Tag: perpetual war

Democrat Senate Hopeful Graham Platner Admitted Taliban-Compromised Network Was Used for ‘Phone Sex’

Things keep getting more problematic for the Democrats, who have hitched their Senate hopes on Graham Platner, the candidate running to oust Susan Collins in Maine. Platner has a deeply troubling history of attacking police officers, dismissing rural Americans as racist, and blaming women for being victims of sexual assault, telling them to ‘grow up.’

Earlier, we learned that Platner had even more troubling Reddit posts, where he admitted to committing lewd acts in portable toilets. Here’s some of what Fox News Digital reported on that:

In one March 2017 post on Reddit’s r/Military forum, Platner responded to a discussion about nostalgic military smells by writing: “I still have to jerk off every time I sit in a portas—-er … that blue water smell conditioned me.” 

But Platner’s depravity goes far beyond the porta-potty. In fact, his sexual proclivities risked the safety of his fellow service members. 

In reporting exclusively to Townhall, additional unearthed Reddit posts reveal that Platner used a cell phone network infiltrated by the Taliban to have phone sex. 

Platner made the comments under the username P-Hustle, and he confirmed in October of last year that the account belonged to him. In January 2020, Platner posted that he used Roshan, an Afghan cell phone network, to have ‘phone sex’ with his girlfriend:

In 2010-2011, I was in Afghanistan as a rifle squad leader with the Army and I was blown away that everyone had cell phones and the command didn’t seem to remotely care. Hell, the unit I replaced gave me a Roshan phone with some minutes on it, which I totally used to have phone sex with my girl.

Keep reading

Disgusting: Democrat Senate Candidate Graham Platner’s Deleted Reddit Posts Mock Wounded Soldier Who Drew Enemy Fire Away from His Squad: Says He ‘Didn’t Deserve to Live’

The Gateway Pundit has reported on the disturbing Reddit posts unearthed from far-left Maine Democrat Senate candidate Graham Platner, including crude sexual remarks.

The Gateway Pundit further reported that concerns about Platner, a 41-year-old Marine veteran turned radical leftist, arose last year after it was revealed that one of his tattoos resembles the infamous Nazi SS Totenkopf skull and crossbones, and the Redditt revelations have only increased concerns about his fitness and ability to serve in office.

News outlets have reported on additional posts by Platner, which show him mocking rural white people, calling himself a communist, and calling Jesus a “zombie.”

Crude comments aside, perhaps one of the most disturbing Reddit threads uncovered concerns his temperament and ability to lead following comments toward a fellow American military brother who was wounded and almost killed in action.

Per Fox News:

“This video never gets old,” the Reddit account “P-Hustle” — which Platner has acknowledged he owned — posted in June 2019, in reference to a viral video from the helmet cam of Pfc. Ted Daniels taken during a clash with Taliban fighters in 2012 that ended in Daniels being shot four times.

He earned a Purple Heart for his injuries.

“Dumb motherf—–  didn’t deserve to live.

At least his stupidity and fat a– wheezing are available for all future infantrymen to witness and hold in contempt.

Poor marksmanship on the Taliban’s part is the only reason this mouthbreather made it home, he managed to make every possible s— decision possible when it comes to small unit combat.”

Although Platner mocked him, Pfc. Daniels, while serving in Kunar Province, Afghanistan, with the 4th Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, deliberately stepped into the open to draw Taliban fire away from the rest of his squad, which consisted of seven other soldiers.

So, the video that “never gets old’ for Platner is a brother in arms being shot multiple times by the Taliban and sustaining several injuries.

Keep reading

U.S. Admits Losing Over 40 Aircraft In War On Iran

A Congressional report released on May 19 revealed that the United States military lost at least 42 aircraft during 40 days of war on Iran.

The report, prepared for Congress using information from the Pentagon, United States Central Command, and defense media outlets, estimated the total cost of the aircraft losses at approximately $2.6 billion. The aerial losses include fighter jets, surveillance aircraft, refueling planes, combat rescue helicopters, and drones.

