Tag: iran

Senate Rejects Resolution to Block Further Military Action Against Iran

The U.S. Senate on April 15 voted against advancing a resolution to halt further U.S. military operations against Iran.

Senators voted 52–47 against advancing the bill.

The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), came as a privileged motion under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which was designed to constrain a president’s ability to prosecute military action without congressional approval. A privileged motion is given the highest priority in the Senate over other matters and allows an immediate debate and vote on the floor.

Duckworth’s resolution specifically calls for the removal of U.S. forces “from hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorized by Congress.”

Democrats brought the resolution to a vote a week after President Donald Trump approved a two-week ceasefire to pursue further negotiations with the Iranian regime.

Washington and Tehran concluded a round of talks over the weekend without reaching an agreement on Iran’s nuclear pursuits, raising the potential for renewed fighting in the near future. Since then, Trump has ordered U.S. forces to enact a blockade of Iranian ports.

Keep reading

Democrats file impeachment articles against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday filed articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, leveling serious criticisms of his handling of the Pentagon and the U.S. attacks on Iran.

As Republicans control the House, this move is unlikely to have an effect in 2026. Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Ariz., introduced the resolution, which says Hegseth has “demonstrated a willful disregard for the Constitution, abused the powers of his office and acted in a manner grossly incompatible with the rule of law,” CBS News reported.

The six articles of impeachment cite offenses including waging unauthorized war in Iran and reckless endangerment of U.S. service members, as well as breaking the laws of armed conflict and targeting civilians. Civilian casualties in Iran have included more than 160 people killed in an attack on a girls school in February.

They further accuse Hegseth of mishandling sensitive military information, which refers to his use of a Signal group chat on his personal phone to share information on a military operation in Yemen last year.

The resolution also says Hegseth obstructed congressional oversight by withholding information on military operations and abused his power by using it for political retribution.

Keep reading

Young woman says Canadian university banned her for listening to a conversation about Iran war

A Canadian woman says she has been banned for life from the University of Guelph in a violation of her Charter rights because she overheard a private conversation that her father had about the Iran war with some Muslims.

Sarah Dotzert, a young conservative activist, posted a YouTube video about her ordeal through her organization, Unify Action. She explains just how far the university went in political correctness by banning both her and her father.

“I’m about to expose the reality of what it’s like to work on university campuses in Canada. I just banned from ever setting foot on the University of Guelph ever again. No joke, this is not a lie. That thumbnail was real – I actually got banned,” she said.

According to Dotzert, she received a letter in the mail from the university titled “notice of trespass.”

The letter reads, as noted by Dotzert:

Dear Sarah,

As a result of your actions on March 6, 2026, this letter serves as a notice of trespass. The University of Guelph and all associated properties are private property. Presently, you are not a registered student, staff, or faculty member at the University of Guelph and are therefore prohibited from entering all University of Guelph properties. Should you be found in violation of this order, you will be charged under the Trespass to Property Act by the Campus Safety Office. This prohibition is in effect for an indefinite period from the date of this letter. A copy of this notice will be forwarded to the Guelph Police Service for their records. If you have any questions, please contact me directly.

— Director of Campus Security

According to Dotzert, she did nothing that would have warranted her being banned from campus. She says that on March 6 at around 7 p.m. she was attending a “private religious function” at the university. She noted that the event was open to the public as well as “non-students,” so she was “free to attend.”

Dotzert said that as her father was dropping her off in the parking lot, he started a conversation with some other girls next to them. Dotzert said that for context the girls “were Muslim.”

“His opening question was, ‘What do you guys think of the war in Iran?” to the girls.

“Immediately, they take it hostile. On his part, he was not hateful, judgmental, or offensive in any way. He makes conversation with everyone … He was simply trying to talk … But they were offended. The conversation lasted minute, maybe two minutes,” Dotzert recounted.

According to Dotzert, she “took no part in it” and was already out of the car and “walking away.”

Keep reading

Comical AI: Israel suggests Iranian military spokesman who mocks Trump is actually a computer-generated FAKE

Israel has suggested that the Iranian military spokesperson known for mocking Donald Trump may be artificial intelligence. 

In a post on the IDF’s Farsi-language account, Israeli officials said that Ebrahim Zolfaghari seems more like an AI-generated product than a real human. 

‘If you have seen him in an interview or in the field, tell us. If not, help us prove that he is an artificial intelligence product,’ the post reads.

‘Are [they] forced to create fictional characters to talk to people? And what does this say about the credibility of their messages?’

Having gained global attention for mocking Trump, Zolfaghari has been likened to ‘Comical Ali’ – the infamously inaccurate Iraqi Minister of Information, Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf. 

Zolfaghari gained notoriety for his attempts to conduct psychological warfare against Israel and the US, famously warning that US troops would become ‘food for the sharks of the Persian Gulf’ and threatened to return Israel to the ‘Stone Age. 

In one video almost three weeks into the war, Zolfaghari mocked Donald Trump for his use of social media, telling the president: ‘The outcome of war cannot be determined by tweets, the result of war is determined on the field.’

