nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Chas Freeman: The Greater Israel Project Is Collapsing Under the Weight of Endless War

the greatest threat to the Greater Israel project may not be Iran, Hezbollah, or any external adversary. It may be the political consequences of the project itself.

JSCHEERPOST, June 7, 2026 ScheerPost Staff

For decades, the dream of a “Greater Israel” has been treated by its advocates as an inevitable project of regional dominance, sustained by military superiority and unwavering support from Washington. But according to former U.S. Ambassador Chas Freeman, that project may now be colliding with the limits of power itself. In a wide-ranging conversation with political scientist Glenn Diesen, Freeman argues that Israel’s wars in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Iran have not strengthened its strategic position but instead accelerated its diplomatic isolation, strained its military capacity and eroded the international support on which its ambitions depend.

Freeman’s assessment is stark: what was once presented as a vision of security has produced growing insecurity across the region, while leaving Israel increasingly at odds with allies, neighbors and much of the world. From the collapse of diplomacy to the widening regional fallout of war, he contends that the greatest threat facing the project of expansion may no longer be external resistance alone, but the political and moral consequences of its own actions. Whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, Freeman offers a sobering warning that the Middle East is entering a new phase—one in which old assumptions about power, alliances and American influence are rapidly unraveling.

Chas Freeman: The Greater Israel Project Is Collapsing

Decades of Expansion Have Reached a Breaking Point

For generations, advocates of a “Greater Israel” envisioned a regional order secured through overwhelming military power, territorial expansion, and unwavering American support. Today, according to former U.S. Ambassador Chas Freeman, that vision is colliding with reality.

In a wide-ranging discussion with political scientist Glenn Diesen, Freeman argued that Israel’s military campaigns across Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Iran have not delivered lasting security. Instead, they have accelerated Israel’s diplomatic isolation, exhausted military resources, and triggered a regional backlash that is reshaping the Middle East.

His conclusion was striking: the greatest threat to the Greater Israel project may not be Iran, Hezbollah, or any external adversary. It may be the political consequences of the project itself.

A Project Losing International Support

Freeman argues that what was once quietly tolerated by Western governments is becoming increasingly difficult to defend.

The devastation in Gaza, the continued expansion of settlements in the occupied territories, military operations in Lebanon and Syria, and the widening regional conflict have dramatically altered global perceptions.

“Israel is at odds with the entire world,” Freeman observed, pointing to growing criticism across Europe, increasing public opposition in the United States, and mounting international scrutiny of Israeli policies.

For decades, Israel relied heavily on diplomatic cover from Washington and its Western allies. Freeman believes that support is eroding faster than many policymakers realize.

The result is a paradox: at the very moment Israel seeks greater regional dominance, it finds itself increasingly isolated.

Security Through Dominance Creates Insecurity for Everyone Else

One of the most important insights from the interview was Freeman’s discussion of what he described as Israel’s pursuit of “absolute security.”

The logic is simple but dangerous.

If one state seeks complete military dominance over all potential rivals, neighboring states inevitably become less secure. Those neighbors then seek new alliances, new military capabilities, and new forms of resistance.

The result is not peace but perpetual conflict.

Freeman echoed a principle often associated with Henry Kissinger: one nation’s quest for total security often creates total insecurity for everyone around it.

This dynamic helps explain why Israeli military operations have increasingly produced regional resistance rather than regional acceptance.

The Iran War Changed the Strategic Landscape…………………………………….

A New Regional Order Is Emerging

Perhaps the most overlooked portion of Freeman’s analysis concerns the changing geopolitical landscape beyond Israel itself.

He described an emerging regional architecture involving countries such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, and Iran……………………………………………………………..

Netanyahu Is Not the Cause—He Is the Symptom

One of Freeman’s most provocative observations concerned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Many critics view Netanyahu as the central architect of Israel’s current trajectory. Freeman disagrees.

Netanyahu, he argued, is not the cause of the crisis but its most visible expression.

The deeper issue is the broad political consensus that has developed around militarized solutions and territorial expansion.

Even if Netanyahu leaves power, many of the underlying assumptions driving Israeli policy would remain.

Removing one leader does not automatically change the direction of a state.

The Failure of Diplomacy

Throughout the discussion, Freeman repeatedly returned to one theme: diplomacy has been abandoned.

Israel, he noted, has relied overwhelmingly on military solutions while offering few meaningful political initiatives capable of resolving regional conflicts.

At the same time, Washington’s credibility as a mediator has steadily deteriorated…………………………………….

A Moment of Reckoning

The interview ultimately posed a larger question than the future of Israel alone.

Can any state maintain security indefinitely through military force while ignoring political reconciliation?

Freeman’s answer is clear.

History suggests otherwise……………………………………………

Whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, his warning deserves attention: the future of the Middle East may be determined less by battlefield victories than by the willingness—or inability—of regional powers to replace domination with diplomacy.

If that transformation does not occur, the conflicts now engulfing Gaza, Lebanon, Iran, and the wider region may prove not to be the culmination of a long struggle, but merely the beginning of a far larger one.

Chas Freeman’s substack: https://substack.com/@chasfreeman662157 Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/… Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen: Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/ X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen Patreon:   / glenndiesen  

June 10, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics | Leave a comment

Trump’s Sedition Act for Israel

“you can’t be an American if you don’t love Israel.”

