Peeling Back the US Information Operation in Iran
By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | February 18, 2026
As part of the US campaign to engineer a regime change in Iran, the US military and intelligence community are using Operational Preparation of the Environmnet aka OPE. OPE is defined in joint publications (e.g., JP 3-05 Special Operations) as non-intelligence activities conducted prior to or in preparation for potential military operations to set conditions for success. It encompasses shaping the operational environment through intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, information operations, civil affairs, psychological operations, and other preparatory actions—often in denied or politically sensitive areas.
I believe that one of the major OPE efforts is to convince the US public that the overwhelming majority of Iranians despise the Islamic Republic and want it overthrown. In my opinion, a major player in this OPE is a polling outfit known as GAMAAN. GAMAAN (Group for Analyzing and Measuring Attitudes in Iran) collaborates with Psiphon VPN, which is widely used across Iran. GAMAAN findings have been consistent in painting a picture of massive opposition to the Iranian regime:
According to GAMAAN polls taken prior to 2025, a significant majority of Iranians — around 70% — oppose the continuation of the Islamic Republic. The highest level of opposition, 81%, occurred during the “Woman, Life, Freedom” uprising in late 2022. Support for “the principles of the Islamic revolution and the Supreme Leader” has decreased from 18% in 2022 to 11% in 2024. Opposition to the Islamic Republic is higher among the youth, urban residents, and the highly educated. An overwhelming majority of Iranians (89%) support democracy.
Only about 20% of Iranians support the continuation of the Islamic Republic. When asked about preferred alternatives, about 26% favor a secular republic and around 21% support a monarchy. For 11%, the specific form of the alternative system doesn’t matter. About 22% report lacking sufficient information to choose an alternative system.
But what are the funding sources for GAMAAN and Psiphon VPN? Let’s start with GAMAAN. GAMAAN describes itself as an independent, non-profit research foundation registered in the Netherlands. It emphasizes its academic credentials (e.g., founded by scholars at Dutch universities like Tilburg and Utrecht) and innovative online methods (e.g., anonymity sampling via VPNs like Psiphon) to overcome self-censorship in authoritarian contexts.
GAMAAN operates under the supervision of a board including Dr. Ammar Maleki (founder and director), assistant professor of comparative politics at Tilburg University, and Dr. Pooyan Tamimi Arab, associate professor of secular and religious studies at Utrecht University. Maleki is an assistant professor of Comparative Politics and a self-described activist for democracy in his native Iran. Tilburg University Critically, he does not hide his political stance — his Tilburg University profile explicitly states that he is “a pro-democracy activist and political analyst of Iranian politics” and that he tries “to have an impact on political debates around democratization of Iran.”
This is where the picture becomes more contested. GAMAAN has relied on US government-funded VPN provider Psiphon to disseminate its surveys; collaborated with the USAID-funded Tony Blair Institute; and collaborated with and received funding from historian Ladan Boroumand, co-founder of the Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran, which is in turn supported by the US government-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
Psiphon is owned and operated by Psiphon Inc., a Canadian corporation based in Ontario. Psiphon was originally developed by the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto, with version 1.0 launching on December 1, 2006, as open-source software. In early 2007, Psiphon, Inc. was established as a Canadian corporation independent of the Citizen Lab and the University of Toronto.
It has a notable funding history. In 2008, Psiphon, Inc. was awarded sub-grants from the US State Department Internet Freedom program, administered by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. In 2010, Psiphon began providing services to the Broadcasting Board of Governors (US), the US Department of State, and the BBC. More recently, in April 2024, the Open Technology Fund (OTF) announced increased long-term funding for Psiphon, with subsequent OTF awards totaling US$18.54 million for 2024 and US$5.87 million for 2025.
The Open Technology Fund (OTF) is administered by the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), an independent federal agency of the US government. USAGM provides OTF with its primary funding through annual grants, which originate from Congressional appropriations under the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs budget. OTF operates as an independent nonprofit corporation (since 2019) but remains a grantee under USAGM’s oversight and governance, as authorized by Congress (e.g., via the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act).
So while Psiphon Inc. is technically an independent Canadian company, it has historically been substantially funded by the US government and other Western institutions — a fact worth noting given its role as the methodology partner for the GAMAAN polling inside Iran. In other words, it is a cut out that, in my opinion and based on my experience, is supporting a CIA information operation to portray Iran as a country on the precipice of overthrowing the Islamic Republic.
There is an alternative polling database that paints a radically different picture of the mood in Iran with respect to the Islamic Republic… The Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland has conducted a separate series of surveys using phone-based methods, which show more moderate results. Their findings from 2023 and 2024 found that about 75% of respondents expect Iran’s constitution and political system to be about the same in ten years, and only 17% agreed with protesters’ calls for the Islamic Republic to be replaced. However, three in five now think the government should not be strict in enforcing Islamic laws, distinctly up from 2018, and support for demands that the government fight corruption has been consistently near-unanimous since 2018.
On the protests themselves, asked in 2024 to think about waves of demonstrations over the past ten years, two thirds say their main objective was to demand that officials pay greater attention to people’s problems, while only one in five think their main objective was to demand greater freedoms or bring about change in Iran’s system of government.
President Pezeshkian, based on the polls from 2024, was viewed favorably by 66% of those polled at the start of his term… and 70% expressed confidence that he would be an honest and trustworthy president, though only a quarter were very confident. Majorities expressed some confidence that he can improve relations with neighboring countries and protect citizens’ freedoms, notably women’s rights, but majorities are not confident that he can lower inflation or improve relations with the West.
There have been no new polls in the wake of Israel’s surprise attack on June 13, 2025. Based on my conversations with both Nima Alkhorshid and Professor Marandi, the reaction in Iran has been similar to what happened in the United States in the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks… National unity increased.
The failed color revolution launched on December 28, 2025 by the United States and Israel has reinforced support for the Islamic Republic. President Pezeshkian has openly admitted his government’s failures on the economic front and he has taken some steps to institute reforms. A more important development was the signing of the Trilateral Security Agreement with Russia and China at the end of January. Those two countries are now providing more resources and support to stabilize the Iranian government and improve the economic lives of the Iranian people.
Donald Trump’s threats to attack Iran are backfiring among the majority of the population in Iran. Yes, there are some Iranians who still want to bring an end to the Islamic Republic, but they are dramatically outnumbered. Remember the boost in popularity that George W Bush enjoyed in the aftermath of 9-11? He even picked up support from Democrats who had previously despised him. That same phenomena has happened in Iran. Prior to the June 13, 2025 attack, Iranians under the age of 50 had no vivid memory of Iran/Iraq war — where Iran was attacked with the encouragement and support of the United States. The June 2025 attack, coupled with the foreign instigated late December 2025 protests and violence, have awakened a new sense of nationalism among the Iranian public that has strengthened support for the Islamic Republic.
The belief in the West that Iran is more vulnerable now than at anytime in the last 46 years is the creation of a US funded propaganda campaign that relied on an ideologically biased pollster to produce results that have been used to convince most Americans that Iran is yearning to breath free… All we have to do is kill off the leadership in Iran.
Israel ‘dictating terms’ to US – Turkish professor
Washington is following the Jewish State’s demands on Iran and the Middle East as a whole, Hasan Unal has told RT
RT | February 18, 2026
Israel is effectively dictating US foreign policy, particularly on Iran and the wider Middle East, in a way that is historically unprecedented for a global superpower, a Turkish international relations professor has told RT.
Hasan Unal, who teaches at Baskent University in Ankara, spoke to RT’s Rick Sanchez this week about what he described as a highly unusual power imbalance between Israel and the US.
”We are living in a world now where a small country like Israel is dictating terms to a superpower like the United States on anything and everything, particularly anything pertaining to Israel and to the Middle East,” he said, calling the situation “totally unacceptable.”
Unal added that some analysts have even described it as an “occupation” of US policymaking by Israel, a characterization he said was “almost true.”
He went on to say that pro-Israel lobby influence and the personal involvement of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were shaping American positions, recalling episodes when Netanyahu “gets on his plane immediately” and flies to Washington “to simply dictate what [US President Donald] Trump should say and should negotiate in the negotiations with the Iranians.”
Unal claimed such a pattern has left Washington “dogging behind the Israeli demands all the time” and cautioned that it risks further destabilizing the Middle East.
Netanyahu has made multiple high profile visits to Washington to engage directly with senior US officials on regional policy. In the past year alone, he has met Trump at the White House at least six times to discuss issues ranging from Gaza and Iran’s nuclear program to military cooperation. His latest trip took place last week, ahead of the second round of indirect US Iran talks in Geneva. Netanyahu later said he had pressed Trump to ensure that Tehran is barred from enriching uranium. The renewed diplomatic push followed joint Israeli-US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities last year, officially justified as an attempt to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons – an ambition the Islamic Republic denies.
Trump has since sent an ‘armada’ to the Middle East and threatened further attacks unless Iran agrees to a deal on both its nuclear and missile programs. Last week, he raised the prospect of regime change and announced a second carrier strike group deployment, with media reports claiming the US military was ordered to prepare for a sustained multi-week operation if talks fail.
Asked whether Iran poses a direct threat to the US, Unal replied that Tehran does not seek to attack American assets as such and that many of the tensions are tied to Israel’s security calculations.
Unal also suggested what he called the gradual collapse of a “big empire,” referring to the Western-led order, and the emergence of a more multipolar system in which countries such as Russia, China, and Türkiye have greater room to maneuver. – video
Erdogan wants nukes: What a Turkish bomb would mean for the Middle East
Ankara is telling the world that a selective and force-driven approach to the Iranian nuclear issue could ignite a chain reaction
By Murad Sadygzade | RT | February 18, 2026
In Ankara, the idea of Türkiye one day seeking a nuclear weapons option has never been entirely absent from strategic conversation. Yet in recent days it has acquired a sharper edge, as the region around Türkiye is sliding toward a logic in which raw deterrence begins to look like the only dependable language left.
