Tag: perpetual war

Inside The CIA’s Covert War To Topple The Syrian Government

For over a decade, the dominant Western narrative on the Syrian War has been simple: a peaceful uprising turned into a brutal civil war because of Bashar al-Assad’s ruthless crackdown on his own people. But in Creative Chaos: Inside the CIA’s Covert War to Topple the Syrian Government, the Libertarian Institute’s latest book, William Van Wagenen methodically dismantles this mainstream version of events, exposing it as a convenient fiction crafted to justify one of the most disastrous regime change wars of the modern era.

His central thesis is clear: the war in Syria was not an organic revolution but a deliberate effort by Washington, Israel, and their regional partners to weaken Iran by toppling Assad’s government. And when peaceful protests were hijacked by Islamist militants, instead of helping restore stability, the US and its allies deliberately prevented Assad from crushing the insurgency—even as it became dominated by al-Qaeda and ISIS-affiliated groups.

Now, years later, the result is a fractured Syria, ruled by jihadist warlords and occupied by foreign powers, with Israel consolidating its hold over strategic territory.

How and why did this disaster for Syria’s people come to pass? And why were the non-interventionists who called out Washington’s lies always right about the war and its likely outcome?

Keep reading

Western Media Manufactured Consent for Israel’s Murder of Palestinian Journalists

Israel’s targeted assassination of six Palestinian media members in the Gaza Strip on August 10 sent shockwaves through the journalism community. Though the murder of journalists has been a common tool of the Israeli’s government’s suppression of information coming out of Gaza, the loss of Al Jazeera‘s Anas al-Sharif was particularly harrowing.

Many of us had been moved by al-Sharif’s heart-wrenching coverage, from watching him remove his press vest in relief when a ceasefire was announced (1/19/25), to seeing a languid al-Sharif reporting on the famine (7/21/25) as people fainted around him. “Keep going, Anas, don’t stop,” said a voice off-camera. “You are our voice.”

Three of the victims were al-Sharif’s colleagues at Al Jazeera, one of the few media outlets that was able to keep journalists reporting in Gaza despite Israel’s blockade. As millions around the world grieved not just for al-Sharif but for his colleagues Mohammed Qreiqeh, Mohammed Noufal and Ibrahim Zaher, and freelancers Moamen Aliwa and Mohammad al-Khaldi, we were also gravely concerned about the vacuum their murders created of on-the-ground coverage of the genocide.

Establishment media, however, used these courageous journalists’ murders as an opportunity to continue parroting the same Zionist talking points that contributed to manufacturing consent for their killings. FAIR looked at 15 different news outlets’ initial coverage of the murders: the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox, BBC, Politico, Newsweek, Associated Press and Reuters.

We found that they overwhelmingly centered Israel’s narrative, attempted to delegitimize pro-Palestinian sources, and failed to contextualize the killings within the larger context of the genocide.

Keep reading

1.7 Mln Losses Exposed After Russian Hackers Crack Ukrainian General Staff Database

The KillNet group hacked the Ukrainian general staff’s database containing information on 1.7 million killed and missing Ukrainian servicemen.

“We can confirm, of course,” a KillNet representative told Sputnik when asked if they indeed have proof of such losses.

The hackers also shared a number of photos of deceased Ukrainian soldiers, their passports and military IDs, death certificates, and tags.

Keep reading

US Space Command Prepares For Satellite Vs. Satellite Combat

Late last year, an American military satellite and a French counterpart carried out a delicate orbital maneuver that signals a new phase in U.S. space operations. The two conducted a rendezvous and proximity operation (RPO) near an undisclosed foreign satellite (likely Russian), testing the ability to approach, inspect, and potentially manipulate another nation’s asset.

According to General Stephen Whiting, head of U.S. Space Command, the exercise demonstrated close coordination with France and reflected growing threats in orbit. “The French have talked about Russian maneuvers [near French satellites] over the years,” Gen. Whiting said. “And so…we demonstrated that we could both maneuver satellites near each other and near other countries’ satellites in a way that signaled our ability to operate well together.”

The success of the exercise, the first of its kind between the U.S. and a country outside the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, has prompted plans to repeat it later this year, according to The Economist.

Space Command, re-established in 2019 during President Donald Trump’s first term, has largely focused until now on building its headquarters and expanding staff. Gen. Whiting says that phase is over. “We now have a combatant command focused on war fighting in space,” he said.

Two developments are driving that shift:

  • Rising reliance on satellites for military operations. Gen. Whiting noted that America’s strike on Iran in June was “space enabled.”
  • Expanding threats from China and Russia. Since 2015, Chinese satellite launches have increased eightfold, and Beijing’s capabilities now surpass Russia’s, U.S. officials say. China, Russia, and India have all tested destructive anti-satellite weapons, and Washington accuses Moscow of developing an orbital nuclear weapon capable of disabling thousands of low-Earth orbit satellites.