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Global Research, May 25, 2026, https://www.globalresearch.ca/trump-sedition-act-israel/5927389

At all times and places it has been difficult to speak freely. 

Even the founding fathers had their Sedition Act of 1798 that criminalized statements against the US government. Shortly afterward President Thomas Jefferson got most of it repealed.

President Abraham Lincoln during his 1861-1865 invasion of the Confederate States of America had a de facto sedition act. Lincoln used executive orders, military directives, martial law, and the suspension of habeas corpus to shut down free speech. At one time Lincoln had 300 Northern newspaper editors in prison.

In 1918, Congress passed a new Sedition Act that applied when the US government was at war. The law prohibited speech and opinion that put the US government and its war effort in a bad light. The bad light was that US President Woodrow Wilson promised Germany no territorial loss and no reparations in exchange for an armistice, and betrayed the promise. The result was the Treaty of Versailles that as British economist John Maynard Keynes correctly predicted led to World War II.

President Donald Trump has declared his own Sedition Act issued not by Congress, increasingly an irrelevant government institution, but by Trump’s personal defense lawyer currently serving as US Attorney General. Trump’s Sedition Act is unique. It protects from criticism not the US government, but a foreign one — Israel. The May 19 press release of the US Department of Justice (sic) says: 

“President Trump has made clear that this administration will not tolerate antisemitism, and the Department of justice is committed to implementing that directive.” (See this)

Understand that the US Department of Justice is now the protector of Israel, as is the US military and US taxpayers, and antisemitism means any criticism of Israel. For example, Israel’s genocide of Palestine and its people, Israel’s interference in tenure decisions of US universities, the hiring and contracting policies of state governments such as Texas and Florida, Israel’s funding of the primary defeat of US Republican Representative Thomas Massie, Israel’s assassinations of foreign leaders, Israel’s suspected assassination of Charlie Kirk, suspicion that Epstein was a Mossad agent collecting blackmail information against Americans in a position to influence US foreign party in the Middle East, and on and on. Every thought, question, statement of fact that can be interpreted as hostile to Israel has become anti-semitism and will not be tolerated by the US Department of Justice (sic).

Clearly, the Trump regime, essentially a Zionist regime, has no intention of permitting any correct information to be aired. If you challenge or taunt the Regime, you are shut down like Colbert, Thomas Massie, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and so many others.

The Washington Post published an article on May 21 about President Trump’s efforts to silence late night TV hosts. Apparently, Trump succeeded in intimidating CBS to cancel Stephen Colbert. NBC’s Seth Meyers and ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel believe they are on the hit list. See this.

A discredited media unable to hold Trump to account has replaced a former biased media.

During my professional lifetime the print and TV media had a liberal bias, coming down hard on conservatives and Republicans and lightly, if at all, on the leftwing and Democrats. The liberal media was more or less at the beck and call of the CIA, but the New York Times did finally decide to publish the leaked Pentagon Papers, an act that contributed to the end of the Vietnam War.

During the 1980s and I think the 1990s the New York Times asked me twice a year for an op-ed article addressing a specified subject. If memory serves, two was the annual limit for outside contributors, although perhaps not for liberal-left ones. As I had been a presidential appointee in the Reagan administration, a trustee of the Committee on the Present Danger, a Wall Street Journal editor and columnist, and a contributing editor of National Review, the liberal media regarded me as a conservative instead of a person who thought for himself.

The Washington Post was also friendly in a limited way. The Post’s editorial page editor was pleased to occasionally have me on her page and once took me to lunch with some of her colleagues. When at the end of the 20th century I could no longer stomach the corruption and backstabbing of the Washington snake pit and departed to the beach in Florida, the Washington Post sent a star reporter and camera team to my Florida home for a full-fledged interview and expressed regret that an honest voice had forsaken the nation’s capital. The fact that the Washington Post thought that I was honest did not mean that the Post thought I was correct.

In those days large newspapers like the Times and Post comfortably existed on advertising revenues so varied that no advertiser could, very often, influence the newspaper. Media had a liberal bias, but that was their own decision. It wasn’t imposed on them. Unlike today, there was enough belief left in the media in debate in place of silencing critics, resulting in occasional presentation of alternative explanations to the official narratives.

In the 21st century the media for whatever reasons has become censorious, demonizing those in opposition to official narratives. The result has been to discredit the media as a source of information.

Today we don’t have, as existed in my 25 years in Washington, a media even partially open to different explanations.

With the traditional TV and print media discredited, and the lack of transparency of most of the Internet media, to whom do we turn for credible explanations? My own attempts to deliver truth are compromised by invalid accusations against me by Zionist organizations, the political left, and liberals who still believe that more government is the answer. The assaults on me are intended to limit my readership, and the assaults have had a partial success. I suspect that I am now read more abroad than in the United States.

Perhaps I have failed in my approach to insouciant Americans who, despite the high stakes, are unaware of the demands on them of our time. If so, my failure is small compared to that of the media, which by destroying its own credibility, has destroyed the media’s checkmate on the rise of a Caesar.

