / collective hegemony in the post-Cold War era through NATO expansionism and military interventionism (“out of area or out of business”).
Russia was implicitly given the ultimatum: be a compliant civilizational student or a counter-civilizational force. Russia could accept NATO’s hegemonic role as a “force for good,” or it could resist, and then NATO would return to its former role of confronting Russia. The NATO-backed regime change in Ukraine—aimed at transforming the country from a Russian partner into a frontline state aligned against Russia— triggered the war in 2014. NATO thus began reverting to its former role of confronting Russia, yet it happened as the hegemonic era had come to an end.
Now that the former collective hegemony has been balanced and a multipolar world has emerged, NATO has yet again lost its purpose and will disintegrate. European leaders want to restore NATO’s original purpose: containing Russia. This will fail because it is based on the fraudulent narrative that Russia wants to restore the Soviet Union, rather than balancing NATO expansionism and military interventionism.
The US will, however, not return to the original purpose of NATO as the distribution of power has shifted, and will therefore not play along with the fake narratives of Europeans leaders. The US is in relative decline and cannot sustain simultaneous strategic dominance in Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and the Western Hemisphere. The US cannot be everywhere in a multipolar world, and it will pivot to the Western Hemisphere and East Asia. A US presence in Europe consumes too many resources and pushes Russia toward China, its main rival. However, the US is happy to outsource the conflict with Russia to the Europeans. Europe remains obedient, and Russia is weakened.
If Europe had rational leaders, they would have adjusted to the new international distribution of power by shutting this war down, making peace with Russia, establishing a common pan-European security architecture (35 years too late) that also saves Ukraine by removing it from the front lines of a re-divided Europe, and diversifying their economic ties to avoid excessive dependence on any one foreign power. However, Europe does not have rational leaders, and even arguing that weapons are not the path to peace or arguing in favour of diplomacy is smeared and censored as “pro-Russian” treason. Europe’s political class remains committed to Russophobic narratives and policies that intensify confrontation and prolong the conflict.
The trajectory now appears increasingly clear: NATO will continue to disintegrate, and the Europeans will compensate by further escalating the war against Russia. This will happen at a time when Russia is desperate to restore its deterrence by retaliating against Europe (most predictably against Germany), while the US commitment and protection of Europe are waning. The predictable consequence is that European leaders will eventually provoke a powerful response from Russia, which will rapidly escalate to what will hopefully only be a limited nuclear strike.
Unknown traders placed nearly $920 million in short positions on crude oil on May 6, just minutes before Axios published a report saying Washington and Tehran were nearing a deal to end their two-month war, according to data from Unusual Whales, a trading surveillance platform that monitors unusual market activity.
The Axios report, written by Barak Ravid—a journalist with close ties to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump—said the one-page memorandum would end the war.
Ravid is a former member of Israel’s elite Unit 8200 intelligence corps. His reporting consistently relies on “unnamed US officials” and has been described as “basically representing the American voice”.
The concern extends beyond journalistic accuracy to potential market manipulation. Each Axios report has been preceded by massive, suspiciously timed trades betting on falling oil prices.
Axios has reported on five separate occasions within a 19-day span that a deal with Iran was “close” or “imminent” — yet no agreement has materialized.
Brent crude prices fell more than 10 percent following the report, from 108 to 97 per barrel, before recovering somewhat to 102 by market close.
Based on that price drop, the unidentified traders would have earned roughly 125 million in profits. The short positions were placed approximately 70 minutes before the Axios story was published, according to Unusual Whales, which shared details on social media platform X.
This is not the first time large bets have preceded major news on US-Iran negotiations. Similar massive positions were identified ahead of previous Axios reports on alleged progress in talks, including a $950 million short position on oil placed on April 8.
Crude prices fell 15 percent after that report. The White House issued an internal staff-wide email that same day warning employees against using confidential information to place trades.
Oil prices have soared since the US-Israeli aggression against Iran began on February 28, coinciding with Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz that typically facilitates about 20 percent of the world’s oil trade.
Iranian officials have pushed back against the Axios report.
“The Axios text is the Americans’ wish list rather than a reality,” Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for the Iranian parliament’s foreign policy and national security committee, said on social media.