Guess we don’t have space lasers after all?

Keep reading

Amidst Horrors in Gaza Some Prefer To Focus on Antisemitism

Canadian officials and commentators continue to justify the unspeakable horrors inflicted on people who have endured 22 months of a live-streamed holocaust in Gaza. After Israel assassinated six Palestinian journalists last week, CBC commentator and former Stephen Harper communications director Dimitri Soudas openly applauded the “elimination” of what he claimed was a “member of a terrorist organization.” There was no mention that 200 Palestinian journalists have been killed simply for practicing journalism in a place where Israel has banned outside reporters.

Alongside a political culture awash in genocidal statements, Canadian officials continue to provide unique, often illegal, support for Israel’s crimes. Canada arms Israel, charities raise up to a half a billion dollars a year on its behalf and groups induce Canadians to join the Israeli military in contravention of Canadian law. In addition, Canada effectively bans most Palestinian political parties and has helped build a Palestinian security force to oversee the occupation of the West Bank.

Canadian taxpayers also fund a special envoy who promotes Israel’s genocide. Deborah Lyons, who recently stepped down as Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combating Antisemitism, previously led Canadian diplomacy in Israel. During that time, she organized a pizza party for Canadians serving in Israel’s occupation forces. Lyons was echoing the stance of Canada’s foreign minister: when Chrystia Freeland visited Israel in November 2018, she declared that if Canada won a seat on the United Nations Security Council, it would serve as an “asset for Israel” on the council.

These are only two examples of Canada’s unique support for Israel. I can state this with confidence, having published 11 books on Canadian foreign policy – including Canada in Africa: 300 Years of Aid and Exploitation, Canada in Haiti: Waging War on the Poor Majority, and Canada’s Long Fight Against Democracy, among others.

In Canada and Israel: Building Apartheid and numerous articles, I have detailed the many forces driving support for Zionism. Over the past century, Canada’s ties to the US and British empires, its interest in geopolitical control of the region, Protestant Zionism, anti-Muslim sentiment, and settler-colonial solidarity have all shaped Canadian policy to varying degrees.

On top of this, there is a well-organized, wealthy and highly motivated Jewish Canadian Israel lobby, which has been increasingly powerful in recent decades. No other internationally focused Canadian ethnic/religious lobby is nearly as well-resourced or organized. And CIJA, B’nai Brith and Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre, etc. wield a uniquely powerful tool to silence critics: accusations of antisemitism.

I have likely written more about Canada’s assistance to Israel than any other Canadian over the past 15 years. Yet, as a sign of the lobby’s reach, even some leftists resort to vicious smears of antisemitism against me – rather than focusing on the suffering of Palestinians – even as the Jewish supremacist state commits the most horrendous crimes imaginable.

Recently, Ben Merenlensky, Sarah Buehler, Jordy Cummings, Judy Rebick, Cormac McCann and others have joined these efforts, labeling me – explicitly or implicitly – as an antisemite and suggesting I should be disqualified from participating in the NDP leadership race.

I stand firm in my belief that institutions financing, cheering on, or otherwise promoting a live-streamed genocide must be “weakened”. Ditto with my response to an absurd claim there’s no ethnic/religious contribution to anti-Palestinian media bias in Canada. These realities must be named. This is not about attacking any faith or ethnicity – it is about holding accountable the institutions and individuals, of any background, that promote apartheid and genocide. We must be able to identify and call out all forces that contribute to, or provide cover for, Canada’s support of genocide.

I reassert my belief that it is racist to invoke the word “antisemitism” more often than the phrase “Jewish supremacy” during a two year genocide – one carried out to advance apartheid and enforce the supremacy of Jewish people over non-Jews in Palestine.

Because of this, some self-described “supporters of Palestine” have labeled me an “antisemite.”

I reject the notion that such criticism is antisemitic.

Keep reading

Systemic Corruption Doesn’t Give a Chance for Peace in Ukraine

Another huge scandal linked to embezzlement of budget funds in government procurement has broken out in Ukraine recently. On August 2, Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) exposed an organized criminal group created by “Servant of the People” party’s deputy Oleksii Kuznietsov and head of the State Administration of the Mukachevo District Serhiy Haidai. The group have been organizing purchases of overpriced FPV drones and electronic warfare systems for the National Guard of Ukraine. According to investigation data, beside Kuznietsov and Haidai, a head of one of the Military-Civil Administrations, a unit commander of the National Guard, and representatives of company manufacturing drones were also involved in the huge corruption scheme. During 2024-2025, the criminals embezzled about $80 000 of money allocated for purchasing of defense goods. 30% from every government contract settled in their pockets. Now, all key persons of interest are taken into custody with the possibility of being out on bail. The head of the state Volodymyr Zelenskyy commented on the situation eloquently calling the fraud “absolutely immoral” and promised a “full and fair accountability” for the criminals.