America now has a president who goes to war at the request of his most important campaign contributors without authorization of the US Congress as long as the request is in Israel’s behalf. The legal advisor to the US Department of State, Reed Rubinstein, has penned a justification for Trump’s military attack on Iran which states the United States initiated its military campaign against Iran (Operation Epic Fury) “at the request of and in the collective self-defense of its Israeli ally”. Note that the State Department defines aggression as self-defense. Clearly  Under President Trump, the United States of America now commits its resources and lives of its military personnel to the achievement of the Zionist agenda of Greater Israel. Americans are now taxed and die for Israel’s domination of the Middle East. If you dissent, you are punished as an “anti-semite.”

Until the 21std century, I cannot imagine the American media allowing this to happen. The digital revolution by putting the power of money over the media in a few hands has cancelled even a biased free press. In its place there is a propaganda ministry.

President Trump’s anti-semitism policy cancels the First Amendment if it is used by Americans for criticism of Israeli government policies, such as the genocide in Palestine.

When the Israel Lobby can cancel the First Amendment, you know that the United States is no longer a sovereign country.  

A country at Israel’s beck and call is America today, thanks to Donald Trump. Yet, a significant percentage of Trump’s supporters conflates MAGA with MIGA. American patriotism now requires patriotism to Israel. As the latest mantra goes, “you can’t be an American if you don’t love Israel.” You have to hand it to the Zionists. They have even stolen our patriotism.

June 10, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Trump and Netanyahu: The odd couple

June 5, 2026 . by Jamal Kanj, https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260605-trump-and-netanyahu-the-odd-couple/

“He’ll do whatever I want him to do,” Donald Trump declared recently about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The statement may be one of the most revealing statements Trump has ever made—not for what it says about Netanyahu, but for what it reveals about Trump’s psychology. It was intended as a display of strength. Instead, it exposed the opposite.

Trump has built a political persona around hyperbole, self-aggrandizement, and declarations of superiority to cover up for an oversized inferiority complex, he only knows its extent. When he insists that Netanyahu is acting at his command, he is projecting an authority he does not possess. The louder the boast, the more apparent the insecurity beneath it.

“If there is one lesson since the election of Trump, it is that Netanyahu, not Trump, has consistently dictated the pace of America’s wars in the Middle East. Trump may occupy the White House, issue ultimatums, and proclaim himself the master negotiator, but the facts on the ground tell a different story. Again and again, Netanyahu acts, and Trump adjusts.“

For years, Netanyahu worked relentlessly to pull the U. S. into another made-for-Israel war, this time against Iran. Successive administrations, despite their deference to Israel, stopped short of falling for the scheme. Trump, however, proved far more susceptible to the influence of his Israel-first donors and to Netanyahu’s chicanery. Yet he continues to portray himself as the one calling the shots. 

This week, Trump proudly recounted a phone call in which he supposedly instructed Netanyahu to halt a planned Israeli attack on Beirut. It took little time after Trump’s statement for Israel’s defense minister to announce that military operations “will continue under all circumstances.” True to that pledge, Israel launched fresh attacks on hospitals and villages in southern Lebanon, killing and wounding civilians despite the so-called Trump’s war cessation. 

“Two days later, on Wednesday June 3rd, Lebanese and Israeli delegations meeting in Washington announced another ceasefire. The third such extension since last April. One day after reaching the agreement, Israel resumed strikes on ​South Lebanon and said it would neither withdraw nor  allow Lebanese civilians back to their homes in the south.“

It is almost certain, when the Lebanese resistance eventually counters the repeated Israeli violations, Trump—as he has done before—will condemn the retaliation rather than the provocation. To save face and avoid appearing weak before Netanyahu, he will once again blame the Lebanese side while ignoring the Israeli occupation and military actions that triggered the response.

The same pattern is evident in the negotiations with Iran. For months, Trump’s stated objective was to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon—a framework which aligns with Tehran’s declared position. But nuclear-armed Israel, which never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty that Iran did, has different goals entirely. Netanyahu’s government will not be satisfied with anything short of the destruction of knowledge and the reduction of Iran to a failed state, precisely the fate that befell Iraq and Libya after both countries agreed to surrender their nuclear ambitions. 

For Israel, a negotiated agreement between the U.S. and Iran, may be far less desirable than the continuation of regional turmoil. For its objective is the preservation of a strategic environment that sustains military and geopolitical dominance. Zionism has long viewed the emergence of democratic, technologically advanced, and self-reliant neighboring states as a threat. Fragmentation and disorder in surrounding countries serve that objective by limiting the rise of independent regional powers that could one day, potentially challenge Israeli primacy. In this case, Israel may be unique among nations: it derives strategic advantage not from a stable and prosperous region, but from entropy, and has built a regional doctrine whose success depends on propagating chaos.

The cost to ordinary Americans is tangible, and personal. They feel it every time they fuel their cars, pay inflated prices for goods, or watch Congress cut healthcare or financial student aid for Americans in order to finance another military aid package for Israel.

“Americans are not only financing Israel’s wars through tax dollars and weapons transfers. They are also paying what amounts to an Israeli surcharge tax at the pump.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has been trying for weeks to assure consumers that gas will hover around $3 a gallon between June and September, as if it is acceptable for Americans to pay elevated prices until Netanyahu deigns to approve a ceasefire, especially when Trump boasts that America is a net oil exporter.

Gaza is another front in Israel’s endless wars. Trump personally signed the ceasefire agreement in Sharm el-Sheikh in October 2025, chirping “we have peace in the Middle East.” He had since watched in silence as Israel systematically dismantled every commitment it had made. During the “ceasefire,” it maintained a starvation diet blockade, murdered more than 800 and wounded thousands. 