“The Americans will not obtain through a failed war what they failed to gain in previous negotiations.”
Despite Tehran’s denial, Trump cited the Axios report on Wednesday to claim that the US and Iran had had “good talks over the last 24 hours” and expressed confidence that a deal would be reached soon.
Traders with privileged information have also used the prediction market platform Polymarket to profit from US foreign policy moves, according to a report by the Anti-Corruption Data Collective (ACDC).
The report found that 52 percent of “long-shot” wagers predicting military action on Polymarket were successful, compared with 25 percent of politics-related bets and 14 percent of all bets on the platform.
Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, serves as an advisor to Polymarket, having taken the role in 2025. His firm has invested millions in the company.
The evidence suggests a recurring pattern: Axios publishes “deal imminent” reports citing unnamed US officials, Iranian officials publicly deny any agreement, oil prices temporarily fall, and unidentified traders profit from well-timed short positions, reflecting intentional coordination.
Iranian media has dubbed the pattern “Operation Fauxios” — a play on Axios’ name — suggesting coordinated efforts between the news outlet and unidentified traders to profit from market volatility.
Observers say false claims also serve to drive down oil prices, a key political objective for Trump who faces domestic pressure over high energy costs, offering political cover during an unpopular war.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry has strongly condemned US acts of aggression against Iranian oil tankers and coastal infrastructure, describing the attacks as a blatant violation of the ceasefire agreement.
The US military attacked two Iranian oil tankers near the port of Jask and the Strait of Hormuz late Thursday and early Friday, while also carrying out attacks on several coastal sites overlooking the strategic waterway.
The assaults were met with a “powerful response and a heavy slap” from the Iranian Armed Forces, the ministry said in a statement on Friday.
The enemies, it said, failed to achieve their “illegitimate objectives.”
The minister said the aggression has clearly violated a ceasefire agreement reached between Tehran and Washington in early April.
It also condemned contradictory conduct and inflammatory rhetoric by US officials, saying the Trump administration’s actions reveal “desperation, confusion, and a deep inability” to find a way out of its “self-created quagmire.”
Reiterating Iran’s determination to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity, the ministry called on the UN Security Council and the Secretary-General to fulfill their responsibilities in safeguarding international peace and security.
It also warned that any UN “indifference or appeasement” toward Washington’s “lawlessness and rogue behavior” would carry dangerous consequences.
Recent events, it added, have made it clear that the US military presence in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman “has not contributed to regional stability or security; rather, it has itself become a source of insecurity with far-reaching regional and global consequences.”
The ministry also reiterated Iran’s commitment to a policy of good neighborliness and respect for the sovereignty of regional states, urging countries in West Asia to work toward a regional security mechanism based on collective trust and free from foreign intervention.
In response to the assault on Iranian tankers and civilian areas on Qeshm Island, Iran’s naval forces struck US destroyers with cruise missiles and combat drones near the Strait of Hormuz.
Hours later, Donald Trump claimed that the ceasefire was still in effect and sought to play down the exchange.
Intelligence monitoring conducted after Iran’s retaliatory strike, however, confirmed “significant damage” to American military assets.
With a pointed message directed at Washington and its regional allies, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ismail Baghaei later wrote in a post on X that “they see a lion’s fangs bared; do not assume the lion is smiling.”
Leftist commentators consistently push a shallow and economically reductive narrative that frames American foreign policy as the sole domain of greedy White capitalists while choosing to ignore the obvious Jewish power structure directing these events. When the veneer of this supposed corporate imperialism is stripped away, it becomes clear that the United States has often served as a vehicle for the specific goals of organized Jewry. The life of Samuel Zemurray stands as prime evidence of this hidden mechanism.
Few figures in American business history wielded power as ruthlessly or as secretly as Zemurray. Born Schmiel Zmurri on January 18, 1877, to a poor Jewish family in Imperial Russia, this teenage immigrant would rise from peddling rotting bananas off railroad cars in Alabama to become the controlling force behind the United Fruit Company, the most powerful agricultural corporation on earth. Along the way he overthrew governments, bribed presidents, hired mercenaries, and played a pivotal behind-the-scenes role in the creation of the State of Israel.