Among the aircraft destroyed or damaged, according to the document, were four F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jets, one F-35A Lightning II stealth fighter jet, one A-10 Thunderbolt II attack jet, seven KC-135 Stratotanker refueling planes, and one E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control aircraft.

The report also listed the loss of two MC-130J Commando II special operations transport planes, one HH-60W Jolly Green II special operations helicopter, 24 MQ-9 Reaper combat drones, and one MQ-4C Triton high altitude surveillance naval drone.

Replacing some of the destroyed aircraft could require restarting production lines for systems that are no longer manufactured, the document said.

It also noted that the destruction of an E-3 Sentry could force the Pentagon to revive the cancelled E-7 Wedgetail replacement program at a cost exceeding $2.5 billion.

Analysts cited in the document estimated that total aircraft losses and replacement programs could eventually exceed $7 billion.

The number confirmed by the Congressional report is still short of the 56 U.S. military aircraft documented in Wikipedia’s list of aviation shootdowns and accidents during the Iran war, which only counts losses based on visual evidence or official self-admission.

Keep reading

Senators Propose To Head Off ‘Automatic’ Draft Registration by Repealing Selective Service

On May 14th, Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR), Rand Paul (R-KY), and Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)  reintroduced the Selective Service Repeal Act, S. 4537).

This bill already has the endorsement of dozens of peace and antiwar groups, draft resisters, religious organizations, antiwar feminists, and civil libertarians.

This bipartisan bill to abolish the Selective Service System (SSS) and end preparations for a military draft has been proposed in each session of Congress since 2019, but has yet to get a hearing or a floor vote in either the House or Senate.

The timing of this bill is more critical than ever: Unless Congress takes action before December 18, 2026, the SSS will start collecting data from other Federal agencies to try to register potential draftees “automatically”. The White House is currently reviewing regulations to implement that change in the draft law, which was buried in the annual defense (sic) bill enacted in December 2025.

The garbage-in, garbage-out process of automated and involuntary registration won’t produce a list that’s complete, accurate, or fit for the purpose of reliably and provably delivering induction orders. But it will allow war planners to continue to pretend that a draft is available as a fallback, so they don’t have to consider whether enough Americans will fight the wars they are planning, even if they prove bloodier than expected. And it will produce a list that’s vulnerable to misuse and weaponization.

“If a war is worth fighting, Congress will vote to declare it and people will volunteer”, Sen. Paul said in in reintroducing the Selective Service Repeal Act. According to Sen. Wyden, “The Selective Service is an outdated program that costs millions of taxpayer dollars to prepare for a military draft that Americans don’t want or need. There is no need to replicate the same draft that sent two million unwilling young men to war 50 years ago.”

The attempt at “automatic” draft registration will inevitably be a fiasco. The only way to head it off is to end draft registration entirely. That won’t happen unless Congress feels public pressure — soon.

In the past, the  Selective Service Repeal Act has received significant bipartisan support in the House, but as of now it’s been reintroduced only in the Senate in the current Congress. Opponents of the draft should push their Representatives to sponsor a House version as soon as possible.

The Selective Service Repeal Act is unlikely to be enacted as a standalone bill, especially in the current Congress. It probably stands a chance of approval only if it is included in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2027. So it’s critical to find members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees who will introduce the Selective Service Repeal Act as an amendment to the NDAA, while the NDAA is still in committee.

Keep reading

US Dept Of War Suspends Permanent Joint Board On Defense With Canada

Remarkably, many news articles are citing confusion in trying to understand why U.S. Undersecretary of War, Elbridge Colby, announced the suspension of U.S. participation in the Permanent Joint Board on Defense with Canada.

However, the announcement comes immediately after his meeting with U.S. ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, at the Pentagon and the comment, “we’re working closely to ensure every NATO partner, including Canada, reaches the Hague Summit’s 3.5% GDP defense spending target, a vital investment for North American and Arctic defense.”