Türkiye’s foreign policy has expanded far beyond the cautious, status-quo posture that once defined it. It has positioned itself as a mediator on Ukraine and Gaza, pursued hard security aims through sustained operations and influence in Syria, Iraq, and Libya, and inserted itself into competitive theaters from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Horn of Africa. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has long framed this activism as a corrective to an international order he portrays as structurally unfair. His slogan that the world is bigger than five – referring to the UN Security Council – is a statement of grievance against a system in which a narrow group of powers retains permanent privileges, including an exclusive claim to ultimate military capability.
Within that narrative, nuclear inequality occupies a special place. Erdogan has repeatedly pointed to the double standards of the global nuclear order, arguing that some states are punished for ambiguity while others are insulated from scrutiny. His references to Israel are central here, because Israel’s assumed but undeclared nuclear status is widely treated as an open secret that does not trigger the same enforcement instincts as suspected proliferation elsewhere. That asymmetry has long irritated Ankara, but it became more politically potent after the war in Gaza that began in 2023, when Erdogan openly highlighted Israel’s arsenal and questioned why international inspection mechanisms do not apply in practice to all regional actors.
Still, for years this was mostly an argument about fairness and legitimacy rather than a declaration of intent. What has changed is the sense that the regional security architecture itself is cracking, and that the cracks are widening at the very moment the US and Israel are escalating pressure on Iran. Türkiye’s leadership has warned that if Iran crosses the nuclear threshold, others in the region will rush to follow, and Türkiye may be forced into the race as well, even if it does not want dramatic shifts in the balance.
This is the key to understanding the new intensity of the debate. Ankara’s signaling is not primarily an emotional reaction to Tehran. Türkiye and Iran remain competitors, but their frictions have also been managed through pragmatic diplomacy, and Türkiye has consistently argued against a military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. Erdogan has again presented Türkiye as a mediator, insisting on de-escalation and rejecting military steps that could drag the region into wider chaos.
The driver is the fear that the rules are no longer the rules. When enforcement becomes selective, and when coercion is applied in ways that appear to disregard broader stability, the incentives change for every middle power caught in the blast radius. The signal from Ankara is that if the Middle East moves into a world where nuclear capability is treated as the only ironclad guarantee against regime-threatening force, then Türkiye cannot afford to remain the exception.
That logic is dangerous precisely because it is contagious. It turns proliferation into an insurance policy. In an unstable region where trust is thin and the memory of war is always fresh, the idea of nuclear weapons as a shield against interference can sound brutally rational. If possessing the bomb raises the cost of intervention to unacceptable levels, it can be perceived as the ultimate deterrent, a guarantee that outsiders will think twice. But the same logic that appears to promise safety for one actor produces insecurity for everyone else. In practice it fuels an arms race whose end state is not stability, but a crowded deterrence environment in which miscalculation becomes more likely, crisis management becomes harder, and conventional conflicts become more combustible because nuclear shadows hover over every escalation ladder.
The renewed urgency also reflects a broader global drift. Arms competition is intensifying well beyond the Middle East. The erosion of arms control habits, the normalization of sanctions as a tool of strategic coercion, and the return of bloc-like thinking in many theaters all contribute to a sense that restraint is no longer rewarded. For Türkiye, a state that sees itself as too large to be merely a client and too exposed to be fully autonomous, the temptation is to seek leverage that cannot be negotiated away. Nuclear latency, even without an actual bomb, can function as a strategic bargaining chip.
Yet the jump from ambition to capability is not straightforward. Türkiye does have important ingredients for a serious civil nuclear profile, and those capabilities matter because they shape perceptions. The country has been building human capital in nuclear engineering and developing an ecosystem of research institutions, reactors for training and experimentation, accelerator facilities, and nuclear medicine applications. Most visibly, the Akkuyu nuclear power plant project with Russia has served as an engine for training and institutional learning, even if technology transfer is limited and the project remains embedded in external dependence.
Türkiye also highlights domestic resource potential, including uranium and especially thorium, which is often discussed as a long-term strategic asset. Resource endowments do not automatically translate into weapons capability, but they reduce one barrier, the need for sustained and vulnerable supply chains. As a result, Türkiye can credibly present itself as a state that could, if it chose, move from peaceful nuclear competence toward a latent weapons posture.
The real bottleneck is not simply material. It is political and legal. Türkiye is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and it operates inside a web of international commitments that would make an overt weapons program extremely costly. Withdrawal from the treaty or large-scale violations would almost certainly trigger sweeping sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and a rupture with major economic partners. Unlike states that have adapted their economies to long-term siege conditions, Türkiye is deeply integrated into global trade, finance, and logistics. The short-term shock of a proliferation crisis would be severe, and Ankara knows it.
This is why the most plausible path, if Türkiye ever moved in this direction, would not be a dramatic public sprint. It would be a careful, ambiguous strategy that expands latency while preserving diplomatic maneuvering room. Latency can mean investing in expertise, dual-use infrastructure, missile and space capabilities that could be adapted, and fuel cycle options that remain justifiable on civilian grounds. It can also mean cultivating external relationships that shorten timelines without leaving fingerprints.
Here the debate becomes even more sensitive, because proliferation risk is not only about what a country can build, but also about what it can receive. The Middle East has long been haunted by the possibility of clandestine technology transfer, whether through black markets, covert state support, or unofficial security arrangements. In recent months, discussions around Pakistan have become particularly salient, not least because Islamabad is one of the few Muslim majority nuclear powers and has historically maintained close security ties with Gulf monarchies.
Saudi Arabia has repeatedly signaled that it will not accept a regional balance in which Iran alone holds a nuclear weapon. Saudi leaders have at times implied that if Iran acquires the bomb, Riyadh would feel compelled to match it for reasons of security and balance. Those statements are not proof of an active weapons program, but they are political preparation, shaping expectations and normalizing the idea that proliferation could be framed as defensive rather than destabilizing.
There have also been unusually explicit hints in regional discourse about nuclear protection arrangements, including arguments that Pakistan could, in some scenario, extend a form of deterrence cover to Saudi Arabia. Even when such claims are partly performative, they underscore how the region’s strategic conversation is shifting from taboo to contingency planning.
Once that door is open, Türkiye inevitably enters the picture in regional imagination. Türkiye, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia are linked through overlapping defense cooperation and political coordination, and analysts increasingly discuss the emergence of flexible security groupings that sit alongside or partially outside formal Western frameworks. The idea that technology, know-how, or deterrence guarantees could circulate within such networks is precisely the nightmare scenario for nonproliferation regimes, because it compresses timelines and reduces the visibility that international monitors depend on.
For Ankara, this creates both opportunity and risk. The opportunity is that Türkiye could enhance its deterrent posture without bearing the full cost of overt development. The risk is that Türkiye could become entangled in a proliferation cascade that it cannot control, while simultaneously inviting a Western backlash that would reshape its economy and alliances.
This is where the question becomes deeply geopolitical. A nuclear-armed Türkiye would not simply change the Middle East. It would alter Europe’s security landscape and challenge the logic that has governed Türkiye’s relationship with the West for decades. Western capitals have tolerated, managed, and constrained Türkiye through a mixture of incentives, institutional ties, defense cooperation, and pressure. Türkiye’s NATO membership, its economic links to Europe, and the presence of US nuclear weapons stored at Incirlik as part of alliance arrangements have all been elements of a broader strategic framework in which Türkiye was seen as anchored, even when politically difficult.
If Türkiye acquired its own nuclear weapons, that anchoring would weaken dramatically. Ankara would gain a form of autonomy that no sanction threat could fully erase. It would also gain the capacity to take risks under a nuclear umbrella, a dynamic that worries Western capitals because it could embolden more confrontational regional behavior. Türkiye’s disputes with Western partners are already intense on issues ranging from Eastern Mediterranean energy politics to Syria, defense procurement, and the boundaries of alliance solidarity. A nuclear deterrent could make those disputes harder to manage because the ultimate escalation dominance would no longer sit exclusively with the traditional nuclear powers.
At the same time, a Turkish bomb could accelerate Türkiye’s drift away from the West, not only because the West would react with pressure, but because the very act of building such a capability would be an ideological statement that Türkiye rejects a Western-defined hierarchy. It would be Ankara’s most dramatic way of saying that it will not accept a subordinate place in a system it considers hypocritical.
None of this means Türkiye is on the verge of producing a weapon. Political obstacles remain huge, and technical challenges would be substantial if Ankara had to do everything indigenously while under scrutiny. A credible weapons program requires enrichment or plutonium pathways, specialized engineering, reliable warhead design, rigorous testing regimes or sophisticated simulation capabilities, secure command and control, and delivery systems that can survive and penetrate. Türkiye has missile programs that could in theory be adapted, but turning a regional missile force into a robust nuclear delivery architecture is not trivial.
The more immediate danger is not that Türkiye will suddenly unveil a bomb, but that the region is moving toward a threshold era, in which multiple states cultivate the ability to become nuclear on short notice. In such an environment, crises become more perilous because leaders assume worst-case intentions, and because external powers may feel pressure to strike early rather than wait. The irony is that a weapon meant to prevent intervention can increase the likelihood of intervention if adversaries fear they are running out of time.
The escalation by the US and Israel against Iran, combined with the broader arms race logic spreading across the Middle East and globally, is making this spiral more plausible. Uncertainty is the fuel of proliferation, because it convinces states that the future will be more dangerous than the present, and that waiting is a strategic mistake.
Türkiye’s rhetoric should therefore be read as a warning as much as a threat. Ankara is telling the world that a selective and force-driven approach to the Iranian nuclear issue could ignite a chain reaction. It is also telling regional rivals that Türkiye will not accept a future in which it is strategically exposed in a neighborhood where others have ultimate insurance.