The man who would topple presidents arrived with nothing but a steamer ticket and family connections in the Deep South. After his father died, the 14-year-old Zemurray emigrated to the United States in 1892, traveling in steerage class and landing in New York before making his way to Selma, Alabama, where relatives had settled. He worked as a chicken catcher, carpenter’s assistant, delivery boy, traveling merchant, and housecleaner, eventually saving enough to bring his mother and 6 siblings over from Europe. Standing approximately 6 feet 3 inches tall with enormous energy and hustle, Zemurray was described as a man who could swear fluently in 5 languages. He encountered his first banana around 1893 in Selma, at that time an exotic and expensive delicacy in the United States, and the fruit became his life’s obsession.
Zemurray brought to the banana trade the same scrappy, rule-bending hustle that had carried him from steerage to a Selma general store. In 1895, at age 18, Zemurray traveled to the docks of Mobile, Alabama, and built a niche specializing in what the industry called “ripes” — bananas that were nearly overripe and being discarded by importers. He bought them for pennies and rushed them inland by rail before they spoiled, famously bribing Western Union telegraph operators to wire ahead with sales offers to towns along the route. Starting with just $150, he had saved $100,000 by age 21 and earned the lifelong nickname “Sam the Banana Man.” By selling bananas directly off moving trains, Zemurray turned minimal investments into substantial profits and was soon selling over one million bananas annually.
In 1903, Zemurray signed a contract with United Fruit giving him rights to distribute the company’s ripest bananas. He partnered with Ashbell Hubbard to form the Hubbard-Zemurray Company and by 1905 had moved to New Orleans, acquired the Thatcher Brothers Steamship Company, and taken control of the Cuyamel Fruit Company. By 1910, he had bought 5,000 acres along the Cuyamel River in Honduras near Omoa and borrowed aggressively to expand into plantations, railroads, and bridges. Unlike the patrician executives of United Fruit who ran operations from their offices in Boston, Zemurray spent months each year working directly on his Central American plantations, learning conversational Spanish, mapping land, clearing fields with a machete, killing snakes, and supervising construction in person.
Zemurray’s appetite for direct action soon extended far beyond plantation supervision. The most audacious act of Zemurray’s early career was his personal financing and orchestration of a coup d’état in Honduras in 1910 and 1911. The crisis arose when U.S. Secretary of State Philander C. Knox attempted to resolve Honduras’s large debt to British banks by having J.P. Morgan buy the bonds, in exchange for which a Morgan bank official would collect customs duties on Honduran imports. This arrangement would have obliterated the tax concessions Zemurray had privately negotiated with Honduran officials, effectively threatening to destroy his business. After lobbying the State Department unsuccessfully and being told directly to “butt out” of U.S.-Honduras relations, Zemurray devised an alternative.
While under surveillance by U.S. Secret Service agents enforcing neutrality laws, Zemurray recruited mercenaries in the French Quarter of New Orleans, hired the flamboyant soldier of fortune Lee Christmas and the notorious mercenary Guy “Machine Gun” Molony, and purchased a former U.S. Navy vessel called the Hornet. The conspirators evaded Secret Service surveillance, slipped away from New Orleans, and sailed to Honduras with rifles and ammunition Zemurray had stashed on Ship Island. They joined forces with Manuel Bonilla, the former Honduran president whom Zemurray supported as the preferred replacement. Through a combination of military action, bluffing, and recruiting local rebel forces, the coup succeeded. Bonilla was inaugurated as president of Honduras on February 1, 1912, and immediately rewarded Zemurray with extensive land concessions, duty-free import privileges, and favorable tax arrangements.
The spoils of that intervention elevated Zemurray from ambitious importer to regional kingmaker. Zemurray became known as “the uncrowned king of Central America.” After Bonilla’s death in 1913, he controlled a string of Honduran presidents and in 1925 secured exclusive lumber rights to 1/10 of Honduran territory. The episode established the template for what came to be called “banana republic” politics.