The issue, as outlined by Undersecretary Colby, centers around Prime Minister Mark Carney’s recent statements in antagonism toward the U.S., a public announcement that Canada would not be purchasing U.S. military equipment and the biggest issue of all, that Canada is not living up to the NATO defense spending agreements.

It was in December of 2024, immediately after the November election where Donald Trump won, when then Prime Minister Justin Trudeau flew to Mar-a-Lago for dinner with President Trump and told him there’s no way that Canada could meet their NATO obligations. 

Canada had relied on the USA to provide all national defense and was 16th in defense spending at 1.1% of GDP.

Keep reading

U.S. Removing 5,000 Troops From Europe

NATO’s top military commander, U.S. Air Force Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, assured allies Tuesday that the planned withdrawal of approximately 5,000 American troops from Europe will not weaken the alliance’s defense posture in the region.

Speaking to reporters after meetings with NATO military chiefs in Brussels, Gen. Grynkewich — who serves as both Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and head of U.S. European Command — described the move as part of a broader adjustment in U.S. force posture. The withdrawal involves an armored brigade, primarily from Germany, and aligns with efforts to shift more conventional defense responsibilities to European allies and Canada, reported Reuters.

“I’d like to emphasise this decision does not impact the executability of our regional plans,” Grynkewich said. He noted that as the “European pillar” of NATO strengthens, the U.S. can focus on providing critical capabilities that allies cannot yet fully deliver.

The drawdown, announced by the Trump administration earlier this month, comes amid ongoing reviews of U.S. commitments in Europe. Grynkewich indicated that further adjustments to the roughly 80,000 U.S. troops currently stationed in Europe are expected over several years, timed to coincide with growing allied capabilities.

The comments aim to reassure NATO partners following concerns over the reduction, which follows heightened U.S. pressure for European nations to increase defense spending. Grynkewich stressed that the process will be gradual to maintain deterrence, particularly along the alliance’s eastern flank.

Keep reading

‘Buffer Zone’ Is Media’s Euphemism for Israeli Occupation

Since October 2023, Israel has occupied vast stretches of territory in Gaza, Syria and, most recently, Lebanon. Corporate media have been reluctant to use clear, direct language to characterize US-backed Israeli land grabs in each of these places, preferring to describe Israel’s policies with euphemistic terminology.

“Buffer” is chief among these. For instance, a Wall Street Journal article (4/9/26) told readers that “Israeli forces now hold buffer zones inside Gaza, Lebanon and Syria.”

Merriam-Webster defines a “buffer zone” as “a neutral area separating conflicting forces.” The UN defines it as “neutral space created by the withdrawal of hostile parties or a demilitarized zone.”

The Journal‘s uncritical use of the term makes it sound as if these Palestinian, Lebanese and Syrian lands are demilitarized zones, when in reality they have been taken over by a belligerent foreign army that intends to remain for the long term.

A Boston Globe piece (4/5/26) noted that

Israel has said even after the war with Hezbollah, it plans to occupy part of southern Lebanon, setting up a buffer zone inside the area and keeping security control over the territory. Some analysts say that the move could lead to the permanent displacement of communities from the region.

“Setting up” is part of the same obfuscatory process as “buffer zone.” Amnesty International’s Kristine Beckerle (3/6/26) offered this account of the evacuation orders Israel issued to over 100 villages and towns in Lebanon’s south and east, and the entirety of Beirut’s southern suburbs, key components of how Israel has gone about “setting up a buffer zone”:

The sweeping evacuation orders have sown panic and terror, displaced hundreds of thousands of people and fueled yet another humanitarian catastrophe for a population already exhausted and reeling from multiple crises.