The tragedy is that this is exactly how nuclear orders unravel. They do not collapse when one state wakes up and decides to gamble. They collapse when multiple states simultaneously conclude that the existing rules no longer protect them, and that deterrence, however dangerous, is the only available substitute. In a stable region, that conclusion might be resisted. In the Middle East, where wars overlap, alliances shift, and trust is scarce, it can quickly become conventional wisdom.
If the goal is to prevent a regional nuclear cascade, the first requirement is to restore credibility to the idea that rules apply to everyone and that security can be achieved without crossing the nuclear threshold. That means lowering the temperature around Iran while also addressing the deeper asymmetries that make the system look illegitimate in the eyes of ambitious middle powers. Without that, Türkiye’s nuclear debate will not remain an abstract exercise. It will become part of a wider regional recalculation, one that risks turning an already unstable region into a nuclearized arena where every crisis carries the possibility of catastrophe.
Murad Sadygzade, President of the Middle East Studies Center, Visiting Lecturer, HSE University (Moscow).
Epstein files may contain ‘crimes against humanity’ – UN
RT | February 18, 2026
Abuses carried out by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein could meet the definition of crimes against humanity, the UN has claimed, while demanding accountability for the suspected perpetrators.
The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) released a statement in response to the millions of files released by the US government related to criminal investigations into the late financier.
The files reveal instances of “sexual slavery, reproductive violence, enforced disappearance, torture, inhuman and degrading treatment, and femicide,” reads the document penned by a group of independent experts and published on Monday.
“So grave is the scale, nature, systematic character, and transnational reach of these atrocities… that a number of them may reasonably meet the legal threshold of crimes against humanity,” it states.
Epstein, who according to the authorities died by suicide in jail in 2019, moved in circles that included figures from politics, entertainment, and business. He faced criminal investigations in the US over allegations that he operated a system to recruit and sexually exploit young girls.
While Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted, “questions persist regarding the potential involvement of additional individuals” and financial structures linked to the alleged criminal enterprise, the UN wrote in a press release on Tuesday.
The UNHRC has urged the US and other countries to prosecute those implicated in the scandal, stating that “resignations alone” are not enough.
“It is imperative that governments act decisively to hold perpetrators accountable. No one is too wealthy or too powerful to be above the law,” they state.
The release of the Epstein files, totaling over 3.5 million pages, has triggered a wave of resignations across several countries. In the UK, the political fallout has been most severe, with three senior officials in Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government stepping down, and the brother of King Charles, Andrew, losing his titles.
In the US, a top Wall Street law firm chairman and a prominent New York arts school chair have resigned. In Europe, national security advisers in Slovakia and Norway have stepped down, along with the president of the Swedish UNHCR and a former French culture minister.
Epstein Files Expose Israeli Occupation of America
MSM grudgingly admits Pizzagaters were on to something
By Kevin Barrett | February 18, 2026
On January 30, the US Department of Justice released what it called “3.5 million responsive pages” in compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act spearheaded by Rep. Thomas Massie. Though more than a month late, redacted in bizarrely non-compliant ways, and representing only about half of the Epstein files (the other half are still being illegally withheld) the DOJ document dump provided abundant, irrefutable evidence that the “antisemitic conspiracy theorists” have been right all along: The United States of America is occupied by a Jewish supremacist crime ring based in Israel.
The documents show that when then-United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Alex Acosta gave convicted sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein a sweetheart plea deal in 2008 because Epstein “belonged to intelligence,” he was referring to Israeli intelligence. According to FBI files, Acosta’s source was Alan Dershowitz, Epstein’s lawyer, who himself represented Israeli intelligence.
Epstein should have gone to prison for years or decades, as would any other criminal convicted of the same charges. But the notorious sex trafficker got a work-release wrist slap. Since when can a foreign intelligence agency tell a US Attorney not to do his job?
The latest document dump confirms that Epstein, who was groomed as a sexual blackmailer by Les Wexner’s MEGA group of billionaire Mossad spies, was “trained as a spy by (Israel’s former military intelligence chief and Prime Minister) Ehud Barak,” who visited Epstein’s New York mansion on dozens of occasions. Barak and Epstein teamed up not only to blackmail American political, economic, and cultural leaders, but also to funnel huge sums of money to politicians in various nations—bribes in return for those politicians following Israel’s orders.
The new document dump reveals that Epstein worked with Israel to support their Ukrainian asset Zelensky, and to try to overthrow Russia’s Vladimir Putin and replace him with an Israeli stooge named Ilya Ponomatov. Epstein, we also learn, was involved in the overthrow of Libya’s Gaddafi. The Mossad blackmailer helped cultivate Israel’s relations with separatists in the imaginary nation of “Somaliland” (which only Israel recognizes). He brokered Israel’s ties with India’s Prime Minister Modi, and maintained close relationships with top UK leaders including Tony Blair and Peter “love the torture video” Mandelson.
These and other revelations prove that Epstein was not just a sexual blackmailer. Since his job was to establish compromising personal relationships with the world’s most powerful people, Epstein was also used by Israel as a high-level international power broker. “I represent the Rothschilds,” Epstein wrote to Peter Thiel, referring to the banking dynasty that created Israel.
The DOJ files show how Israeli/Rothschild agent Epstein lured his blackmail targets into a cesspool of depravity. The files contain many references to torturing, raping, and murdering children. FBI files cite testimony that Epstein’s crime ring would “birth babies for black market use.” Those who thought Pizzagate was an unproven conspiracy theory may be surprised to learn that the Epstein emails include more than 900 references to “pizza” as a likely code for child sex slaves. There are also 673 suspicious references to “ice cream” and countless uses of “grape soda” presumably referring to black prostitutes or sex slaves. Mainstream media are twisting themselves into contortions trying to insist that even though most of these food code words are obviously what they seem–code words for child sex slaves–though possibly a few could be interpreted as references to actual food! New York Magazine opines:
Admittedly, some of the pizza-related material seems pretty weird. An April 2018 message from a redacted sender says, “lets go for pizza and grape soda again. No one else can understand. Go kno.” Cryptic! Some of it is scrutable: “Go kno” appears to be a rendering of go know, an English derivative of the Yiddish expression geh vays, which is roughly equivalent to “go figure.” The claim that “no one else can understand,” on the other hand, is a creepy element that echoes Donald Trump’s allusion to “wonderful secrets” in his infamous letter on the occasion of Epstein’s 50th birthday…
“Pizza and grape soda” belongs to the latter category, and it appears frequently in Epstein’s emails and texts. In a 2018 exchange with his urologist, Harry Fisch (who erroneously appears in Epstein’s contacts as “Harry Fish”), the two seem to discuss refilling Epstein’s prescription for erectile-dysfunction medication. Fisch later texts, “After you use them, wash your hands and lets [sic] go get pizza and grape soda.” This proposal seems odd. There are many things you can do after your Viagra kicks in, and getting a slice with your doctor is not near the top of the list…
… Remember when only unreasonable people thought like this? The idea that pizza could be a code word for illicit sexual activities was laughable in 2016, when the so-called Pizzagate conspiracy captured the imaginations of what might charitably be called the internet’s most enthusiastic users…At the time, the assumption that pizza was code for sex with children seemed obviously arbitrary and extravagant, a violation of the principle that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. This heuristic, Occam’s razor, is often a handy way to differentiate ideas and people we should take seriously from ones we can safely dismiss — people who are frustrated that they’ve misplaced their keys tend to be more credible than those who think their keys have been stolen. Except with this Epstein pizza thing, the somebody-stole-my-keys contingent seems to have been suddenly, disastrously vindicated…
…Occam’s razor has comparatively little to tell us about grape soda. Fisch and Epstein refer to “pizza and grape soda” so often, and so often together — seemingly never just grape soda and rarely just pizza — that the whole thing starts to look like a shibboleth… The mystery deepens when you notice that Fisch often follows references to pizza and grape soda with an emoji depicting an African American…
The sender’s name has been redacted, and the identity of “Brice” is unclear, but a former New Zealand Army chef named Brice Gordon co-managed Epstein’s New Mexico ranch and was interviewed by the FBI in 2007. Red Hook is an unincorporated town in the U.S. Virgin Islands — the least-populated such place, according to the 2020 census, consisting mostly of marinas. There is, as it turns out, a pizza restaurant there. But why would someone need Epstein’s permission to have a “quick pizza meal” to which the financier was not invited? It’s enough to drive a sensible person to speculation.
From the mainstream media’s perspective, the problem is not that we are ruled by genocidal Israeli-Mossad-empowered Jewish supremacist psychopathic billionaire perverts. It is that someone might notice that we are ruled by genocidal Israeli-Mossad-empowered Jewish supremacist psychopathic billionaire perverts. That would mean that the “antisemitic conspiracy theorists” were right all along. Oy vey! Double-plus ungood!
Though the mainstream media professes to hate racism, they are covering up Epstein’s virulent racism against non-Jews. The emails are full of disparaging references to “goys,” a term for non-Jews that roughly parallels other racial slurs including the N-word. Epstein and his supremacist cronies loved to degrade non-Jewish children and teens, but never targeted their fellow “chosen people.”
For many Americans, the most disturbing revelations in Epstein files involve President Donald J. Trump. Prior to the files’ release, we already knew that Trump flew on Epstein’s jet at least eight times, was referred to by Epstein as his “best friend,” sent a birthday drawing to Epstein depicting a barely pubescent naked girl alluding to their “secret,” and has been accused of raping 13-year-old “Katie Johnson” in 1994 at an Epstein party and then threatening to kill the girl and her family. The first Epstein dump also contained FBI witness reports that Trump was present when a baby was drowned in Lake Michigan, and was implicated in the rape and murder of a certain Dusty Rhea Duke in 2000.
The new Epstein files release includes FBI witness reports that Trump was involved in murdering three girls who were buried at Mar-a-Lago and threatening the witness with a similar fate. Witnesses also told the FBI that Trump auctioned underage girls from his swimsuit contests, measuring their vulvas and rating them for tightness. Trump is also accused of forcing oral sex and other abuses against 13 and 14 year old girls.