Under Phase One of the agreement, Israeli forces were required to withdraw to approximately 53 percent of Gaza. Phase two stipulated further withdrawal. Instead, Netanyahu ordered the seizure of an additional 32 percent, increasing total Israeli military occupation to 70 percent of the besieged territory, confining 2.3 million Palestinians to 30 percent, or roughly 50,000 human beings per each square mile of rubble.

On all fronts, Trump did not merely follow Netanyahu’s lead. He enabled it, funded it, armed it, and defended it diplomatically. Then, standing before television cameras, he attempted to compensate for this reality by insisting that he was the one in control.

To that end, and following recent Republican primary elections, lame-duck Republican members of Congress have already begun treating the Trump administration as a lame-duck presidency, long before the midterm elections. The recent congressional vote to limit presidential war powers is a telling sign that Trump’s political capital is eroding far sooner than expected.

Nevertheless, Americans may be witnessing a historic inflection point in the decades-long power of Israel-first Zionist influence over American political life. It is clear the political landscape is shifting, and the assumptions that long governed Washington’s relationship with Israel no longer appear as immutable as they once did. From growing dissent within the Democratic Party—and among Republican influencers—to deepening unease across the Washington Beltway, genuine cracks are appearing in a system that for generations treated Israel as a sacred cow. Eight decades of unquestioned manipulation and political leverage over American leaders is now facing resistance from constituencies that were once among its most reliable friends.

“Hence, no amount of presidential bravado or social-media posturing can obscure what has become undeniable: under Donald Trump, American foreign policy has served Netanyahu’s Israel-first agenda, not America’s. And when the history of this era is written, this odd couple may be remembered for ushering in the sunset of Israel-first Zionist dominance over the U.S. government.“

June 10, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Fusing the US Military and the IDF

A bill’s provision to integrate the U.S. and Israeli militaries will go to a U.S. House vote after an effort to stop it failed Thursday. Passage will make it nearly impossible to end the U.S.-Israel special relationship, writes Alan MacLeod. 

Alan MacLeod for MintPress News,  June 6, 2026, https://scheerpost.com/2026/06/06/fusing-the-us-military-and-the-idf/

Amid widespread and growing public opposition to the Israeli genocide of Gaza and South Lebanon, a controversial new bill seeks to formally integrate the U.S. and Israeli militaries like never before, making it difficult to tell where one ends and the other begins.

Section 224 of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) proposes to join the two forces together at the hip, laying the groundwork for extensive cooperation into “seemingly every manner of U.S.-Israeli military-industrial complex cooperation,” according to the Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

This includes the research, development and production of modern, hi-tech arms, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, drones, directed energy, cyber and autonomous weapons systems. It would compel the United States to integrate Israeli arms and technologies into its defense supply chain, and fuse the countries’ data-capturing and storage facilities together, meaning that Israel could have access to essentially all the U.S. military’s data.

The bill also requires the creation of a new position within the Department of Defense: an executive agent whose role is to coordinate cooperation and integration between the two parties.

In essence, then, it would dramatically change the relationship between the two states, from one where Washington supplies Tel Aviv with money, weapons, and diplomatic support, to a situation where the two are fundamentally intertwined.

It would also make the relationship far less transparent, as aid to Israel currently requires an annual public debate and vote. However, by moving it away from the political realm into that of defense acquisition, oversight and accountability mechanisms will be removed, and the public will have little right to know the details going forward.

Judging by its sponsors, Section 224 has strong support on Capitol Hill. It was put forward by Mike Rogers (R-AL), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, and Adam Smith (D-WA), the panel’s highest-ranking Democrat.

[On Thursday Rep. Ro Khanna’s effort to revoke the provision from the massive military funding bill failed, paving the way for the NDAA to advance to a full House vote.]

The news that a new bill could essentially fuse together the U.S. and Israeli militaries has been met with pushback online, but provoked little comment in Washington, D.C.

One lawmaker who has spoken up is Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie, who has promised to offer an amendment to strip Section 224 from the bill on the House floor. “We are a sovereign country,” he said on Saturday.

Massie, a strong critic of U.S. support for Israel, recently lost his primary to challenger Ed Gallrein, after AIPAC and other Israel Lobby groups flooded the race with tens of millions of dollars, making it the most expensive contest in American history.

Massie at a speaking event in Las Vegas in 2024. (Gage Skidmore/ Flickr/ Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 2.0)

Analysts have noted that, if passed, the bill will “extraordinarily” expand Israeli influence in domestic American politics, giving Tel Aviv the opportunity to pull powerful political levers through the tried and tested method of offering jobs.

As the Institute for Responsible Statecraft warns, by expanding or starting new arms production facilities like they already have in Mississippi and Arkansas, the Israeli government could use the influence of bringing jobs to districts to buy the support of American members of Congress.

The U.S. already provides Israel with enormous amounts of military aid, having sent hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons since 1948.

Since 2008, it is required by law to protect Israel’s “qualitative military edge,” by supplying it with advanced weaponry.

Section 224, however, would transform and deepen this relationship, making it all-but-impossible to democratically break the U.S.-Israel special relationship.

That alliance is under increased scrutiny, as support for Israel is collapsing across the United States. A new poll published by Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies found that 60 percent of Americans (including 75 percent of respondents under 30 years old) hold a negative view of the country. When asked, a large plurality says that Israel holds too much sway over American politics and politicians.