He continued: ‘The very place where you and your forces do not dare approach and you can only talk about it in your tweets.’

Wearing military clothing, Zolfaghari ended his message with a mocking smile, telling Trump: ‘It is better to name this war as Epic Fear, instead of Epic Fury.’

In another video after Trump floated joint control of the Strait of Hormuz and suggested he didn’t know who was currently leading Iran, Zolfaghari ridiculed the US President saying: 

‘Hey, Trump, you are fired… You are familiar with this sentence. Thank you for your attention to this matter.’

In a separate video, Zolfaghari intensified his criticism and questioned Washington’s claims of diplomacy.

‘Have your internal conflicts reached the point where you are negotiating with yourselves?’ he added.

Similar to the current Iranian spokesperson, Iraq’s 2003 Information Minister, Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf known as ‘Comical Ali’, became infamous for his delusional daily briefings during the US invasion. 

At the war’s start, Al-Sahhaf boasted that American troops would ‘all die.’ 

He once claimed previous foreign invaders had always met a disastrous end, citing a obscure history book for journalists to read at his home. 

And he frequently mocked Western leaders as ‘blood-sucking bastards,’ losers, and fools.

In one particularly outrageous moment, Comical Ali declared to western journalists that the ‘infidels’ were facing ‘slaughter’ even as US tanks rolled into Baghdad.

From his vantage point on the roof of Baghdad’s Palestine Hotel, and ignoring the sight of Iraqi troops retreating across the Tigris, Al-Sahhaf proclaimed that the city was ‘safe.’

‘Baghdad is safe. The battle is still going on. Their infidels are committing suicide by the hundreds on the gates of Baghdad. Don’t believe those liars,’ he declared.

Keep reading

IMF Cuts Growth Outlook, Warns Iran War Could Push Global Economy to Brink

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) on Tuesday cut its growth outlook and warned the global economy could edge toward recession if the Iran war intensifies, as energy disruptions ripple through inflation, financial markets, and trade.

In its latest World Economic Outlook and accompanying analysis, the IMF said the Middle East conflict—now disrupting a key share of global oil and gas flows—sent previously positive growth momentum to an unexpected halt and introduced unusually high uncertainty for policymakers and investors.

“Downside risks dominate,” IMF analysts wrote in the executive summary. “Geopolitical tensions could worsen even more than they already have—turning the situation into the largest energy crisis in modern times—or domestic political strains could erupt.”

The fund outlined three scenarios—reference, adverse, and severe—depending on how long the war lasts and how deeply energy markets are affected. Under the most severe case, global growth could fall to around 2 percent, a level historically associated with recession-like conditions that has occurred only four times since the 1980s.

“This shock is large. … It is global. Everybody uses energy. Everybody feels the pinch,” IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said in a recent interview with CBS, noting that up to 13 percent of global oil and 20 percent of gas flows have been disrupted.

“People are hurting.”

Keep reading

Trump’s Iran claims clash with reality on the ground 

There is rarely a day when US President Donald Trump does not command attention on social media, with posts ranging from attacks on public figures to sweeping claims about his own achievements. The same tone has carried into his handling of the war on Iran, where he has repeatedly insisted that US actions have weakened Tehran and decisively shifted the conflict in Washington’s favor.

Those assertions have come under closer scrutiny after Trump announced a US naval blockade of Iranian ports following the collapse of talks on Sunday, warning that any vessel attempting to challenge it would be destroyed.

Yet the reality on the ground appears far less clear: Iran has threatened retaliation, the practicality of enforcing such a blockade remains uncertain, and key allies have shown limited willingness to take part. The contrast underscores a widening gap between Trump’s narrative of progress and a conflict that continues to escalate without a clear resolution.

Keep reading

Hormuz Blockade: Europe Mobilizing Against the U.S., Not the Iran Regime

When President Trump announced on Truth Social that the U.S. Navy would blockade “any and all Ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz,” he also instructed the Navy to interdict vessels that had paid tolls to Iran and to destroy mines Iran had placed in the waterway.

CENTCOM subsequently clarified the actual scope: the blockade applies to vessels entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas and does not affect ships transiting the strait to and from non-Iranian ports. The blockade is therefore a naval embargo on Iranian trade, not a closure of the strait to international shipping generally.

Trump took the action in response to Iran’s “world extortion.” The IRGC had imposed a de facto toll regime in the strait. The Tehran regime said that vessels would be required to submit documentation, obtain clearance codes, and accept IRGC-escorted passage through a single controlled corridor. Trump’s goal was to stop Iran from policing the strait and profiting from its closure while the rest of the world absorbed the economic damage.

Neither the U.S. nor Israel is dependent on oil transiting the Strait of Hormuz. Around the globe, the U.S. is the primary enforcer of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), maintaining freedom of navigation for all countries. Trump’s request for Europe and other allies to support U.S. freedom-of-navigation patrols in the Strait of Hormuz was rejected.