Meanwhile the mainstream media chant in unison: “President Trump has not been accused of wrongdoing.” Will they change their tune, and suddenly discover the FBI files, if and when Trump stops following Israel’s orders?
A shorter version of this article was published in last week’s American Free Press. -KB
Stripe is Substack’s only processor and they debanked me, so you can no longer pay me through Substack. Now I am posting everything on Substack free and asking people to sign up for recurring donations at my Paypal donation page… or better yet, the free speech platform SPdonate. Alternately you can Paypal or Zelle to truthjihad[at]gmail(dot)com. Note that Zelle, unlike other methods, doesn’t charge any fees.
The Mandelson Molecule: Exposing the Architecture of Cross-Border Political Suppression
By Freddie Ponton | 21st Century Wire | February 18, 2026
The resignation of Peter Mandelson as UK ambassador to Washington in February 2026 revealed more than a scandal—it exposed the architecture of a parallel governance system operating through deniable channels. The Epstein files, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) censorship apparatus, and the Mandelson intelligence pipeline are not separate stories. They are component parts of a transatlantic mechanism that converts private access into public control, with enforcement mechanisms that now reach across sovereign borders to silence American citizens.
Jeffrey Epstein was a convicted sex offender with deep ties to political and financial elites on both sides of the Atlantic. Peter Mandelson is a former UK power‑broker and ambassador to Washington, now under investigation for secretly sharing government information with Epstein. This article shows how their relationship connects to a wider system of online censorship and private global‑health finance.
The Intelligence Pipeline: Real-Time Treasury Briefings to a Convicted Sex Offender
The Mandelson-Epstein correspondence reveals something far more systematic than indiscreet friendship. It documents a private intelligence channel operating at the highest levels of UK and US financial policy.
In December 2009, while serving as Business Secretary, Mandelson forwarded Treasury positions on the bankers’ bonus tax to Epstein within hours of receiving them, with Epstein requesting advance notice “before Jes” and Mandelson replying simply: “Treasury”. By March 2010, the pattern had escalated—Mandelson forwarded notes from a meeting between UK Chancellor Alistair Darling and US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers to Epstein within five minutes, followed by his own meeting with Summers the next day. Those notes were forwarded within two minutes.
The content was market-moving intelligence: Dodd-Frank implementation, hedge fund taxation, derivatives regulation, and Bank of England quantitative easing strategy during the credit crunch. Mandelson advised Epstein that JPMorgan’s CEO should “mildly threaten” Chancellor Darling over policy. This systematic extraction of live government intelligence for private financial advantage can hardly be construed as incidental corruption.
DOCUMENT: Peter Mandelson leaked No 10 documents to Epstein, who then helped him pursue multi-million dollar jobs (Source: Tax Policy Associates)
The Censorship Architecture: From Anti-Corbyn Operations to American Deplatforming
The same censorship machine that produced the Biden White House’s authoritarian campaign against the so-called “Disinformation Dozen” in 2021 had emerged from the notorious Room 216, Brixton, where Israeli loyalist and architect of Keir Starmer’s rise to power, Morgan McSweeney, along with Imran Ahmed, built the “Labour Together” operation to dismantle Jeremy Corbyn. It was a CCDH list of 12 named individuals, which the White House then pushed Facebook to censor. The March 2021 “Disinformation Dozen” report was not independent research—it was unequivocally the identical playbook redeployed. The Biden White House directly cited CCDH’s report to pressure Facebook into censoring American health publishers, with internal documents showing the platform’s “secretly demoted” users, including alleged “anti-vaxxers”, and Twitter accounts of targeted individuals. When Facebook pushed back that the “majority of the accounts in question were not spreading misinformation,” the White House persisted.
Among those branded the “Disinformation Dozen” by the CCDH in March 2021: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Children’s Health Defense), physician Joseph Mercola, and Sayer Ji—whose investigative work exposing the Mandelson intelligence pipeline appears later in this report.
The method was documented in internal strategy papers: cultivate “seemingly independent voices to generate and share content to build up a political narrative,” infiltrate opposition spaces to extract decontextualised content, and feed narratives to sympathetic media. The “antisemitism crisis” that destroyed UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn was, as Labour Party files confirm, instrumentalised by this same faction.
Morgan McSweeney was CCDH’s founding director and subscriber for 18 months, operating from the same Brixton office that produced Labour’s anti-Corbyn operation. When he resigned in April 2020 to become Starmer’s chief of staff, Ahmed inherited an apparatus already proven effective at demonetising political opposition.
Morgan McSweeney, founding director of the CCDH, and former British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Chief of Staff. (Source: The Edge | Business news)
The March 2021 “Disinformation Dozen” report was not independent research—it was unequivocally the identical playbook redeployed. The Biden White House directly cited CCDH’s report to pressure Facebook into censoring American health publishers, with internal documents showing the platform “secretly demoted” affiliated accounts and Twitter accounts of targeted individuals. When Facebook pushed back that the “majority of the accounts in question were not spreading misinformation,” the White House persisted.
Project Molecule: The Financial Infrastructure of Private Governance
The August 2011 JPMorgan “Project Molecule” blueprint reveals the financial architecture that made this system durable. The $150 million fund Epstein pitched to JPMorgan CEO Mary Erdoes was designed to operate “across sovereign borders, into specific countries, for specific biological interventions”—with no elected officials, no treaty obligations, and no public accountability beyond its own audit committee.
DOCUMENT: JPMorgan “Project Molecule” blueprint (Source: DOJ Epstein File Library | EFTA01301114)
Epstein operated as Bill Gates’s representative under a written agreement, with the explicit purpose of securing “additional money for vaccines” while creating a “permanently governed, privately controlled, transnational system”. The budget allocated $40M for polio vaccines in Afghanistan, $40M in Pakistan, $20M specifically for “financing the surveillance network in Pakistan,” and $30M for rotavirus vaccines in Latin America.
This is the governance model: private intelligence (Mandelson-Epstein), private finance (Project Molecule’s offshore vaccination funds), and private enforcement (CCDH’s deplatforming operations) operating in substitutional parallel to democratic institutions.
The Enforcement Layer: Cross-Border Suppression of American Speech
What transforms influence operations into censorship is enforcement. The original investigation documents the apparatus reaching into foreign legal proceedings against American journalists—cross-border enforcement without due process, extradition treaties, or congressional oversight.
The pattern is now confirmed by US government action. In December 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio barred Imran Ahmed from entering the United States, citing his role in “leading organised efforts to coerce American platforms to punish American viewpoints they oppose”. Ahmed was one of five Europeans sanctioned under a visa policy targeting foreigners responsible for censoring protected speech in America.
The CCDH is now reportedly under DOJ investigation for potential violations of foreign agent registration laws, given its coordination with UK Labour operatives while targeting US political speech. Labour’s deployment of approximately 100 operatives to US swing states during the 2024 election—conducted by McSweeney’s network—has generated formal FEC complaints alleging direct electoral interference.
After days of parliamentary theatre about “transparency,” Westminster has craftily moved to bury the Mandelson-Epstein papers—not in open sunlight, but inside the Intelligence and Security Committee, a body three of whose members have already stuffed with cash from pro-Israel lobbyists.
In Britain, Downing Street originally wanted veto power over anything “prejudicial to national security”, but the documents will now be reviewed by the Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC). Critics argue that this allegedly independent oversight body could be compromised. In effect, three sitting members—Deputy Chair Sir Jeremy Wright, Sir John Hayes, and Labour’s Derek Twigg—have all taken money from the pro-Israel lobby, which by some estimates bankrolls roughly a quarter of British MPs. This can be verified in the excellent Declassified UK report published in June 2024.
The bottom line is that the Epstein file, which details how Mandelson piped classified Treasury intelligence to a convicted sex offender, and how British power brokers and Wall Street criminals traded backroom briefings, will now be “vetted” by politicians on the take from foreign influence networks. Forget transparency—it was never on the table.
The Architecture of Manufactured Consensus
The critical insight is structural: these networks exploit the gap between formal democratic institutions and actual governance. Mandelson’s Treasury briefings to Epstein occurred through informal channels. Project Molecule’s sovereign surveillance programs were designed to operate offshore. CCDH’s censorship operations, though effective at capturing White House policy, occurred through a nonprofit rather than state agencies. According to reports, George Soros is said to have donated $250,000 to the CCDH, which is working to censor conservative news outlets and to undermine Musk’s Twitter.
When the same personnel (McSweeney as CCDH founder, then Starmer’s chief of staff), the same infrastructure (Brixton operations), and the same methods (crisis amplification, media laundering, financial pressure) appear across Corbyn’s destruction, COVID censorship, and US electoral operations, we are not observing a coincidence. We are witnessing a system.
The switchboard is not the scandal. The switchboard is the system, and it is now being dismantled by the very government it sought to influence.
The Original Investigation
This synthesis builds upon the groundbreaking investigative work of Sayer Ji, founder of GreenMedInfo and author of the Switchboard series—including the first publication to connect the Mandelson-Epstein intelligence pipeline to the CCDH censorship apparatus. Ji’s research, conducted under direct legal and professional pressure from the very networks he was exposing, documented how British political operatives built a cross-border enforcement mechanism capable of weaponising foreign courts against American journalists.
His original reporting on Room 216, the Brixton operations, and the emergence of “disinformation” as a tool for political suppression predates mainstream coverage by years, and has now been validated by the Epstein disclosures, the Rubio sanctions against Ahmed, and the DOJ’s investigation into CCDH’s foreign agent activities.
Read the complete investigation series and supporting documentation at Sayer Ji Substack…
Sayer Ji reports on Substack…
The Switchboard: From Epstein to Mandelson to McSweeney to Ahmed — How a British Machine Became America’s Censorship Engine
How the Epstein Files Reveal the Architecture Behind Censorship, Crisis Finance, and What Happened When I Investigated It – Part 3 in a Series
Peter Mandelson, “the Prince of Darkness,” Keir Starmer’s hand-picked ambassador to Washington, the most powerful unelected figure in British politics, resigned from Parliament this week, one step ahead of legislation to eject him. The Metropolitan Police opened a criminal investigation. The Prime Minister apologised to Jeffrey Epstein’s victims for believing Mandelson’s lies.