In 1929, Zemurray sold Cuyamel to United Fruit for $31.5 million in stock, becoming one of the wealthiest men in America and the single largest individual stockholder in the company. He nominally retired and moved to an estate outside New Orleans. But the Great Depression devastated United Fruit. The company’s stock collapsed by roughly 90 percent, wiping out most of Zemurray’s fortune. After his written suggestions were dismissed and his proposals ignored at board meetings, Zemurray took extraordinary action — traveling personally to visit individual shareholders and collecting their proxy votes. At a dramatic board meeting in 1932 or 1933, Zemurray placed the collected proxies on the table and reportedly declared to the assembled executives, “You’ve been fucking up this business long enough. I’m going to straighten it out.” He became managing director immediately and then formally president of United Fruit in 1938, serving until 1951.
Under Zemurray’s leadership, United Fruit became a behemoth. It owned rail transportation monopolies, radio communications infrastructure, steamship lines, and port facilities across 13 nations. In some Central American countries, the company operated as what critics described as “a state within a state.” Zemurray openly admitted that bribery was the foundation of his operations.
The most historically catastrophic action tied to Zemurray and United Fruit was the 1954 CIA-backed coup that overthrew Guatemalan President Jacobo Árbenz, a democratically elected leader who had introduced agrarian land reforms. Árbenz’s land reform law, Decree 900, expropriated uncultivated United Fruit land for redistribution to landless peasants. Under Zemurray’s influence, United Fruit launched one of history’s most consequential corporate lobbying campaigns.
Edward Bernays, known as “the father of public relations,” orchestrated press tours, planted stories, and produced films painting Guatemala as a Soviet beachhead in the Western Hemisphere. Both Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and CIA Director Allen Dulles had prior connections to United Fruit as former partners at Sullivan and Cromwell, the company’s main law firm. President Eisenhower authorized Operation PBSUCCESS with a $2.7 million budget. The CIA armed and trained a force under Carlos Castillo Armas, conducted psychological warfare operations, and engineered Árbenz’s resignation on June 27, 1954. Castillo Armas installed a military dictatorship that reversed land reforms, eliminated labor rights, and initiated decades of U.S.-backed military rule that led to over 200,000 deaths in a decades-long civil war.
While Zemurray built his banana empire in public view, he pursued another project almost entirely in the shadows. Beginning in the 1920s, he became personally close with Chaim Weizmann, the leader of the World Zionist Organization and Israel’s eventual first president. At the end of World War II, Zemurray was approached by Zionist leaders and asked to help procure ships for the clandestine network transporting Jews from displaced persons camps in postwar Europe to British Mandate Palestine. Working entirely behind the scenes, he raised money and used his connections to facilitate logistics.
The Jewish corporate magnate was instrumental in obtaining the ship that became the Exodus 1947 for the Haganah, which would explain its Honduran registration — Zemurray’s United Fruit Company effectively controlled much of Honduras. The Exodus carried over 4,500 Jewish refugees toward Palestine in 1947 before being intercepted by the British Royal Navy. The incident became an international cause célèbre and accelerated international support for Jewish statehood.
Zemurray’s most consequential contribution to the founding of Israel was his behind-the-scenes lobbying effort that helped secure passage of UN Resolution 181 on November 29, 1947, the Partition Plan that divided Mandatory Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. The resolution required a 2/3 majority to pass. According to author Rich Cohen, Zemurray made calls from his New Orleans home to Latin American heads of state, pressing for affirmative votes or abstentions. Haiti switched from a “no” vote to an abstention. Nicaragua switched from an abstention to a “yes.” In total, 13 of the 33 “yes” votes came from Latin America, including countries where United Fruit operated.
Samuel Zemurray died in New Orleans on November 30, 1961, at age 84. His philanthropy included major donations to Tulane University, the New Orleans Museum of Art, the Audubon Nature Institute, and Jewish refugee relief efforts. He also contributed financially to The Nation magazine.
If we look closely at the history of 20th century American interventionism, the shadow of the Jewish hand becomes impossible to ignore. Zemurray was not an outlier but a precursor to the modern reality where the United States operates as a private military company for the advancement of Jewish interests abroad.
The multitude of seemingly perpetual interventions of the past century were not driven by the abstract greed of villainous, White American billionaires but by the deliberate orchestration of a distinct group with its own tribal loyalties. We are destined to remain powerless subjects in our own land as long as we fail to unmask the true masters of our state and break free from the suffocating grasp of Jewish supremacy.
