As Trump-Iran Truce Frays, Dem Leaders Pursue Yet Another Round of War Powers Votes

After accusations of cowardly delays, Democratic leaders in the US Congress moved Wednesday toward a vote on yet another war powers resolution aimed at stopping President Donald Trump from waging more unauthorized war on Iran as the tenuous day-old Mideast ceasefire unravels.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced Wednesday that Democrats will force a vote on a war powers resolution when upper chamber lawmakers reconvene next week.

“Congress must reassert its authority, especially at this dangerous moment,” Schumer said during a press conference at his New York office. “No president, Democrat or Republican, should take this country to war alone. Not now. Not ever.”

Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) reiterated remarks made during a Tuesday evening interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, in which he said he’s demanding House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) “immediately reconvene the House back into session” so lawmakers can vote on the war powers resolution.

“A two-week ceasefire is insufficient,” Jeffries said. “We need a permanent end to Donald Trump’s reckless war of choice.”

“Assuming it doesn’t happen this week, we’ll go back into session next week and we will present a war powers resolution as soon as it becomes available to us to do so as a matter of privilege on the House floor,” he continued. “All we need are a handful of Republicans to join us.”

“The American people strongly oppose this reckless war of choice and know that we should not be spending billions of dollars to drop bombs in Iran while Republicans and Donald Trump are unwilling to spend a dime to actually make life more affordable for the American people,” Jeffries added.

The GOP-controlled House and Senate have rejected attempts to pass war powers resolutions, with Johnson denying that the US is even at war – a dubious argument used in as far back as the Korean War in order to skirt the constitutional requirement for congressional assent.

Keep reading

White House ‘signed off’ on Pakistan’s declaration that Iran ceasefire included Lebanon: Report

The White House was directly involved in “shaping” the ceasefire announcement by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, having reviewed and approved it before publication, according to a New York Times (NYT) report on 8 April.

The report says Washington saw and signed off on the statement in advance, indicating that the announcement was not an independent diplomatic move but part of coordinated communication. 

US President Donald Trump had issued an 8:00 pm deadline on Tuesday for Iran to surrender, saying that he would erase an entire civilization if Tehran did not agree to his terms for a deal.

“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will,” the president wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social.

The NYT report notes that, behind the scenes, US officials were actively seeking a way out as the deadline approached, even as US President Donald Trump was threatening Iran with annihilation if it did not open the Strait of Hormuz.

It asserts that diplomatic channels were far more active than the public messaging indicated, with the ceasefire appeal reflecting a managed effort rather than a spontaneous initiative.

Sharif’s post itself had appeared earlier with the header “Draft – Pakistan’s PM Message on X,” fueling speculation that the text had been provided externally before publication. It called for extending the deadline by two weeks, reopening the Strait of Hormuz as a “goodwill gesture,” and implementing a temporary ceasefire across all fronts. 

Iran’s 10-point plan includes US non-aggression, sanctions removal, compensation, troop withdrawal, uranium enrichment, and Iranian control of Hormuz, alongside a halt to fighting across all fronts, directly naming Lebanon. 

The Pakistani premier’s statement on X explicitly stated that “the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere, including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.”

Keep reading

Designer Wars to depopulate and to destroy

The War against Iran may be temporarily suspended (perhaps only while ammunition stockpiles are renewed) but it is about more than stealing land and oil and destroying an entire civilisation – it’s also about killing hundreds of millions, particularly in Asia and Africa, and destroying the global economy. This is a half-hearted peace, a peace full of tension and uncertainty and guaranteed betrayal; a peace as fragile as an old man’s bones. In that it now controls the Strait of Hormuz, Iran is stronger. The blustering, bombastic Trump now has a reputation in the gutter and his skills as a negotiator have been exposed as worthless. The dollar‘s days as the reserve currency are numbered. China and the yuan are winners.

The obvious, overt aim of the unprovoked attack on Iran was, as with all recent wars, to grab land and commodities (especially oil). All recent wars have been at least partly about commodities (especially oil). Even Gaza has oil. And it seems clear that the designer war between Russia and Ukraine was devised to destroy productive land and oil. It is, in short, part of the depopulation plan.

Similarly, there are covert, unspoken purposes for the attack on Iran – which is another “designer” war.

The first aim is to kill a lot of people, as part of the depopulation plan, which is an essential part of the Great Reset and which is, indeed, the reason behind the absurd pseudoscientific manufactured nonsense known as global warming, about which I’ve been warning for many years.