The press is treating this as a story about a politician’s downfall. It is not. It is a story about what he was connected to — and what was built to make sure you never found out.
Key Findings:
- The censorship machine that targeted American speech during COVID was built inside a Labour Party factional operation. Morgan McSweeney and Imran Ahmed created the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) from the same office, using the same staff, and the same dark-money infrastructure they used to destroy Jeremy Corbyn — then redeployed the identical playbook against U.S.-based health publishers and independent media.
- CCDH’s founder and political patron is a protégé of Peter Mandelson, who was simultaneously routing confidential UK and U.S. government intelligence to Jeffrey Epstein. Mandelson forwarded Treasury readouts on the Volcker Rule, Dodd-Frank, and derivatives regulation to Epstein within minutes of receiving them — intelligence worth billions to Epstein’s Wall Street clients. The same political culture of deniable backroom operations that made the Epstein network functional also produced CCDH.
- Epstein’s network was not just criminal — it was architectural. Project Molecule, a $150M JPMorgan blueprint produced the same month Epstein sketched a private global health fund, reveals the institutional machinery: offshore vaccination funds, sovereign biological surveillance programs, and governance structures designed to bypass elected oversight entirely.
- The enforcement layer is not theoretical — it has already been deployed against named individuals. CCDH’s “Disinformation Dozen” list led directly to platform deplatforming. In at least one documented case, CCDH-originated material was entered into foreign legal proceedings to seek an ex parte arrest warrant against a U.S.-based journalist for lawful American speech — cross-border enforcement with no due process, no extradition treaty, and no congressional oversight.
- The same network is now the subject of a formal FEC complaint alleging direct electoral interference. McSweeney — Mandelson’s protégé, CCDH’s political architect, and now Starmer’s chief of staff — was named in a formal FEC complaint for dispatching approximately 100 Labour operatives to U.S. swing states during the 2024 presidential election. The censorship pipeline and the electoral interference pipeline share the same personnel, the same infrastructure, and the same assumption: that British political operatives can shape American outcomes without accountability.
Israeli firms transform cars into intelligence devices: Reports
Al Mayadeen | February 17, 2026
Modern vehicles have evolved into internet-connected digital ecosystems, a transformation that is reshaping the global intelligence market, with “Israel” paying special attention to this rising domain, according to a new investigation by Haaretz.
In intelligence circles, information harvested from vehicles is known as “CARINT,” short for car intelligence. Today’s vehicles function as “computers on wheels,” equipped with built-in SIM cards, GPS systems, Bluetooth connectivity, and multimedia platforms that continuously transmit data.
The report reveals that at least three Israeli companies are operating in this expanding sector, developing tools that enable government clients to track vehicle movements in real time, cross-reference vast databases, and identify specific targets among thousands of cars on the road.
Industry sources cited in the investigation described the use of AI-powered “data fusion” systems that combine vehicle telemetry, roadside camera feeds, advertising data, and cellular metadata to construct comprehensive intelligence profiles. Rather than directly hacking a device, agencies are increasingly assembling what sources describe as a surveillance mosaic from legally or commercially available data streams.
The case of Toka
Among the companies identified is Toka, co-founded by former Prime Minister Ehud Barak and former Israeli military cyber chief Yaron Rosen.
According to documents and industry sources cited by Haaretz, Toka developed a product capable of infiltrating a vehicle’s multimedia system, pinpointing its location, and remotely activating microphones or dashboard cameras. The system was reportedly approved by “Israel’s” Security Ministry for presentation and eventual export.
The company said that as part of its 2026 product roadmap, it no longer sells the hacking tool.
Experts noted that exploiting vehicle vulnerabilities remains technically complex, as each manufacturer employs distinct digital architectures. However, the possibility of remote access to in-car microphones and cameras has raised acute privacy and security concerns.
Another Israeli firm, Rayzone, has reportedly begun selling vehicle-tracking tools through its subsidiary TA9. Unlike offensive hacking products, Rayzone’s system focuses on aggregating and cross-referencing data, including SIM-card tracking, Bluetooth signals, and license-plate recognition feeds.
The investigation suggests that the intelligence industry is gradually shifting away from high-profile phone-hacking technologies associated with firms such as NSO Group and toward large-scale, AI-enabled data analytics platforms.
In the United States, companies such as Palantir Technologies analyze license plate databases and vehicle registries, integrating them into broader intelligence systems. Israeli firm Cellebrite also works extensively with US law enforcement agencies in extracting and processing digital evidence, including vehicle-related data.
Vehicle intelligence expanded post Oct. 7
The Haaretz investigation further highlights that in the aftermath of Operation al-Aqsa Flood, Israeli authorities, with support from the private sector, developed advanced capabilities to locate vehicles stolen from army bases and border communities. According to the report, these tools were later integrated into military systems.
The article also points to China’s longstanding regulatory framework requiring domestic car manufacturers to transmit vehicle data to state authorities. It further notes that the Israeli Occupation Forces imposed restrictions on certain Chinese electric vehicles entering military facilities, citing security concerns.
Security analysts warn that the accelerating digitization of vehicles not only expands surveillance capabilities but also increases cybersecurity risks. Ethical hackers have previously demonstrated, in controlled environments, the ability to manipulate steering systems or disable engines remotely. Industry sources cited in the investigation indicate that some government clients are increasingly expressing interest in remote vehicle-disabling technologies.
At global intelligence exhibitions such as ISS World, often referred to as the “Wiretapper’s Ball”, artificial intelligence and real-time data fusion dominate discussions. AI systems now enable the rapid processing of millions of disparate data points, including vehicle telemetry, audio streams, and video feeds, transforming them into actionable intelligence with unprecedented speed.
Industry insiders argue that as vehicles become more connected, they will inevitably play a more central role in intelligence gathering. Privacy advocates, however, caution that the same connectivity that enhances consumer convenience may also underpin a powerful and potentially intrusive surveillance infrastructure.
The Haaretz investigation concludes that while directly hacking individual vehicles remains technically complex, AI-driven aggregation of vehicle-generated data could make such intrusions increasingly unnecessary, raising significant questions about privacy, regulation, and the future of digital mobility.
Palantir, Dataminr help build Gaza AI-Driven digital prison system
A +972 Magazine investigation reveals that US firms Palantir and Dataminr are embedded in the US-Israeli post-war plan for Gaza through the Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC), a US-run hub coordinating Trump’s 20-point plan. A Palantir “Maven Field Service Representative” tied to Project Maven has been assigned to the center, integrating battlefield AI into Gaza’s future control structure.
Project Maven fuses satellite imagery, drone feeds, intercepted communications, and metadata into an AI platform described as “optimizing the kill chain.” Rights groups argue these AI-enabled systems have accelerated the genocide in Gaza, scaling up killings with minimal human oversight. UN figures show nearly 70% of verified fatalities are women and children, with entire families wiped out in strikes allegedly guided by AI systems.
Palantir has expanded cooperation with Israeli occupation forces since 2024, doubling its Tel Aviv presence and supporting war-related missions. Amnesty International lists the company among firms whose services helped facilitate genocide and starvation in Gaza. Dataminr, specializing in real-time social media surveillance, has also been integrated into the framework, feeding AI-driven threat intelligence into the evolving security architecture.
Under the so-called “Alternative Safe Communities” model, Palestinians would be forcibly relocated into fenced, heavily monitored compounds under US-Israeli control. Within these zones, AI systems would track phones, movements, and online activity, flagging individuals as “security risks,” effectively turning Gaza into an AI-driven digital prison and kill-list system.
This architecture has been compared to Nazi concentration camps in its logic of isolating, surveilling, and managing an entire population as a security threat, reducing civilians to data points under total algorithmic control.
Zionist-controlled companies to surveil British citizens
Press TV – February 17, 2026
The implications of the British state using technology produced by Zionist-controlled companies to surveil British citizens are beyond belief.
The cornerstone of a sovereign nation is the absolute control over its own justice, its own data, and its own watchmen. Yet today, the very machinery of British law enforcement is being quietly and systemically outsourced.
The British government has allowed the digital and physical infrastructure of the state to become a high tech extension of a foreign power, driven by the pernicious influence of Zionism, an ideology that prioritizes the expansion of a foreign entity over the rights of people in the UK.
This is not merely a matter of procurement. It is a surrender of independence.
By embedding Zionist-linked firms into the heartbeat of British society, the government is importing a surveillance philosophy rooted in the subjugation of one people and applying it to their own subjects.
These are combat-proven technologies forged in the fires of the Gaza genocide, and they are now the primary eyes and ears of the metropolitan police.
The police use Israeli intelligence firm Cellebrite to unlock the phones and private lives of their own citizens. They also use BriefCam to track people’s movements through video synopsis.
BriefCam is a company co-founded by Gideon Ben-Zvi, a veteran of the IOF elite unit 8200 Intelligence Corps, who openly admits to using unit 8200 criteria to lead his ventures.
The reach of foreign intelligence into the streets is even more direct through Corsight AI, which provides facial recognition throughout the country.
Born as a subsidiary of Cortica, it was founded by Igal Raichelgauz, another alumnus of the Zionist military intelligence apparatus.
When our faces are scanned by software overseen by the architects of the occupation of Palestine, can we truly say that the British public is being policed by British consent?
But the intrusion goes deeper than software. It reaches the very hands of our officers on the front lines.
ISPRA, an Israeli specialist in riot control, has historically supplied the crowd management munitions used to police the streets.
When the tools used to suppress dissent in the UK are manufactured by a firm specializing in the containment of occupied territories, the line between domestic policing and foreign military occupation begins to blur.
Furthermore, Motorola Solutions, a company listed by the United Nations for its links to illegal settlements, is now deep inside our research projects.