Recognizing the crimes of devious figures like Samuel Zemurray is a necessary first step in this process to reclaim our polities from the machinations of organized Jewry.
A spokesperson for the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters said on Thursday that Iranian forces gave an immediate and decisive response to a series of US military aggressions in the strategic waters of the Strait of Hormuz and along the country’s southern coastline.
In a statement, Ebrahim Zolfaghari noted that the “aggressive, terrorist, and outlaw” US military, in violation of a ceasefire, targeted an Iranian oil tanker.
The vessel was transiting from Iran’s coastal waters in the Jask region, heading towards the Strait of Hormuz.
In a separate but simultaneous incident, another Iranian ship came under attack while entering the Strait of Hormuz, directly opposite the UAE’s Fujairah port.
Concurrent with these fresh acts of aggression, the spokesperson said that US forces, operating in coordination with certain countries in the region, launched airstrikes against civilian areas in the coastal provinces.
These aerial attacks reportedly targeted locations along the coasts of Bandar Khamir, Sirik, and Qeshm Island.
According to the statement, Iran’s response was immediate and decisive.
The armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran launched a swift counterattack, engaging US military vessels east of the Strait of Hormuz and south of the port of Bandar Chabahar.
The Iranian operation inflicted “significant damage” on the American warships, he said.
The spokesperson warned that the “criminal and aggressive” US and its allies must recognize that the Islamic Republic of Iran will, as it has in the past, deliver a crushing response to any act of aggression or violation “powerfully and without the slightest hesitation.”
Earlier, media reports said Iranian naval and missile forces had delivered a swift and precise response to yet another act of US aggression in the Strait of Hormuz, forcing American vessels to flee after sustaining damage.
A senior Iranian military official confirmed to IRIB on Thursday night that, following the unprovoked attack by US military aircraft on an Iranian oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman, attacking enemy units in the Strait of Hormuz came under intense Iranian missile fire.
The aggressor forces suffered direct hits and were compelled to retreat in disarray.
It comes a day after US President Donald Trump suspended the so-called ‘Project Freedom’ after just 48 hours, which was aimed at forcing open the Strait of Hormuz.
It marked another humiliating retreat from the American side in the past few months.
Apparently, the Trump administration’s recent pro-war shift is not limited to the Middle East. The Republican administration seems increasingly yielding to the interests of the military lobby and the so-called “deep state,” approving measures that will harm international security and further worsen current tensions (in addition to contributing nothing to US people’s legitimate interests).
Recently, the Trump administration gave the green light to the sale of precision-guided bomb kits to Ukraine. The package is estimated to be worth over 373 million dollars. The approval is a direct consequence of strong congressional pressure on the administration. Although the White House had been trying to freeze discussions on the subject, lawmakers – many of whom directly represent the interests of the military-industrial complex – had long been pushing for the measure’s approval.
The approved equipment is the JDAM-Extended Range (JDAM-ER), which can be used to convert heavy bombs into guided munitions, increasing the impact power of attacks. These munitions are generally guided by a GPS system, and can hit targets tens of kilometers away. Depending on where these bombs are launched from, they could destroy numerous civilian targets in Russian border regions.
The approval was announced by the US State Department itself in a document published on May 5. Interestingly, the text appears to have been written in an “optimistic” tone, celebrating the approval as a kind of “victory” and stating that the measure will significantly strengthen Ukraine’s defense capabilities. The Department said this new aid package will not alter the military balance in the conflict, but will allow Ukraine to engage more effectively in “self-defense” operations.
“The proposed sale will improve Ukraine’s capability to meet current and future threats by providing it with additional means to conduct self-defense missions and enhance regional security (…) [The package] will not alter the basic military balance in the region,” the statement reads.
The way the State Department simultaneously “celebrated” the news and tried to disguise its nature, pretending there was no escalating attitude, indicates that the US pro-war lobby is not only active in Congress but also within the government agencies themselves. This is not surprising, considering that the presence of representatives from the defense industry and Western transnational elites among American state officials and bureaucrats is a fact long denounced by various insiders and investigative journalists.