Worldwide, 40% of crops are grown on land which requires irrigation powered by diesel. Without diesel, farmers cannot grow or harvest crops. Fishing boats are stuck in their harbours because they have no fuel. No fishing boats means no fish. Wheat is the biggest food crop in the world but grain drying requires energy, which isn’t available. There is, it seems, plenty of fuel for transporting troops and bombs, but little for producing food. There is energy galore for the servers required for AI, but none for farming and fishing.

Did the poikilothermic, psychopathic warmongers know all this before they started their criminal activities?

Of course they did! They are taking over the world and plan to run it and destroy it. The wars aren’t going to stop – they are part of the plan to take us into the Great Reset.

Energy shortages are being used as a weapon and the thousands dying in the Middle East are clearly just beginning of a major land and oil grab.

You almost certainly did NOT read in the mainstream coporate press that the shortage of oil and fertiliser, and the higher prices of energy and food, will mean that hunger in Asia and Africa will increase. The deaths there could quickly reach hundreds of millions. Around 700 million people were hungry and close to starving to death before the United States and Israel started their current unprovoked war in the Middle East. And countries struggling to catch up with the 21st century will be held back – as planned. (Where are the Black Lives Matter campaigners when they’re needed?)

All this was predictable.

Keep reading

From Iraq to Iran: What the latest war revealed about US airpower

During nearly six weeks of the war on Iran, the US has suffered heavy military aircraft losses, now exceeding those recorded during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Iran’s recent downing of an American F-35 jet marks the first time in 23 years that a US fighter jet has been shot down in combat; the previous instance was in Iraq in 2003, when an A‑10 was lost. 

Over the seven years of the Iraq campaign from 2003 to 2009, total US aviation losses amounted to 129 helicopters and 24 fixed‑wing aircraft, with only 46 attributed to hostile fire. The remaining cases were due to malfunctions, fuel exhaustion, and pilot error.

Since the start of the Iran war, the US has lost at least 44 aircraft, including the first incident of the US fifth-generation stealth F-35 Lightning II being hit. The list includes four F-15E Strike Eagle (the Wall Street Journal cited a fact sheet stating that the original model costs at least $31 million, while the cost of newer models is close to $100 million), two A-10 Thunderbolt IIs, two Lockheed C-130 Hercules, two Boeing E-3 Sentries, eight Boeing KC-135 Stratotankers, one Boeing CH-47 Chinook, one Sikorsky HH-60 Pave Hawk (damaged), two Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawks (damaged), four MH-6 Little Bird helicopters, and 17 General Atomics MQ-9 Reapers (at about $30 million each, totalling close to $500 million).

High-value AWACS and multiple KC-135 tankers were damaged by Iranian strikes on regional airbases.  In the first four days of the war, Iran hit almost all US military bases (or locations hosting US aircraft) in the Gulf. It struck key US ground radars linked to the THAAD air‑defense system, other early‑warning radars, and multiple radar and communication nodes.

Keep reading

This is how the age of American dominance comes to an end

Regardless of how the conflict between the United States and Iran formally concludes, its symbolism is already unmistakable. An ancient civilization, one of the oldest continuous states in human history, has emerged as the final obstacle to the project of American global dominance. That alone tells us something about the direction in which the world is moving.

For historians, the deeper meaning of the current Middle Eastern crisis lies in the confrontation between two powers at opposite ends of the historical spectrum. Iran is arguably the world’s oldest centralized state, with roots stretching back to around 530 BC. Since then, it has never ceased to exist as a unified political entity. That continuity is remarkable. Even Russia, the major Western European powers, India and China have all experienced fragmentation at various points in their histories.

The United States, by contrast, is among the youngest major nations – barely 250 years old. Its history is ten times shorter than that of Persia. In that sense, the present conflict pits antiquity against modernity, a civilization forged over millennia against a state that rose rapidly in a uniquely favorable historical moment.

In purely military terms, such comparisons mean little. The United States retains overwhelming destructive capacity. If it chose to do so, it could devastate Iran. This is, after all, the only country in history to have used nuclear weapons against civilian populations. That fact alone should temper any illusions about the limits of American power.

Yet the long-term significance of this confrontation lies elsewhere. It isn’t about whether Iran can defeat the United States in a conventional sense. It’s about whether the current international order, one shaped by American dominance, can continue to function as it has.

Keep reading

Iran has prevailed, and the Middle East has changed

US President Donald Trump has, in the end, found a way out of the situation he created by embarking on a reckless war against Iran. The threat of destroying an entire civilization provided him with the pretext to step back.

Indirect negotiations between Tehran and Washington, conducted through intermediaries, primarily Pakistan and, behind it, China, have produced a ceasefire. Trump may claim that Iran was cowed by his threats, but the reality is different.