Through initiatives like CREST and Connections, they’re building predictive policing tools designed to monitor the social media content and online lives of the British public.
When a company that facilitates surveillance in the West Bank is the same one mapping the future crimes of Londoners, we have fundamentally compromised our domestic integrity.
Links between Zionist movement and Lionel Idan
Lionel Idan is a key British prosecutor serving as the Chief Crown Prosecutor for the CPS and also the National Hate Crime Lead Prosecutor.
He’s currently being heavily lobbied by a network of powerful Zionist groups.
We’re not just talking about casual meetings.
Idan has held repeated engagements with the Israeli embassy and Zionist lobby groups, the board of Deputies of British Jews and the Community Security Trust, CSD, an organization headed by convicted fraudster Gerald Ronson.
The objective is clear, to ensure the Crown Prosecution Service, CPS, fully adapts the IHRA definition of anti-semitism, a definition weaponized against anti-Zionists, as we saw during the attacks on Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party.
Lionel Idan has not hidden these alliances. In an op-ed for the Jewish News, he boasted that the CPS sits on the anti-semitism Working Group alongside the CSD and the Jewish leadership council.
He confirmed that lobby groups, the CSD and the Antisemitism Policy Trust, are now core members of the CPS External Consultative Group on Hate Crime.
Perhaps most concerning is that the national prosecution guidance is being shaped by these very groups. Idan has admitted that their involvement helps the CPS define the line where anti-Zionism becomes a criminal offense.
When the person overseeing London’s prosecutions attends Israel lobby annual dinners to celebrate new security task forces, where is the independence of the UK legal system?
It should be demanded that the CPS remain an impartial body free from the influence of political lobbyists and foreign interests.
Trump stalls over Iran strike plan, Iran holds all the aces
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 17, 2026
Trump has the option of going to war with Iran and receiving much-needed campaign funds from Israel for the midterms – or opting to defy Bibi and facing certain defeat by losing both houses and facing certain impeachment. Can the Iranians save him?
Is Trump serious about going to war with Iran? To understand this, it’s important to examine his relationship with Netanyahu and to see who has the advantage when it comes to dragging the U.S. into a war, and whether Israel can actually be a greater threat to the U.S. than Tehran can ever be.
The trap that Trump is falling into is one where he has little or no wiggle room at all to control the Iran crisis, whereby Israel can threaten him with isolation while it goes ahead with its strike.
There are two dynamics at play here which are struggling to find a compromise. Trump wants a deal with Iran which takes away their nuclear capability, while Israel wants a war which overthrows the Iranian regime and installs a Mossad/CIA puppet. The problem, though, is that Israel is not an honest broker and keeps shifting the goalposts. The latest demand now is that removing Iran’s ballistic missiles should be at the heart of any deal that Trump pulls off.
Trump is ensnared and is aware of how Bibi is manipulating him. He may, on occasion, swear at journalists and pretend he is his own boss and his own president and that Israel is a client state of Washington which has to toe the line, but in reality, it is clear that Israel is calling the shots.
In recent days, we have heard that the one aircraft carrier the U.S. had in the region, the USS Abraham Lincoln, is to be joined by a second called the USS Gerald Ford. U.S. media report that the Lincoln is in the “Arabian Sea,” which is a comical way of saying that it’s keeping its distance from Iran’s shores and Houthi missiles off the coast of Yemen. But other reports are suggesting that the reason why Trump claims he has sent a second carrier – to beef up the “flotilla” in case of a war breaking out with Iran – is untrue. Some insiders are briefing journalists that the Lincoln has technical problems which will render it useless in a combat situation and so needs to be replaced with the more advanced Ford.
However, even this might be a false narrative offered by Pentagon insiders who are not supporters of Trump. A second explanation about the carriers is that it buys Trump time. He has even told reporters that it will take about a month for the Ford to get there, which he believes should be ample time for a deal to be struck with Iran, or at least will give him four more weeks to work out a way of dealing with the threat – that’s the threat from Israel, not Iran.
Israel threatened Trump before when he went ahead with his bunker buster bombs in June of last year by saying simply, “If you don’t do it, we’ll nuke Iran.” It worked. This time around, the threat is, “If you don’t join us, then we’ll strike Iran alone and you will have to deal with the consequences of being the first U.S. president to have to explain to the Jewish lobby why Iran is wiping Israel off the face of the map.” This second threat is multi-layered and also might work with Trump, given that the midterm elections, which are approaching, will cost twice what the elections cost which got him into office. It will be Jewish money which bankrolls him this time around, with the intention of saving him from losing both houses and facing inevitable impeachment.
And so, in many ways, Trump is closer to and more dependent on the regime in Tehran to help him out. A deal which limits the enrichment of uranium and can guarantee no nuclear bomb can be made might be something he can present to the American people as a great victory. The irony is that the deal might be more or less a carbon copy of Obama’s, which he, Trump, rejected while in his first term in office, a rejection which has created the present crisis.
The trouble with any deal now about enrichment is that it is unlikely to satisfy the Israelis, who have become more aware in recent weeks about the capability of Iran’s latest generation of ballistic missiles both in terms of defence and attack. Moreover, the U.S. attack on Iran last year for 12 days has now raised the stakes to a fever pitch, making the Iranians clearer and more focused about any kind of attack happening against them: all-out war.
According to some credible reports, Trump was recently asking Pentagon chiefs if the U.S. could carry out a single in-and-out strike operation which could be used to warn Iran while satisfying Israel at the same time about the U.S. threat, and he was told no such options are feasible. This is due to Iran being much more prepared now for such attacks, both militarily and intelligence-wise, while the Mossad operation of creating civil strife on the ground failed spectacularly. The U.S. is in a very tight corner right now, as its forces and its allies in the region are in the crosshairs of Iran the moment the first bomb is dropped, and so Trump’s options to go to war are very limited. It would be suicidal for Trump to strike Iran, as the losses to U.S. forces and the disruption to oil distribution via the Straits of Hormuz would be too great, not to mention the destruction of infrastructure in Israel itself.
But there is also another factor which is putting all the pressure on Trump to get a deal with Iran. Since last June’s attack and more recently Trump’s betrayal of cordial relations with Putin conjured up at Alaska, along with the Venezuela coup, both Russia and China have upped their support for Iran. This is a critical factor now preventing Trump from hitting Iran with anything. China recently gave Iran its latest state-of-the-art new radar system which can identify U.S. stealth bombers at a range of 700km. Game changer. If you consider Iran, Israel, and the U.S. as three poker players at the table, it is clear that Iran now has the best hand with the most options. It can maximize its role now and exploit Trump’s vulnerability by going for a deal which involves sanctions being relieved, or it could hold out and play a long game way beyond Trump’s one-month breathing space and really turn up the heat on him leading up to the midterms in November. Iran always plays for time and is good at this strategy. And given that even the kindest analysis of America’s strike capability in Iran is two weeks before depletion of all missile stocks is reached, any hawks close to Trump who are pushing for a strike must have the destruction of the U.S. in their strategy as well, as Iran cannot be pounded into a state of submission in such a short space of time. Surely that can’t be the aim of Bibi. Surely not!
Macron, Merz, and von der Leyen Defend Expanded Speech Controls
The Munich Security Conference just became a defense session for Europe’s most ambitious censorship regime
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | February 16, 2026
Emmanuel Macron stood before the Munich Security Conference last week and offered a blueprint for what European governments should be allowed to delete from the internet. The French president wants mandatory identity verification for social media users, one account per person, algorithm transparency on the government’s terms, and the legal authority to block platforms that refuse to comply.
“We have to be sure there is one single person with one account,” Macron said. “If this is an AI system, if this is bot or organized by big organization, it should be just forbidden.”
The statement describes a system where every social media user would have their identity verified by platforms and tied to a single permitted account. Anonymous speech, pseudonymous commentary, and the ability to maintain separate personal and professional presences online would effectively end for anyone using platforms that serve the European market.
Macron suggested this as a way to protect democracy. The mechanism would give governments a powerful tool to identify, track, and silence any user whose speech they find objectionable.
France is moving to ban social media access for anyone under 15, a policy that requires verifying every user. Macron defended this by characterizing free expression online as a form of brainwashing.
“Free speech would mean I will give the mind, brand the heart of my teenagers to algorithm of big guys,” he said. “I’m not totally sure I share the values, or Chinese algorithm without any control. We are crazy.”
The argument runs as follows: letting young people encounter ideas online without government permission is insanity. The solution requires every user to prove their age to access platforms where public discussion happens.
Macron suggested that speech illegal in newspapers should remain illegal when moved online. “How is that the craziest and most harmful narratives can go unchecked in our digital space, where they will fall under the law if published in print?”
The question assumes “harmful narratives” is a category the government should define. It also assumes the government should have the power to prevent people from encountering ideas it has labeled crazy.
Macron invoked the Digital Services Act as the foundation for expanded censorship across Europe. “This is a very important regulation because for the first time we created the framework to regulate this platform.”
The DSA gives EU regulators the authority to demand content removal from platforms. Macron called for going further: using the law to “excuse those who clearly decide not to respect our rules and our regulation” and to “block all those [who allow] interferences in our systems.”
He offered a familiar list of speech categories he wants suppressed: “racist speech, hateful speech, anti-Semitic speech.” These terms have no fixed legal definition that applies uniformly across EU member states. Who is racist, what constitutes hatred, which criticism of which policies counts as anti-Semitism: these determinations would be made by regulators and platforms operating under government pressure.
Macron described limits on speech as somehow inherent to democracy itself: “When you have free speech, you have respect, you have rules, and the limit of my freedom is the beginning of your freedom.”
This formulation treats speech as equivalent to physical coercion. Your words are framed as a boundary violation against others simply by existing. The speech that most requires protection is speech that offends, that challenges consensus, that the powerful would prefer to suppress. Macron’s framework offers no protection for any of it.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who opened the conference, echoed the European position that speech protections should end where government-defined values begin.