However, neither high-profile exposure of corrupt officials, nor passionate speeches of the president of the country haven’t been able to dispel the tension, that has accumulated over last several weeks, and exonerate the Kyiv authorities for Ukrainians and international public. The reason for this is recent attempts of authorities to discredit the Ukrainian anti-corruption agencies and restrict their independence which really destroyed civilians’ faith in Zelenskyy’s and his team’s commitment to the rule of law and authorities’ interest in fighting corruption in general. I’m talking about a set of planned and well-coordinated attacks of current authorities on SAPO and NABU which preceded the exposure of the Kuznietsov-Haidai group.  On June 21, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine (one month before the events the office of Prosecutor General was taken by Ruslan Kravchenko who is known for his loyalty to the Office of the President of Ukraine) and SBU conducted unauthorized searches in both agencies. As the result of the searches, several NABU detectives were taken into custody on suspicion of collaboration with Russia. This joint operation of the secret services and the Prosecutor General’s Office (cynically called by the implementers “special operation”) literally paralyzed the work of NABU and SAPO and created a formal reason for tightening the control over anti-corruption agencies. The reason the Kyiv authorities have been looking for a very long time. And not finding one, they created it themselves. Already on July 22, the Verkhovnaya Rada of Ukraine passed a new law which practically liquidated the independence of anti-corruption agencies and established full control over their work by the Prosecutor General’s Office. Later that night, the new law was quickly signed by the President Zelenskyy despite the will of Ukrainians.

Such an undisguised attempt to liquidate the anti-corruption agencies caused an immediate reaction from Ukrainians. Ukrainians openly stood against the culpable law: hundreds of people went to protests on the streets, and free Ukrainian media was full of critics and disapproval of Kyiv’s authorities. However, I hate to admit it, but Ukrainians wouldn’t stop the authorities’ arbitrariness by themselves without the help of Ukrainian allies. Only due to the fast interference and strong stand of European and American authorities which have made everything they could to stop Kyiv’s authorities’ treacherous actions. The process of liquidation of SAPO and NABU was reversed. As a result, on July 31, under pressure of Ukrainian and international public a new law was passed. It restored the independence of the anti-corruption agencies. Nevertheless, we shouldn’t hope that Kyiv’s authorities stop trying to destroy anti-corruption agencies.

Keep reading

Is Venezuela the Next Target of the US Empire?

President Donald Trump has deployed several warships and thousands of Marines to the southern Caribbean – just miles off the coast of Venezuela. The provocative mission was launched under the guise of an anti-narcotics crusade, but risks disastrous outcomes for both countries.

While a war with Venezuela might seem unlikely, the move is sure to radically escalate tensions with the Latin American state, and in the worst-case scenario could become a trip-wire for direct conflict with Caracas.

According to a recent New York Times report, the president has signed a secret directive authorizing military action against drug cartels designated as “terrorist” groups, having added several drug gangs to the terror blacklist since February. The new operation in the Caribbean is almost certainly based on that order.

One US official reached by Reuters earlier this week suggested the naval mission might involve lethal force, saying the warships could be used not only for “intelligence and surveillance operations, but also as a launching pad for targeted strikes.”

The deployment will include at least 4,000 sailors and Marines, and a wide range of military assets: three Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers, transport vessels, an amphibious assault ship, as well as a nuclear-powered attack submarine and P8 Poseidon reconnaissance planes.

That’s a lot of soldiers and hardware for a few drug busts, raising questions about how such an arsenal might be used in practice – and who it is intended for. (Granted, any major operation against Venezuela would require a much larger force, with the US’s 1989 invasion of Panama involving well over 25,000 troops.)

Keep reading

Ukraine Strikes Druzhba Pipeline for the THIRD TIME, Cutting Russian Oil Flow to Hungary and Slovakia – Orbán Complains Online and Trump Answers: ‘I Am Very Angry About It!’

Ukraine bites the hands that feed it.

As we reported three days ago, the Ukrainians have started attacking the Druzhba pipeline that transports Russian crude oil to Hungary and Slovakia.

While strikes on energy infrastructure have become commonplace, this specific pipeline is the lifeline for the Hungarian and Slovak economies.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó took to X, and sais that the ‘strike against our energy security is outrageous and unacceptable!’

The Ukrainian FM Andrii Sybiha was ironic, and told his counterpart ‘You can now send your complaints—and threats—to your friends in Moscow’.

Szijjártó responded with fire, saying:

“Fact 1: Russia has supplied oil to Hungary for decades via the Druzhba pipeline. This is in Hungary’s interest.

Fact 2: Ukraine attacks this pipeline, and because of these Ukrainian strikes, oil supplies to Hungary are repeatedly cut off. This is against Hungary’s interest.