A ceasefire under conditions where the Strait of Hormuz remains under Iranian control suggests that Tehran has not backed down. Washington, in effect, has.

It is too early to speak of any “golden age” emerging from these talks. But the outlines of the conflict’s outcome are already visible.

Keep reading

The War in Iran as International Terrorism

As someone born in 1944, when Franklin D. Roosevelt was president, who lived through 12 other presidencies before Donald Trump took — and that word has a different meaning with him — office in 2016, the truth is that I’ve simply never experienced anything quite like this (and I know that I’m in good company). Yes, I’ve certainly lived through other wars, from the Korean War of my childhood to the nightmarish war in Vietnam of my collegiate years (though it began well before and went on long after that) to the invasion of Afghanistan (that led me to launch TomDispatch) to George W. Bush’s nightmarish war in Iraq that was a critical part of my reportorial (or at least TomDispatchian) life. And now, in my old age, yet another war! (Why is it that my country, with or without Donald Trump, just can’t seem to stop going to war?)

Iran is, of course, being trumped (or rather Trumped!). The “president of peace” was only the president of peace until he wasn’t. Ask Nicolás Maduro and his wife if you doubt that for a second. And give Donald Trump credit for his unpredictability. One moment he is indeed the president of peace and the next moment — no question about it — he’s making war like a maniac or blowing staggering numbers of boats (almost 50 as I was writing this) out of the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean.

You might wonder, under the circumstances, if it’s even possible to cover his presidency as a reporter the way any journalist might once have covered a presidency. The very name for his latest assault (on Iran), Operation Epic Fury, is distinctly all Trump all the time. As he told a crowd at a rally in Kentucky recently, “They gave me a list of names to choose. ‘Sir, you could pick the name you’d like, sir.’ I said, ‘The name of what?’ ‘The name of the attack on Iran, sir.’ And they gave me, like, 20 names, and I’m, like, falling asleep. I didn’t like any of them. Then I see ‘Epic Fury.’ I said, ‘I like that name! I like that name!’”

In short, the president of peace has distinctly made peace with war and, when it comes to Latin America, his version of war may just be beginning. (Watch out, Cuba!) With all of that and, sadly, more in mind, let TomDispatch regular Nan Levinson take you into a world in which reporters do indeed have to cover (whatever that may mean these days) Donald Trump making war on this world of ours.

Keep reading

Army survivors of deadly attack in Kuwait dispute Pentagon’s account, say unit “was unprepared” to defend itself

Survivors of the deadliest Iranian attack on U.S. forces since the war began have disputed the Pentagon’s description of events and said their unit in Kuwait was left dangerously exposed when six service members were killed and more than 20 wounded.

Speaking publicly for the first time, members of the targeted unit offered CBS News a detailed account of the attack and its harrowing aftermath from the perspective of those on the ground. 

The members CBS News spoke to disputed the description of events from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who described the drone as a “squirter” — in that it squirted through the defenses of a fortified unit inside Kuwait.

“Painting a picture that ‘one squeaked through’ is a falsehood,” one of the injured soldiers told CBS News. “I want people to know the unit … was unprepared to provide any defense for itself. It was not a fortified position.”

That service member, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of rigid media restrictions within the military, said that in spite of the carnage that ensued, those inside the charred and splintered compound responded with swiftness, ingenuity and valor that saved lives.

“I don’t think that the security environment or any leadership decision diminishes in any way their sacrifice or their service,” the member of the Army’s 103rd Sustainment Command said in an interview. “Those soldiers put themselves in harm’s way and … I’m immensely proud of them, and their family should be proud of them.”

These first eyewitness accounts, along with photos and videos of the attack’s aftermath obtained exclusively by CBS News, offer the first descriptions of what occurred March 1 at the thinly fortified Kuwaiti port facility on the day of the Iranian drone strike.

Keep reading

Is the ‘Ghost Murmur’ quantum device possible? Scientists are skeptical

On Monday afternoon President Donald Trump and CIA Director John Ratcliffe hinted at technology that had helped locate a downed American Air Force officer hiding in a mountain crevice in southern Iran. By Tuesday, the New York Post reported that the CIA had deployed Ghost Murmur, a device that uses vaguely described “long-range quantum magnetometry” to find signals of human heartbeats, after which artificial intelligence software isolates each heartbeat from the noisy data. An unnamed source told the Post it was like “hearing a voice in a stadium, except the stadium is a thousand square miles of desert.” Another line landed like a movie tagline: “In the right conditions, if your heart is beating, we will find you.”