“A divide has opened up between Europe and the United States,” Merz said. “And Vice President JD Vance said this very openly here at the Munich Security Conference a year ago, and he was right. The battle of cultures of MAGA in the US is not ours. Freedom of speech here ends where the words spoken are directed against human dignity and our basic law.”
“Human dignity” is the phrase German law uses to justify prosecuting speech. The Constitutional Court has interpreted it to cover insults, Holocaust denial, and an expanding category of expression that authorities determine undermines respect for persons or groups. It is the legal mechanism under which German police have raided homes over social media posts and prosecuted people for memes.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen joined the censorship chorus with a declaration of territorial authority over online expression.
“I want to be very clear: our digital sovereignty is our digital sovereignty,” she said, adding the EU “will not flinch where this is concerned.”
Von der Leyen described European speech regulation as under attack from the United States, “which has wielded the threats of tariffs on partners to secure preferential access and has decried the EU’s digital rules as an assault on free speech.”
The EU’s digital rules are an assault on free speech. The DSA empowers bureaucrats to demand platforms remove content, under threat of massive fines.
The EU has opened formal proceedings against X for its policies. European regulators have forced platforms to suppress content that would be legally protected in the United States.
Von der Leyen framed resistance to this regime as a threat to Europe’s “democratic foundation.” She claimed Europe has “a long tradition in freedom of speech” while defending a legal structure designed to ensure certain speech never reaches European audiences.
“The European way of life – our democratic foundation and the trust of our citizens – is being challenged in new ways,” she said. “On everything from territories to tariffs or tech regulations.”
The phrasing groups speech regulation with tariffs and territorial disputes. All three are matters where Europe will defend its sovereignty. What Europeans are permitted to say, read, and share online is treated as equivalent to where national borders fall.
The leaders who gathered in Munich spoke of protecting democracy while proposing tools that would let governments identify and punish dissent. They invoked free speech while demanding the power to decide which speech is free. They claimed to defend Europe while stripping Europeans of the ability to speak freely online.
Keir Starmer-tied think tank paid PR firm to target The Grayzone
By Kit Klarenberg | The Grayzone | February 16, 2026
Leaked files have revealed that Labour Together, the shadowy think tank run by disgraced former top Keir Starmer aide Morgan McSweeney, paid the Washington DC-based corporate intelligence firm APCO Worldwide to spy on journalists who reported on their corrupt handling of campaign finances.
The reporters named appear to have been targeted for their efforts to investigate how the UK’s Labour Party elites spent 730,000 pounds in undeclared donations to install Starmer as their leader.
The files show APCO used those funds to oversee the fabrication of a dodgy, evidence-free dossier claiming that Russia was behind damaging disclosures about Labour Together, which it submitted to the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) of Britain’s GCHQ — London’s equivalent to the US National Security Agency.
The “significant persons of interest” listed in APCO’s McCarthyite casebook included The Grayzone and myself.
According to my APCO dossier, “While a self described ‘investigative journalist,’ he is an author for the Gray Zone. The site has been described as a ‘conspiracy blog’ and ‘Wagner propaganda channel.’ In 2023,” the dossier reads, I “was arrested by counter-terror police after [I] arrived in the UK.”
APCO bills itself as “a trusted and strategic advisor… that drive[s] our clients’ missions and objectives forward.” Despite its massive contract with Labour Together, the files show the PR firm struggled to identify its targets, and proved unable to establish the most basic facts about them.
When APCO branded The Grayzone as “Wagner propaganda,” it seemed to have confused us with “Grey Zone,” an entirely unrelated and now-defunct Telegram channel affiliated with the Russian military contractor. APCO also claimed I was “arrested by counter-terrorism police” in May 2023 upon returning to Britain. In fact, I had been detained, not arrested.
APCO also targeted journalists Matt Taibbi and Paul Holden, who led investigations into Labour Together’s potentially criminal activities, based on leaks and Freedom of Information requests. The PR firm had sought to secure “leverage” over Holden in order to sabotage his work.
The spying scandal began in November 2023, when Britain’s Sunday Times revealed that Keir Starmer’s campaign manager, Morgan McSweeney, had failed to declare £730,000 in campaign donations which he diverted to advance Starmer’s rise to Labour leadership. One month later, APCO prepared a memo for Labour Together outlining a strategy to blame the damaging disclosure on Russian hackers and attack the journalists who dared to publish details of the offending documents.
The story was given new life in February 2026, when British journalist Peter Geoghehan exposed a secret contract showing Labour Together paid APCO £30,000 to investigate the journalists it blamed for exposing its legally questionable activities.
It has now gone mainstream, with the Sunday Times publishing a lengthy report branding the Labour operation as a “dirty smear” based on a “lie” about Russian hacking.
However, the Times article omitted any mention of this reporter or The Grayzone, even though we were prominently targeted by Labour Together. In the following investigation, we explain why The Grayzone was targeted, tracing the origins of the slimy spying operation to a network of Labourite operatives who have sought to destroy us since well before Starmer came to power.
“Familiar with masters of the same drivers”
Labour Together was founded in 2015 by McSweeney, Starmer’s longtime svengali. After several failed campaigns for establishment candidates, McSweeney managed to transform his organization into a propaganda juggernaut, soliciting large donations from the UK Israel lobby’s most significant moneyman, Trevor Chinn.
While presenting his campaigning outfit as a plucky little think tank, he wielded it against Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and the movement behind him. To neutralize the ecosystem of alternative media outlets supporting Corbyn as Labour leader, Labour Together contracted a political operative named Imran Ahmed to spin out a censorship front called “Stop Funding Fake News.”
After weaponizing dubious charges of antisemitism to defund one of the most influential pro-Corbyn outlets, Canary UK, the organization folded, then resurfaced as the much bolder Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). Based inside the office of Labour Together, CCDH relied on the funding from Chinn and, as The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal revealed, secretly coordinated with the Israeli embassy in Washington.
McSweeney entered Downing Street as Starmer’s Chief of Staff just one month before Trump’s re-election. Among his most important tasks was repairing relations with the US President. At the time, Trump’s aides were bristling over reports that McSweeney met with Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris during the Democratic National Convention to plot strategy. One of Trump’s top donors, the transhumanist mega-billionaire Elon Musk, also had his knives out for McSweeney after journalists Matt Taibbi and Paul Thacker revealed that CCDH’s top priority for 2024 was to “kill Elon Musk’s Twitter.”
McSweeney’s solution was to dispatch one of Labour’s most seasoned – and scandal-stained – fixers to Washington. He was Lord Peter Mandelson, the architect of the neoliberal New Labour wave whose notoriously transactional tendencies seemed to make him the perfect match for Trump. Mandelson made himself a fixture at Butterworth’s, a favorite Capitol Hill haunt of MAGA operatives, and insinuated himself into Trumpist social circles.
In June 2025, the restaurant erected a plaque honoring Mandelson during a ceremony overseen by Raheem Kassam, a close associate of former Trump chief of staff Steve Bannon. There, a mirthful Mandelson raised a toast and proclaimed a special kinship with the MAGA elite: “Although we don’t have identical politics, we are familiar with masters of the same drivers that brought our respective figures to power — President Trump in your case and Keir Starmer in mine.”
But Mandelson was also dogged by the same sex trafficking figure who constantly inhabited the personal lives of both Trump and Bannon: Jeffrey Epstein. Both McSweeney and Starmer had been keenly aware of the ambassador’s friendship with Epstein, but they dismissed the concerns, even ignoring a warning from UK security services.
However, when a series of emails confirming Mandelson’s friendship with Epstein poured forth as part of a release by the US Department of Justice, the ambassador’s position became untenable. Following his firing in September 2025, a new tranche of emails published this January provided an even more damning portrait of their friendship. They showed, for instance, that Epstein channeled money to Mandelson’s husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, for a specious initiative which was never completed. Even worse, the communications exposed Mandelson providing Epstein with advance notice of the impending collapse of Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government in 2010, as well as sensitive information about the UK’s “saleable assets.”
McSweeney’s scheming had finally caught up with him. Though Starmer initially praised and defended his longtime campaign guru in parliament, he caved soon after, forcing McSweeney to resign his post on February 8.
In the days since, Starmer has been unable to fill the vacancy. Meanwhile, another senior Labour official is reportedly considering leaving his role as well. Amid the chaos, British media has begun to speculate that the Prime Minister will be next to go.
Will the revelation of Labour Together’s media enemies list, and its secret contract with APCO, be the weight that finally sinks Starmer?
Labour Together’s misdirection ploy: blame Russia
McSweeney was aware that Labour Together had secretly contracted APCO to spy on journalists; however, he didn’t carry out the dirty work himself. That job appears to have been commissioned by his successor at the think tank, Josh Simons, who’s now a senior minister in Starmer’s government.
Simons has dismissed reports that the PR firm was tasked with spying on reporters as “nonsense,” insisting that APCO was merely “asked to look into a suspected illegal hack.” Simons’ disingenuous claims are undermined by newly-leaked documents related to the probe, however.
Perhaps most damning is a December 2023 memo prepared by APCO for Labour Together which shows investigators fretting about “recent articles and blog posts” which threatened to draw attention to the political group’s questionable funding schemes. Information published by these meddling journalists, particularly Paul Holden, “[raised] concern about the source of his information and what more he may choose to publish in the future,” the memo continued.
It was therefore deemed “important to identify the source of the information and to ascertain what additional information could be published.” Labour Together tasked APCO with probing several journalists, dubbed “significant persons of interest.”
The memo speculated that Holden and others may have received leaks from inside Labour Together, Labour party headquarters, parliament, or “illegally-gathered information collected” from a purported “hack” of Britain’s Electoral Commission in 2023. APCO concluded it was “essential” for Labour Together to concoct a strategy to counter the critical reporting.
Its response was to blame the organization’s woes on a Russian hack. But rather than hiring a cyber-security firm to investigate the supposed data breach, it contracted a corporate intelligence firm to attack the messengers.