As Hungary’s Foreign Minister my mandate is clear: Hungary’s interest comes first. Period.

And let’s not forget: a significant part of Ukraine’s electricity comes from Hungary…”

Yes, you read it right: Ukraine disrupts the energy security of a country who sends electricity to make up for its destroyed infrastructure!

Keep reading

Giving Ukraine a US Security Guarantee Risks National Suicide

Too much of the talk about the recent Alaska summit meeting between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin focuses on the wrong issue.  The key question is not whether an eventual peace accord ending the fighting in Ukraine will require Kyiv to accept Moscow’s continued possession of Crimea and at least a portion of Ukraine’s Donbas region.  Anyone with a modicum of realism understands that such territorial concessions are unavoidable if the bloody war of attrition is to end.  The real issue involves the demand of Ukraine and of its fan club in NATO that Kyiv be given “security guarantees” in exchange for accepting that reality.  Agreeing to such an open-ended commitment could ultimately prove fatal to the United States.

Trump has attempted to steer a middle course to accommodate the competing demands and extricate Washington from its entanglement in NATO’s dangerous proxy war using Ukraine as a weapon against Russia.  He has told Ukraine leader Volodymyr Zelensky repeatedly that his country must at least make some territorial concessions – especially Crimea.  Trump also has indicated that Ukraine must give up its aspirations for official NATO membership.  However, he has been receptive to endorsing vaguely conceived security commitments to shield Ukraine from any further coercion by Russia.

Extending a U.S. security guarantee to Kyiv could take two forms – both of them bad from the standpoint of America’s genuine interests and well-being.  One version could consist of pledges from individual European NATO powers – especially major players such as Great Britain, France, Germany, Poland, and Turkey–as well as the United States to enforce a peace accord between Kyiv and Moscow.  Another equally dangerous option would be to establish an explicit pledge from NATO as an alliance to come to Ukraine’s defense if it is the victim of renewed aggression from Russia.  In essence, that move would make Ukraine a de facto NATO member, even though Kyiv apparently would not have the right accorded to formal members to vote on Alliance decisions.  Any version of a security guarantee also is almost certain to include a peacekeeping contingent to enforce a ceasefire or a full-blown peace agreement.  However, Russian leaders insist that such a deployment must never take place without Moscow’s explicit consent.

Unfortunately, the Western powers may seek to implement the scheme of deploying peacekeeping troops along with a robust NATO security guarantee to Kyiv in defiance of Moscow’s wishes.  NATO countries have already blurred and expanded the security pledge contained in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty to consider an attack on any Alliance member to be an attack on all members and to provide aid to the victim.  Since Russia’s expanded military operations in Ukraine began in February 2022, the United States and other key NATO nations have treated Ukraine as though it were already an integral part of the alliance.

Article 5 does not require a member to launch retaliatory military strikes against the aggressor or even to provide weaponry to the alliance signatory under siege.  Yet, the United States and other NATO countries have provided sophisticated weapons to Kyiv, including missiles and drones that it has used to strike targets deep inside Russia.  NATO intelligence operatives also have assisted Ukrainian forces to conduct offensive operations against Russian targets.  Finally, although the evidence is not definitive, the United States, Britain, Norway, and possibly Poland are prime suspects in the destruction of Russia’s Nord Stream natural gas pipeline. 

Keep reading

Taxpayers On Hook For $3.5 Billion To Replenish Munitions US Used Defending Israel

Taxpayers are yet again on the hook for America’s supposed “closest Middle East ally” as the Pentagon is planning to allocate at least $3.5 billion to restock weapons used in defense of Israel.

A Bloomberg report issued this week has reviewed Department of Defense budget documents prepared through mid-May. Emergency expenditures are highlighted which include US combat operations “executed at the request of or in coordination with Israel for the defense of Israeli territory, personnel or assets during attacks by Iran” or its proxies.

The largest single portion of the funding is $1 billion that is earmarked for replenishing Standard Missile interceptors, specifically the SM-3 IB Threat Upgrade models made by Raytheon and deployed by US Navy ships to intercept ballistic missiles.

Each of these big missiles are estimated to be between $9 million and $12 million, and these were used in the initial April 2024 flare-up and brief round of fighting between Israel and Iran.

The US assisted Israel following the Netanyahu government’s airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus – which was the first such deliberate attack by a sovereign government on a foreign embassy in history (the lone precedent being the Chinese embassy strike in Belgrade in 1999, which the US apologized for as an ‘accident’).

The second-largest funding request in the documents is $204 million to restock THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) interceptors, produced by Lockheed Martin at a price tag of about $13 million each.

All of this will be pushed through despite recent polls showing public support for Israel being at a recent all-time low. The American public is also generally war-weary, given the now years-long conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, and the fact that Washington has sunk billions into supporting one side of each war.

Keep reading