A 2025 study found that half of American voters believe Israel is carrying out a genocide against its neighbors in West Asia.

The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant, among others, on charges of crimes against humanity.

The United States, however, has refused to accept the ICC’s actions, attempted to shut down proceedings, and imposed sanctions on the court. ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan stated that Senior U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham – one of Netanyahu’s closest allies in Washington – told him that his court is only “for African thugs like [Russian president Vladimir] Putin. It is not for democracies like Israel and the United States of America.”

The response from the governments of Israel and the United States to the increasing opposition to the genocide has been to crack down on dissent and to censor social media.

As Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of pro-Israel pressure group, the Anti-Defamation League stated, “We really have a TikTok problem, a Gen Z problem.” The Trump administration forced through the sale of TikTok to the family of Larry Ellison, a passionately pro-Israel tech billionaire who is the largest private funder of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).

Ellison, no doubt, will support Section 224. Yet the effective merger between the U.S. military and the IDF will have profound consequences for the future of America, and should provoke stiff opposition nationwide. Whether it passes will depend largely on the nature and scale of that opposition.

Alan MacLeod is senior staff writer for MintPress News. He completed his PhD in 2017 and has since authored two acclaimed books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.org, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine and Common Dreams. 

June 10, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

A Collective Call by the Women of the World

 Global Women for Peace – United against NATO, 4 June 28

LISTEN TO US.
We are speaking to you — every president, every prime minister, every king, every general, every warlord, every weapons dealer, every man sitting behind a polished desk or atop a throne of power — every single one of you who holds a nation’s fate in your hands and has chosen, again and again, to spend it on war.

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH YOU?
Do you not see what you are doing? Do you not feel it? The mothers burying their children. The fathers standing in the rubble of what was once a home, a life, a future. The little girls who no longer have schools to walk to. The little boys who have never known a single day without the sound of explosions. Do these images reach you in your fortified palaces and secured bunkers?
Do they cost you even one night of sleep?
WHY — why in the name of everything sacred — CAN’T YOU USE YOUR MINDS?
You are supposedly the smartest men in the room. You have advisors and analysts, historians and economists, strategists and diplomats. You have centuries of human knowledge at your fingertips. And yet — and yet — the answer you reach for, time and time and time again, is MONSTER bombs. A missile. A drone. A bullet. Another weapon. Another war.
Is that truly the best your intelligence can produce?

SIT DOWN.
Not at a war table. Not in a command center. Sit down across from each other — as men, as human beings — and talk. That is all we are asking. Just talk. Negotiate. Compromise. Give something. Take something. Find the middle. Find the bridge. Find the thread of humanity that must — that must — still connect you.
Because here is what we know, what every woman who has ever carried life in her body knows instinctively: nothing built on destruction ever lasts. Not one empire. Not one conquest. Not one “victory” purchased with the blood of the innocent. History has screamed this truth at you for thousands of years and still — still — you do not hear it.

STOP DESTROYING EACH OTHER’S LANDS.
Those are not just territories on your maps. Those are orchards that took generations to grow. Those are rivers that gave life to entire civilizations. Those are cities that held art, music, laughter, love. When you bomb a city, you are not just destroying infrastructure — you are erasing memory. You are committing violence against time itself. And no flag planted in the ash of someone else’s home is worth that.

STOP DESTROYING EACH OTHER’S PEOPLE.
They are not pawns. They are not collateral. They are not numbers in a military briefing. They are people — with names, with dreams, with people who love them. Every single one. On every side. Every soldier forced to fight a war he didn’t choose. Every civilian who never wanted any part of your quarrel. Every child. Every child. Can you look at the face of a child and justify this? Can you? Then look harder.
STOP WASTING THE WORLD’S WEALTH ON WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.
Do you have any idea — any real idea — what the world spends on war every single year? Trillions. Trillions of dollars, euros, rubles, yuan — the combined treasure of humanity — poured into machines designed for one single purpose: to kill. While people drink contaminated water. While children go to bed hungry. While diseases go uncured because the research has no funding. While the planet itself burns and floods and cries out for attention.
You are building monstrous weapons — things so terrible their very existence is a crime against the future — and you call this strength? You call this leadership?
We call it madness.

And we are done being polite about it.
We do not come to you without hope. We come to you because of hope — because we refuse to believe that the men entrusted with the greatest power in human history are incapable of the most basic human act: choosing peace.
Peace is not weakness. It is the hardest, most disciplined, most courageous thing a leader can choose. It requires more intelligence than war. More creativity than war. More genuine strength than war ever could.
History does not remember the men who destroyed most. It remembers — it honors — the ones who found a way through. The ones who chose the harder, braver path.
Be those men.
Sit down. Look each other in the eye. Remember that on the other side of every enemy you’ve invented is a human being trying, just like you, to matter — to protect something, to be heard, to leave something worth leaving.


Talk to him.

The world is watching. Your children are watching. History — relentless, unforgiving, honest history — is watching.
And we are watching.
Choose differently. Choose better. Choose peace.
While there is still something left to save.
If You Won’t Listen to Us — Then Listen to One of Your Own
If you don’t want to listen to us — the mothers, the daughters, the women who birth the very lives you send to war — then read this. Read it carefully. Read it slowly. Let it land.
These are not our words. These are the words of General Dwight D. Eisenhower — Supreme Commander of Allied Forces, architect of the victory in World War II, President of the United States of America. A soldier’s soldier. A man who sat exactly where you sit. A man who knew war not from a briefing room, but from its blood-soaked reality.