In February 2024, The Guardian contacted Holden to alert him that the paper was preparing a hit piece alleging he was under investigation by the NCSC for receiving illegally obtained information from Russia. The Guardian had clearly been influenced by briefings from Labour Together, as well as by APCO’s report. Yet the outlet backed off when Holden promised to sue them for defamation.
APCO is now under formal investigation for potential standards breaches by Britain’s Public Relations and Communication Association.
How did The Grayzone wind up on Labour Together’s enemies list?
It is unclear how and why I became a “significant person of interest” in APCO and Labour Together’s secret smear campaign. However, their operation dovetailed with another surreptitious attempt by intelligence-tied actors to smear The Grayzone as Russian agents.
I have never spoken to Paul Holden or other journalists named as the firm’s targets, or conducted any journalistic investigations into Labour Together’s corrupt financial dealings. When APCO initiated its probe, I had mentioned Labour Together in a single article months prior that focused on the organization’s censorship-obsessed spinoff, the Center for Countering Digital Hate.
Such sloppiness and paranoia is the hallmark of Amil Khan, a veteran British government psyops warrior turned “disinformation expert” involved with Labour Together and Starmer’s Labour.
Khan cut his teeth running covert British-funded psychological warfare operations during the Syrian dirty war, supporting violent extremist groups armed and financed by the CIA and MI6. He subsequently founded Valent Projects, which “specializes in addressing online manipulation.” Khan’s outfit produced a paper on social media ratfucking strategies for Labour Together entitled, “Power and Persuasion: Understanding the Right’s Playbook.”
In December 2021, The Grayzone exposed how Valent Projects covertly produced Covid vaccine propaganda funded by the British monarchy’s Royal Institute, using then-popular “BreadTube” personality Abigail Thorn as the front person for its campaign. The investigation apparently placed this outlet in the crosshairs of Khan and his information warfare network.
Less than a year later, The Grayzone exposed Khan again – this time, for his role in a covert conspiracy to destroy us. Enlisted by celebrity former leftist journalist Paul Mason, Khan helped coordinate a harebrained scheme to demonetize and deplatform The Grayzone. The pair discussed going “full nuclear legal to squeeze [The Grayzone] financially,” and proposed publishing intelligence agency-sourced smears to delegitimize this outlet.
As their revenge plot approached its paranoid apogee, Mason and Khan fantasized about hosting an anti-Grayzone summit with some of the most rabid, intelligence-tied opponents of our reporting. Among those they pitched for the gathering was Imran Ahmed, director of the censorship-obsessed Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which was founded by Morgan McSweeney and shared an office with his Labour Together.
While it is unknown if the anti-Grayzone summit ever took place, we have since learned that Mason enlisted a team of high-priced London lawyers to sue this outlet just days after our article exposing his secret smear campaign appeared. In May 2023, I was detained at the UK’s Luton International Airport and interrogated about The Grayzone’s activities by counter-terror police. Six months later, APCO initiated its covert investigation of me, The Grayzone, and others whose reporting had wound them up on the Labour Together enemies list.
APCO has so far remained silent about the scandal. The Grayzone has submitted a request for comment to Tom Short, the PR firm’s London chief. We received an automated response revealing he conveniently slipped away to the US. Upon Short’s return to Britain, APCO will no longer be able to hide behind bogus allegations of Russian hacking.
‘Israel’ threatens to genocide Gaza if Hamas refuses disarmament
Al Mayadeen | February 16, 2026
Senior Israeli officials have threatened to renew the genocide in Gaza if Hamas does not disarm within a proposed 60-day period, although the Israeli occupation continues its attacks on the Strip daily, never adhering to the ceasefire agreement.
Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said that the occupation government intends to give Hamas two months to relinquish its arms. If it does not comply, the Israeli military would “complete the mission” in Gaza, he threatened.
The warnings came against the backdrop of the US-led “Board of Peace”, under which Washington dictated the 60-day deadline.
According to Fuchs, Hamas would be required to surrender all weapons, including small arms such as AK-47 rifles. He emphasized that the Israeli regime would evaluate the outcome at the end of the period.
Netanyahu also reiterated that disarmament must include small arms, claiming that such weapons were used during the October 7 operation. Israeli officials allege that tens of thousands of rifles remain in Gaza.
Reports in The New York Times suggested that a draft proposal discussed by US mediators could initially allow Hamas to retain some small arms while surrendering weapons deemed capable of striking “Israel”. The document is reportedly expected to be shared with the Palestinian Resistance in the coming weeks.
Devastation and aggression despite ceasefire
Despite the ceasefire agreement, officially effective as of October 11, 2025, the Israeli regime has maintained its occupation of vast areas across the Gaza Strip, and continues to attack the Palestinian territory’s infrastructure and civilians.
Since then, over 591 Palestinians, including women and children, have been killed, and more than 1,598 others have been injured.
Since October 7, 2023, more than 72,051 Palestinians have been killed, and over 171,706 have been injured, making the war on Gaza one of the most brutal in modern history. Many victims are still in dire need of treatment. However, hospitals across Gaza have been systematically targeted over the past three years, forcing operations to minimal function, sometimes to a halt.
Featured Video
The KAL Flight 007 Tragedy
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
US-Israel War on Iran: The Myth of Limited Warfare
By James Petras :: 04.04.2012
Introduction
The mounting threat of a US-Israeli military attack against Iran is based on several factors including: (1) the recent military history of both countries in the region, (2) public pronouncements by US and Israeli political leaders, (3) recent and on-going attacks on Lebanon and Syria, prominent allies of Iran, (4) armed attacks and assassinations of Iranian scientists and security officials by proxy and/or terrorist groups under US or Mossad control, (5) the failure of economic sanctions and diplomatic coercion, (6) escalating hysteria and extreme demands for Iran to end legal, civilian use-related uranium enrichment, (7) provocative military ‘exercises’ on Iran’s borders and war games designed for intimidation and a dress rehearsal for a preemptive attack, (8) powerful pro-war pressure groups in both Washington and Tel Aviv including the major Israeli political parties and the powerful AIPAC in the US, (9) and lastly the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (Obama’s Orwellian Emergency Decree, March 16, 2012).
The US propaganda war operates along two tracks: (1) the dominant message emphasizes the proximity of war and the willingness of the US to use force and violence. This message is directed at Iran and coincides with Israeli announcements of war preparations. (2) The second track targets the ‘liberal public’ with a handful of marginal ‘knowledgeable academics’ (or State Department progressives) playing down the war threat and arguing that reasonable policy makers in Tel Aviv and Washington are aware that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons or any capacity to produce them now or in the near future. The purpose of this liberal backpedaling is to confuse and undermine the majority public opinion, which is clearly opposed to more war preparations, and to derail the burgeoning anti-war movement.
Needless to say the pronouncements of the ‘rational’ warmongers use a ‘double discourse’ based on the facile dismissal of all the historical and empirical evidence to the contrary. When the US and Israel talk of war, prepare for war and engage in pre-war provocations – they intend to go to war – just as they did against Iraq in 2003. Under present international political and military conditions an attack on Iran, initially by Israel with US support, is extremely likely, even as world economic conditions should dictate otherwise and even as the negative strategic consequences will most likely reverberate throughout the world for decades to come. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Larry Johnson: The U.S. Will Exhaust Itself & Lose War Against Iran
- In The Name of ‘Helping Iran’, The U.S. And Israel Slaughter Over 100 Iranian Schoolgirls
- Why are Americans killing and dying for Israel, again?
- Timing of US-Israel attack on Iran bears symbolic meaning in Judaism
- 70 martyrs, 90 wounded in US-Israeli strike on elementary school
- Did Israel Just Forfeit Its ‘Right To Exist’? — Carlson’s Interview with Huckabee
- Trump Starts a Major Regime-Change War with Iran, Serving Neoconservatism and Israel
- The KAL Flight 007 Tragedy
- Why Trump’s war on Iran will fail
- Lebanon: Between sovereignty and the mirage of normalization
- If Americans Knew
- When Presbyterians Fought Christian Zionism
- Israel starts another war on Iran – Not a ceasefire Day 141
- ‘Terror Was Needed to Make Arabs Leave’: What the Israeli Army Did in 1948, Revealed
- 17,000 Unaccompanied Orphans in Gaza, in World’s Biggest Orphan Crisis
- Israeli leaders want to buy global legitimacy – Not a ceasefire Day 140
- Israel warns of a Ramadan escalation — while doing everything to provoke one
- Democrats Should Release Their 2024 Election Autopsy – and Stop the Gaza Denial
- Israel responsible for 2/3 of press killings worldwide – Not a ceasefire Day 139
- Are the Jews indigenous to Palestine?
- AIPAC Wants to Kill a Bill that would Ensure Israel Complies with Ceasefire
- No Tricks Zone
- Glaciers Worldwide Are Suddendly Surging, Experts Blame Warming!
- Surprising Discovery: Sahara Is Greening…Billions Of Trees Where Once Thought To Be Barren
- New Research Reaffirms Clouds, Aerosols, And Surface Solar Radiation Are ‘Driving The Climate System’
- Germany: Electric Car Catches Fire At Charging Station, Sets Off Local “Inferno”, Widespread Damage
- New Study: Canada’s New Brunswick Was 1°C Warmer Than Today During The Medieval Warm Period
- Coal Power Back In Trend As Globe Tries To Keep Pace With Growing Demand For Power
- New Study: A 4°C Warmer Beaufort Sea Had ‘No Sea Ice’ 11,700 – 8200 Years Ago
- Unfudging The Data: Dutch Meteorological Institute Reinstates Early 20th Centruy Heat Waves It Had Erased Earlier
- German Gas Crisis…Chancellor Merz Allegedly Bans Gas Debate Ahead of Elections!
- Pollen Reconstructions Show The Last Glacial’s Warming Events Were Global, 10x Greater Than Modern
Aletho News 