It’s a terrific story. It is also, according to scientists who study magnetic fields, almost certainly not true. The rescue was real—the mission involved multiple aircraft and a survival beacon carried by the airman—but Ghost Murmur, at least as publicly described, finds no support in decades of peer-reviewed physics, even with the help of AI, experts told me.

Quantum magnetometers are real; they are ultraprecise at, for instance, detecting heart arrhythmias by measuring magnetic fields (via quantum properties) produced by the cardiac muscle. The problem is that the heart’s magnetic field is weak. “At the surface of the chest, where you’re about 10 centimeters away from the source, the magnetic field is just barely detectable,” says John Wikswo, a professor of biomedical engineering and physics at Vanderbilt University. “Now, [if] instead of going 10 centimeters away—which is a tenth of a meter—you go a meter away, the amplitude of the signal has dropped to a thousandth of what it was.” The signal becomes dramatically weaker at a kilometer.

Wikswo was the first scientist to measure the magnetic field of an isolated nerve and has been measuring the heart’s magnetic field since the mid-1970s. The first such detection was done by other researchers with two coils, each containing two million turns of wire, and then with a magnetometer “cooled to four degrees above absolute zero,” Wikswo says. This magnetometer is not spy gear—it is a cryogenic instrument designed to keep the rest of the universe out.

To find a heartbeat, a quantum Ghost Murmur tool would have to contend not just with Earth’s magnetic field and magnetic noise from natural and human-made electric currents but also with “the heartbeats of the sheep and dogs and jackrabbits—whatever else is running around out there,” says Chad Orzel, a professor of physics at Union College in New York State and author of How to Teach Quantum Physics to Your Dog. He uses refrigerator magnets to illustrate the weakness of magnetic fields in general. “You have to get the magnet very, very close to the refrigerator before it snaps into place,” he says. “That field drops off very quickly.” Clinical sensors “are usually butted right up against your body … at a distance of centimeters,” Orzel adds. Even pattern-matching using artificial intelligence, he says, couldn’t find a magnetic signal large enough to identify the presence of a person from kilometers away in a desert. At one kilometer away, the signal would diminish to about one trillionth of the strength.

Bradley Roth, a physicist at Oakland University and author of the 2023 review Biomagnetism: The First Sixty Years, agrees. “People have been measuring the magnetic field of the heart for 60 years, and usually it’s done in a lab with shielding, and it’s done just a few centimeters or a couple inches from the heart, and even then you can barely record it.” A helicopter-borne version, he says, “would be not just a small advance, but it’d be a revolutionary advance from the state of the art.”

Orzel struggles to see how a Ghost Murmur could work. “There is really fascinating work being done using quantum magnetometry to measure heart rates,” he says, and magnetic brain scans can now catch the tiny flickers of firing nerves. “But none of that is something that works over ranges of many miles.”

So why was this a story at all? Orzel has a guess: “Somebody yanking a reporter’s chain,” he says. It could be a “snarky, clever way to say, ‘Of course, I’m not going to tell you how we figured this out’”—or a piece of disinformation “to fool somebody into thinking that we actually have this secret technology.”

Keep reading

Trump Launches Federal Investigation Into “Fraudsters and Charlatans” Pushing FAKE Iran Ceasefire Letters

President Donald Trump just dropped the hammer on a coordinated campaign of fraud and deception surrounding the U.S.-Iran ceasefire negotiations.

President Trump announced a full federal investigation into the flood of phony “agreements,” lists, and letters being circulated by total “fraudsters and charlatans” who have absolutely nothing to do with the real negotiations.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, President Trump announced a double-sided ceasefire just yesterday, agreeing to suspend bombing of Iran for two weeks after negotiations.

And of course, Fake News CNN is right in the middle of it, just like Trump called out. They ran with a bogus “statement” from someone with zero power or involvement.

Trump wrote on Truth Social:

“The alleged Statement put out by CNN World News is a FRAUD, as CNN well knows. The false Statement was linked to a Fake News site (from Nigeria) and, of course, immediately picked up by CNN, and blared out as a “legitimate” headline. The Official Statement by Iran was just released, and posted on TRUTH, below.

“Authorities are looking to determine whether or not a crime was committed on the issuance of the Fake CNN World Statement, or was it a sick rogue player? CNN is being ordered to immediately withdraw this Statement with full apologies for their, as usual, terrible “reporting.” Results of the investigation will be announced in the near future.”

CNN pushed back on President Trump’s claim, asserting that the Iranian statement originated from official regime spokespeople.

“The statement in question was obtained by CNN from Iranian officials and reported on multiple Iranian state media outlets. We received the statement from specific official Iranian spokespeople who are known to us.”

Keep reading