He said this 65 years ago. And every single word is more urgent today than the day he spoke it:


“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.”
“Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war — as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years — I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.”
— President Dwight D. Eisenhower

He was disappointed. A man of that stature, that experience, that power — disappointed — because even after everything humanity had endured, the world still could not find its way to lasting peace.
Sixty-five years have passed since he spoke those words.
What have you done with them?
He called disarmament a continuing imperative — not an option, not an ideal for dreamers, but an imperative. A necessity. A duty. He called on you to compose your differences “with intellect and decent purpose.” Not with missiles. Not with sanctions designed to starve populations. Not with proxy wars fought on the bodies of other people’s children.
With intellect. With decent purpose.

If a five-star general who led the liberation of a continent is telling you that war is not the answer — if a man who could never be accused of naivety about the brutality of conflict is begging you to find another way — then what exactly is your excuse?
He feared another war could utterly destroy a civilization built slowly and painfully over thousands of years.
Look around you. Is he wrong?
We are still here. We are still asking. Eisenhower is still asking — across the decades, from the weight of history itself.
When will you finally answer?

WE ARE DONE.
Do you understand what it takes to bring a life into this world?
The months of carrying. The pain of birth. The years — the years — of feeding and holding and teaching and worrying and loving a child into a human being. We pour everything we are into these sons and daughters of ours. Every sleepless night. Every sacrifice. Every prayer. We give our bodies, our time, our hearts — completely and without reservation — to bring forth the next generation of this world.
And you take them. And you waste them. And you bury them.
For what? For borders drawn by men long dead? For pride that won’t bend? For resources you could have negotiated for? For ideology? For ego?

WE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF IT.
Sick and tired of kissing our children goodbye and wondering if it’s the last time. Sick and tired of folded flags handed to us in place of the living, breathing people we raised. Sick and tired of watching our daughters come home broken in ways no one can see. Sick and tired of a world where the measure of a nation’s power is how efficiently it can slaughter someone else’s children.
We gave you life. Every single one of you. You came into this world through a woman — helpless, small, entirely dependent on her love to survive. And somewhere along the way, you forgot that. You forgot that the enemy across the border also came into this world the same way. That his mother also stayed up through fevers and nightmares. That her daughter also had a first day of school, a first laugh, a first dream.
They are us. We are them. There is no “other side” that isn’t also human.
So hear us — really hear us — when we say:

GET YOUR HEADS TOGETHER.
Sit in a room. Stay there until you find a way forward. Call your diplomats. Call your historians. Call your economists. Call anyone with the intelligence and decency to help you find common ground — because it is there. It is always there. Peace is always possible. War is always a choice.
You are — supposedly — the most capable, the most resourceful, the most powerful human beings on this planet. Then act like it. Use those minds you were given. Use those positions you were entrusted with. Use the authority we — the people — placed in your hands for our protection, not our destruction.
TALK. NEGOTIATE. COMPROMISE. LISTEN. SOLVE.
These are not radical demands. They are the most basic expectations of any intelligent, capable human being faced with a problem.

And do it NOW.
Not next year. Not after the next offensive. Not after more cities are reduced to dust and more families are shattered beyond repair. NOW. While there are still people left to save. While there is still a world worth handing to the children you haven’t yet destroyed.
We brought you into this world.
We are telling you — with every ounce of love and fury that is in us —
STOP THIS MADNESS. NOW AND PREPARE FOR WORLD PEACE!!!!
The mothers and daughters of this earth are watching — and we will not be silent.

“If Rotary is to realize its proper destiny, it must be evolutionary at all times, REVOLUTIONARY on occasion.”—–Paul Harris

June 10, 2026 Posted by | Women | Leave a comment

Tortured US history with Iran goes back 73 years, not 47

Walt Zlotow   West Suburban Peace Coalition   Glen Ellyn IL , 8 June 26

US neocons reveling in the current US war to destroy Iran tell the monstrous lie Iran has been at war with America 47 years. In their deranged world view it began with the 1979 Iranian revolution that disposed the hated US puppet ruler Mohammed Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran and took 66 US embassy hostages. Their lie claims that during that 47 years Iran killed thousands of Americans and no president defended America till Trump attacked Iran February 28.

 These war lovers omit the current truth that Trump’s war is a total failure for 100 days now. Fourteen US service persons are dead. Hundreds injured. All US Gulf States bases damaged or destroyed. Israel suffered the worst destruction in its 78 years. US offensive, defensive missiles so depleted they will take years to replenish. America’s defeat is irreversible. Worst of all? The US forced closure of the Strait of Hormuz choking off a fifth of the world’s oil and vital economic supplies, likely risking worldwide recession, if not depression. Today’s neocon war was stupidity on steroids.

Their stupidity omits the historical truth that the US is the warmonger here, not Iran, going all the way back to 1953 when the US collaborated with the UK to depose the democratically elected Iranian leader Mohammad Mosaddegh. Patriot Mosaddegh sought to nationalize the British controlled Iranian oil industry being exploited by the UK for decades. To prevent this the Brits cooked up Operation Ajax and brought the US on board to overthrow Mosaddegh on the pretext he was a commie. 