And it’s not just “some analysts” who say that creating this “buffer” could lead to “permanent displacement.” Israeli Defense minister Israel Katz (BBC, 3/31/26) said that the state plans to maintain control over Lebanon south of the Litani River, a 19-mile stretch of territory, even after Israel’s current war on the country ends. Katz added that Israel will demolish “all houses” in Lebanese villages near the Lebanon/Israel armistice line, a move that would make the displacement of the residents of those houses seem awfully permanent. That’s not a “buffer zone”—that’s occupation.

Keep reading

Trump Wants Veto Power Over Chinese or Russian Investments in Greenland in Bold National Security Move

Trump is working to curtail outside influence in our hemisphere.

Back in November 2025, the Donald J. Trump administration released the new National Security Strategy, and we could understand a little better how the protection of the Western Hemisphere has become central to US efforts.

We read there: “The United States has achieved success in rolling back outside influence in the Western Hemisphere by demonstrating, with specificity, how many hidden costs—in espionage, cybersecurity, debt-traps, and other ways—are embedded in allegedly ‘low cost’ foreign assistance. We should accelerate these efforts, including by utilizing U.S. leverage in finance and technology to induce countries to reject such assistance.”

So, when it comes to the Arctic Island of Greenland, this whole security architecture applies there, too.

We have reported how Greenland Leader Admits US Military Presence on Island Is Part of Negotiations ‌With Washington.

But the security is not limited to establishing a number of air bases and other military assets there.

There’s also the question of curbing the outside influence from major powers.

So, it’s not at all surprising that reports arise today that Trump is demanding a ‘veto’ power over any future Chinese or Russian investments in Greenland.

Keep reading

OPCW Inadvertently Admitted Burying Critical Evidence on Syria Chemical Weapons Investigation

For the first time in a prolonged cover-up scandal, the world’s top chemical watchdog has acknowledged censoring a finding that undermined allegations of a toxic gas attack by the former Syrian government.

According to previously leaked documents, expert German military toxicologists consulted by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) ruled out chlorine gas as the cause of death of dozens of victims in an alleged chemical attack in the Syrian town of Douma in April 2018.

The experts even raised the possibility that the incident was a false flag. The OPCW suppressed this finding and released a final report asserting that chlorine gas was likely used. The OPCW’s conclusion aligned with the claims of the U.S., U.K. and France, which bombed Syria in April 2018 over what they alleged was a Syrian government chemical attack in Douma.

After years of stonewalling, the OPCW has admitted that the Germans’ input, along with the fact that they were even consulted, was concealed.

The concession came during a legal battle with Dr. Brendan Whelan, a veteran OPCW inspector and senior member of the team that deployed to Syria for the Douma mission. Whelan and another Douma team member, Ian Henderson, raised concerns about the manipulation of the investigation’s findings.

After their complaints became public, the OPCW leadership publicly disparaged the two dissenting inspectors and penalized them for alleged breaches of confidentiality.

Whelan successfully challenged his censure before the Geneva-based Tribunal of the International Labour Organisation (ILOAT), which recently awarded him damages and instructed the OPCW to withdraw its impugned decision.

One of the allegations against Whelan was that he improperly sent two letters in March and April 2019 to Fernando Arias, the OPCW director-general, raising concerns about unethical conduct in the Douma investigation.

In trying to make its case against Whelan, the OPCW inadvertently admitted to the censorship that he had challenged.

In his letters to Arias, the OPCW complained, Whelan included

“specific and detailed information gathered by FFM [Fact-Finding Mission] investigators from toxicology experts. This information, classified as OPCW Highly Protected, was not included in the Final Report which was publicly released.”

The OPCW’s confirmation that it excluded the toxicologists’ “Highly Protected” information from the publicly released Final Report confirms one of Whelan’s key grievances.

“Critical information, like the expert opinions of the toxicologists… has, shockingly, been omitted,” Whelan wrote in his April 2019 letter.

“There is even no record in the report of those consultations… To say that this selective use of expert opinions and facts is disturbing is an understatement.”

Keep reading