Europe’s argument was that the U.S. took action against Iran unilaterally and therefore could not expect European support. President Trump’s position is that the U.S. has spent trillions defending Europe and keeping sea lanes open around the globe for 70 years, and it was reasonable to ask for reciprocity.

Instead, Europe blames Trump for the Hormuz closure, completely ignoring the fact that it is the IRGC, not the U.S., that has closed the strait.

Their refusal to help reopen it is a classic example of cutting off your nose to spite your face, since Europe’s energy supplies are at stake, not America’s. However, anger at Trump is mobilizing Europe to form a coalition to protect the Strait from America rather than from Iran.

Keep reading

House Democrats Seek to Launch ‘25th Amendment Commission’ to Remove Trump From Office

House Democrats have introduced new legislation to create a commission to evaluate whether President Trump should be removed from office under the 25th Amendment.

The proposal, led by New York Congressman Jamie Raskin, would establish a 17-member panel to assess whether the president is fit to carry out his duties.

The effort comes despite Republicans controlling Congress and the president retaining veto power, making the measure almost certain to fail.

More than 85 Democrats in Congress recently called for Trump to be impeached or removed through the 25th Amendment following comments he made about bombing Iran.

Keep reading

As US Initiates Blockade Of Hormuz, Trump Warns Any Iranian Ships Coming Near Will Be ‘Eliminated’

Mediators Still Press For Iran Deal After US Demanded 20-Year Halt To Nuclear Program

On Monday a US official has been cited in Axios as saying Iran must halt its nuclear enrichment program for 20 years to end the war, scaling back from an earlier White House demand for a permanent end to enrichment. And that’s when sources say the Iranians countered with a shorter “single digit” period, or less than ten years.

Multiple Middle Eastern countries are still working to mediate a resolution, as both Washington and Tehran moved away from maximalist positions on enrichment. Before the talks, Trump demanded a permanent halt, while Iran pushed for a deal allowing a civilian nuclear program without additional restrictions. Axios has further said the “door is not closed” on a deal, but certainly the two sides’ are still far apart, with Tehran accusing Washington of inexplicably reverting to intolerable “maximalist demands.”

At Least 15 US Navy Ships Enforce Blockade

The Wall Street Journal has newly detailed that more 15 American warships are now in place to support the operation, in the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. The report further specified that “An advisory to mariners from U.K. Maritime Trade Operations, which is affiliated with Britain’s Royal Navy, said maritime-access restrictions were being enforced for Iranian ports and coastal areas along the Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman and parts of the Arabian Sea.

“Any vessel entering or departing the blockaded area without authorization is subject to interception, ​diversion, and capture,” a notification from US Central Command (CENTCOM) has said. And UKMTO has warned maritime traffic, “These access restrictions apply without distinction to vessels of any flag engaging with Iranian ports, oil terminals, or coastal facilities.”.

Keep reading

The Strait Of Hormuz Crisis Exposes A Fatal Flaw In Economic Thinking

A priest, an engineer, and an economist are stranded on a desert island. The first order of business is to get some food. The priest suggests that they all pray. The practical-minded engineer suggests that the three men make a net to catch some fish. But where will they find the necessary materials? The priest and the engineer turn to the economist and ask him if he has any ideas. The economist replies, “Assume a fish.”

This well-worn economist joke summarizes one of the chief flaws in contemporary economic theory.

That theory almost completely ignores the role of physical resources, assuming they will always be available in the quantities we need at prices we can afford at the time we need them. When those resources aren’t available, that theory begrudgingly accepts that there will be some damage to economic activity, but tends to greatly underestimate the impact.

This conceptual flaw explains why economists in most financial institutions and governments, and thus investors, are not especially alarmed at the loss of energy resources, as stock market indices remain not too far from their recent highs.

For a good summary of how contemporary economic theory goes off the rails, Australian economist Steve Keen offers a mercifully brief and comprehensible explanation. Here I will relate one critical part of that explanation. About 5.7 percent of U.S. GDP is devoted to procuring and distributing energy. Most economists will tell you that a 10 percent decline in energy availability would have a small effect on the U.S. economy. They would take the percentage of the economy devoted to energy, in this case 5.7 percent, and multiply it by 10 percent to arrive at a 0.57 percent reduction in economic activity.

This conclusion is utter nonsense and not even close to what the effects would be.

The reason is that energy is the master resource. It cannot be treated like other resources. Energy is the resource that makes all other resources available. Nothing gets done without energy. The correlation between economic activity and energy use is 0.9 (where 1.0 represents a perfect correlation). This should come as no surprise. When the economy is growing, energy use grows with it as energy fuels the economic activity that pushes growth.

What this implies is that a 10 percent reduction in energy availability is much more likely to result in a decline in economic activity closer to 10 percent than to one-half percent.  For comparison, the real GDP of the United States fell 4.3 percent during the Great Recession, which lasted from December 2007 through June 2009.

So, how much energy is currently being denied to the global economy by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz? No one knows for certain. We do know that liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from Qatar were previously transiting through the strait. And, close to 20 percent of the world’s oil supply was also passing through the strait on a daily basis.

Keep reading