The US enlisted Kermit Roosevelt Jr., grandson of premier US warmonger President Teddy. As a top CIA official, Kermit was tasked with exploiting fake anticommunist sentiment to oust Mosaddegh in a violent coup. Kermit used his contacts among Egyptian Anglophiles and pro Shah forces to get Mosaddegh’s removal started. But advance knowledge of the coup allowed Mosaddegh to prevail, so much so, Roosevelt’s CIA bosses demanded he leave Iran immediately. Instead, he conjured up the ghost of TR, inspiring him to instigate a second coup on his own that succeeded.

It became the model for CIA backed coups, both successes and failures, throughout the Cold War. A year later Ike secretly gave Kermit a National Security Medal for keeping Iranian oil safe for the West. Apparently, Ike didn’t want to go public with an illegal, immoral and criminal overthrow of a sovereign government.

Seventy-Three years on the neocons of today ditched coup for all out war to reclaim Iran for a new American sock puppet, one candidate of whom is Reza Pahlavi, son of the Shah deposed in 1979. Unlike Kermit’s successful coup in ’53, Trump’s war is a colossal failure that signals the end of US hegemony in the Middle East and possibly the entire world. The Gulf States, looking at their shattered US bases and degraded oil infrastructure, will likely turn toward Russia, China, even Iran for security. Europe has largely given up on America. The Far East, seeing the US claw back its missiles for its Iran misadventure is also rethinking its defensive strategy. 

Unlike the clever Kermit Roosevelt Jr., today’s coup plotters and warmongers, including Trump, Hegseth and Rubio, are blithering idiots.

June 10, 2026 Posted by | history, Iran, USA | Leave a comment

AI to double data centre power and water consumption by 2030, UN researchers say

Data centres are expected to consume twice as much power and water by 2030
as they expand to meet the surge in demand from artificial intelligence,
U.N. researchers said on Wednesday. Unless governments heed the rising
environmental ‌costs of AI, the rapid rollout could also strain scarce
land resources and create mountains of electronic waste, the United Nations
University Institute for Water, Environment and Health warned in a report.

Reuters 3rd June 2026, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/ai-double-data-centre-power-water-consumption-by-2030-un-researchers-say-2026-06-03/

June 10, 2026 Posted by | technology | Leave a comment

Kim Jong Un vows to build nuclear-armed navy with ‘secret underwater weapons’ as he tours warship with his daughter

Kim Jong Un has vowed to bolster North Korea‘s defences with a nuclear-powered navy and a new generation of ‘secret underwater weapons’. 

The North Korean leader made the announcement on Thursday while inspecting a new warship, alongside his teenage daughter, believed to be named Jin Ju Ae, ahead of a visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping. 

State media reported Kim called for the rapid development of naval forces capable of playing a central role in the country’s nuclear deterrent. He said the navy must be able to deliver ‘a deadly blow at the enemy any moment under the water or on the water’. ………………………….

Daily Mail 6th June 2026, https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15879219/Kim-Jong-nuclear-navy-underwater-weapons-warship-daughter.html

June 10, 2026 Posted by | North Korea, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Industrial dispute on Hinkley C site sees large police presence

A LARGE early morning police presence was needed at Hinkley Point C as
tempers flared while hundreds of workers were locked out of the site during
unofficial industrial action. The dispute arose after claims a dangerous
crane lift on the nuclear power station construction site has put workers
at risk. MEH Alliance workers, who are delivering Hinkley C’s mechanical,
electrical, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning installations,
staged protest sit-downs in canteens. The site’s management then withdrew
access rights for the workers ‘to avoid any further disruption, limit
impacts to other HPC team members, and allow time for discussions’.

West Somerset Free Press 6th June 2026, https://www.wsfp.co.uk/news/industrial-dispute-on-hinkley-c-site-sees-large-police-presence-914669

June 10, 2026 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

Hegseth Compares D-Day Troops to Europe’s Migrants

You could argue that Hegseth was confused in this analogy, and simply misspoke. But he and the administration he is part of have taken over Nazi talking points on racial hierarchies,

Juan Cole, 06/07/2026, https://www.juancole.com/2026/06/hegseth-compares-migrants.html

Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – Whiskey Pete Hegseth, speaking 82 years after the Allied storming of the beaches of Nazi-occupied France, appears to have sided with . . . the Nazis. He said, “Sadly, today, different European beaches are stormed by different dangerous ideologies. Beaches in Spain, in Italy, in Greece and Bulgaria. Boats and men arrive. When will European capitals do something about that invasion?”

He compared the 156,000 US, Canadian and British troops who landed at five beaches on the Normandy coast of Vichy France on June 6, 1944, to the desperate “boat people” coming to today’s Europe in risky voyages on leaky vessels across the Mediterranean. About 150,000 a year make it across alive, to a continent of 743 million Some 30% are summarily deported. I.e., each year’s irregular migrants constitute 0.013% (a little over one hundredth of one percent) of the population.

Now, I’m sure that Operation Overlord, helmed by Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower and Commander of all Allied ground forces British General Bernard “Monty” Montgomery, was viewed by German Field Marshals Erwin Rommel and Gerd von Rundstedt as a landing of tens of thousands of undocumented aliens from barbarian races. After all those who hit the beaches included Jews, Slavs, Hispanics, indigenous Americans, Chinese Americans and 2,000 African Americans, whom the Nazis viewed with the same horror and disdain that Hegseth views today’s migrants to Europe.