It seems clear that recently these parliamentarians and bureaucrats representing the American “deep state” (the network of businessmen and criminals who control local politics behind the scenes) have managed to obtain several substantial victories in Washington. Since Trump made the irresponsible decision to attack Iran and start a new war in the Middle East, the original MAGA promises – focused on economic nationalism and non-interventionism – seem to have been forgotten. Consequently, Trump’s previous promises of peace in Ukraine, which even included the possible suspension of military aid to Kiev, are now completely ignored.
In fact, the new assistance will not change the situation on the battlefield in any way. Ukraine has already used JDAM-ER systems before, adapting them to its fighter jets for air operations. Russia has been successful in repelling these attacks using electronic warfare mechanisms, which easily affect the operational capabilities of GPS-guided systems. In practice, Russia will continue to have a significant military advantage in all sectors, and the new aid will not be a “game changer” for the regime.
Nevertheless, it is reprehensible that Trump is deepening a stance that will only escalate the conflict. Even without significantly changing the military landscape, these systems can facilitate illegal attacks against border regions – something that has already become commonplace in Ukraine. Washington is once again becoming complicit in the crimes of the Ukrainian regime against Russian civilians, ignoring the original non-interventionist proposals of the MAGA project.
It is wrong to attribute all responsibility for these recent events to Trump. It is well known that the US president himself does not have enough political power to resist the pressure from the various lobbies that control Congress and government agencies. However, Trump needs to demonstrate more ability to contain the interests of these lobbying groups if he does not want to lose his legitimacy and popularity.
Trump was elected on promises of peace and domestic economic reforms. Now, his policy is heading towards international interference to the detriment of national interests. Either he reverses this in time or his popularity will erode.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
On Thursday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian reiterated that China supports Cuba’s sovereignty, expressed opposition to foreign interference in its internal affairs and called on U.S. authorities to end the blockade against the Caribbean Island.
“China firmly supports Cuba in defending its national sovereignty and security, and resolutely opposes interference in its internal affairs,” Lin stated.
“Beijing urges the United States to immediately end the blockade, sanctions and any form of coercion and pressure against Cuba,” the spokesperson said in response to a question regarding measures announced by U.S. President Donald Trump that expanded sanctions against the Caribbean country.
Lin stressed that the United States has further intensified illegal unilateral sanctions against Cuba, “seriously undermining the Cuban people’s rights to subsistence and development, and seriously violating the basic norms governing international relations.”
China rejects the January military attack against Venezuela
The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson also rejected the military attack against Venezuelan territory that occurred on Jan. 3 when U.S. soldiers kidnapped President Nicolas Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores.
“Four months ago, the U.S. carried out a brazen military attack against Venezuela and forcibly took control of President Nicolas Maduro and his wife. This hegemonic act constitutes a serious violation of international law, infringes upon Venezuela’s sovereignty, and threatens peace and stability in Latin America and the Caribbean,” Lin stated.
“China firmly opposes this. We will continue, as always, supporting Venezuela in defending its sovereignty, dignity and legitimate rights,” he stressed.
Iran has achieved what almost no country has managed in the post-Cold War era, a strategic defeat of the United States military without being knocked out on the first punch. In a landmark conversation on The Duran, Alexander Mercouris and Alex Christoforou sit down with Trita Parsi to dissect exactly how America’s 40-year obsession with finding a “silver bullet” against Iran has brought Washington to its weakest position in the Middle East since 1979. Parsi argues that the naval blockade of Iran sold to Trump as the final pressure tool that would force capitulation was built on dangerously flimsy analysis, and that the window for Trump to negotiate a genuine exit and spin it as a win is rapidly closing. From Iran’s nuclear calculus and the prospect of a grand bargain replacing the JCPOA, to the long-term unraveling of the American security umbrella across the Gulf states, this episode maps out the tectonic shift now reshaping the global order. The question is no longer whether US primacy in the Middle East is ending it’s whether Washington will recognize it in time to leave on its own terms.
Reknowned economist M. Shahid Alamoffers this excellent critique of Noam Chomsky’s defective analysis of the relative influence of Oil versus the Israel lobby over US foreign policy: … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.