But it is more than a little odd that the successor of Department of War head Henry L. Stimson should take the Nazi view of the matter.

You could argue that Hegseth was confused in this analogy, and simply misspoke. But he and the administration he is part of have taken over Nazi talking points on racial hierarchies, as I observed in some detail in my analysis for Tomdispatch.com of the Trump National Security Strategy regarding Europe. I wrote,

‘Trump claims that he’s no longer sure Europeans will even remain European. He supposedly worries that, two decades from now, the continent will be unrecognizable and EU countries no longer capable of being Washington’s “reliable allies.” That barb is, of course, clearly aimed at Muslim immigrants to Europe, even though they are a distinct minority of those arriving there. In an interview about his NSS, Trump snidely remarked, “If you take a look at London, you have a mayor named Khan.” And he then went on to exclaim in horror that immigrants aren’t just coming from the Middle East, “they’re coming in from the Congo, tremendous numbers of people coming from the Congo.” In other words, the only thing that outstrips Trump’s Islamophobia is his horror of Black people.

Of course, he’s completely misinformed about immigration to Europe, which means his NSS is as well. As a start, the largest influx of people into the EU in recent few years has been 4.3 million Ukrainians. The major sources of immigration to Germany in 2024 were Ukraine, Romania, Turkey, Syria, and India. For Spain, it was Colombia, Morocco, Venezuela, Peru, and Argentina. As for Europe’s future reliability, Trump has already said that he “can’t trust” Denmark, no matter that its population is solidly Lutheran and predominantly blond, because that country won’t give him Greenland. And since the president has expressed a willingness to break up the NATO alliance, if necessary, to add 57,000 Greenlanders to his feudal domains, his doubting of European dependability should be considered richly ironic.

Aryan Reliability

The underpinnings of Trump’s reasoning can (or at least should) be described as Nazi in style. After all, he’s assuming that the immigrants he loathes are inherently incapable of becoming Europeans and will make those countries intrinsically untrustworthy as allies of the United States. Of the EU countries, he recently asserted that “they’ll change their ideology, obviously, because the people coming in have a totally different ideology.” Yet British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, born in Southampton to an immigrant Indian-East African family of Hindu faith, was widely viewed as having restored British-U.S. diplomatic relations after years of strain.

In reality, studies show that socio-economic status, not national origin, best predicts how immigrants will vote. In Germany, the better-off Russian-Germans, who far outnumber largely working-class Turkish-Germans, tend to vote for right-of-center parties. Both groups, however, seem happy to participate in European politics in accordance with local norms. If, for Trump, the term “immigrants” in this context is a dog whistle for Muslims, it might be noted that nine of the 22 countries, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, that have been formally designated by Trump as “major non-NATO allies” are Muslim-majority

His foreign policy reasoning in that NSS eerily mirrors the crackpot logic of Adolf Hitler, who saw France as an enemy of Germany’s because it had allegedly fallen irretrievably under non-Aryan Jewish influence, and who held out hope in the 1920s and early 1930s that Aryan elements would prevail over Jewish ones in Britain, a country he preferred as a strategic partner because of the Germanic ancestry of part of its population. In Trump’s NSS, immigrant Europeans from Africa and the Middle East play the role that Jews did in Hitler’s thinking — that is, non-Aryan underminers of national integrity. Hitler’s conspiratorial racism was, of course, all too grimly insane, and so, too, is that of Trump’s NSS.

“Mongols and Negroes”

Central to the NSS is the Great Replacement. The idea, though not the phrase, goes back to 1900 when the French nationalist parliamentarian and novelist Maurice Barrès wrote, “Today, new French have slipped in among us… who want to impose on us their ways of feeling.” He warned of Jewish, Italian, and other immigrants. “The name of France might well survive,” he commented, but “the special character of our country would nevertheless be destroyed.” Amid a political crisis over the wrongful conviction of Captain Alfred Dreyfus (of Jewish and Alsatian heritage) for supposed espionage for the German embassy, Barrès denounced the famed French novelist Émile Zola, a supporter of Dreyfus, as “not French” but a rootless cosmopolitan from a Venetian background.

Fifty years later, the French Nazi René Binet (1913-1957) coined the phrase “Great Replacement.” An ex-Communist, he had served as a Nazi collaborator during World War II in the Waffen Grenadier Brigade of the Charlemagne paramilitary Protection Squadron (Schutzstaffel or SS). After the war, in his 1950 book Theory of Racism, he wrote in dismay about how Western Europe had been invaded by “Mongols and Negroes” — that is, by the Soviets and the Americans. He lamented that Jewish-dominated capital also supposedly controlled Europe (it didn’t, of course) and falsely alleged that Jewish CEOs were bringing in immigrants in a deliberate attempt to replace civilized White Europeans.

Sadly enough, Binet’s ideas have been revived in this century by French thinkers and politicians. Renaud Camus published his twenty-first century version of the theory in 2010, entitling his book The Great Replacement. Such falsehoods were echoed in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017, when American Nazis chanted “Jews will not replace us” (and President Trump called the assembled protestors, as well as those who opposed them, “very fine people”).

Read the rest here.

June 10, 2026 Posted by | spinbuster, USA | Leave a comment