Today’s Update is continuation of our reporting on the diligent and thorough work done by the New Mexico Environment Department to hold Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) accountable for not responsibly addressing the hexavalent chromium plume beneath LANL that has now spread beneath Pueblo de San Ildefonso.
On Tuesday, February 11th, the New Mexico Environment Department issued two Administrative Compliance Orders under the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act and the New Mexico Water Quality Act to address the on-going migration of hexavalent chromium into the sole source regional drinking water aquifer that feeds the Rio Grande and those living downstream. The Orders proposed civil penalties for multiple violations of both laws that total nearly $16,000,000. https://www.env.nm.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/2026-02-11-COMMS-NMED-acts-to-hold-DOE-accountable-for-legacy-waste-Final.pdf
Both Orders provide detailed histories of what has led the Environment Department to issue civil penalties for contamination of groundwater, which was first discovered in 2004 in a newly drilled monitoring well in Sandia Canyon.
Since then LANL has not done everything in its power to properly investigate and protect against the groundwater contamination. It has drilled wells at least 1,000 deep to reach the contaminated waters, extracted those waters, treated the waters on the surface, and returned them back into the deep aquifer. Due to the findings of contamination beneath Pueblo de San Ildefonso, in November 2025, the Environment Department ordered the cessation of these operations. This is not the first time the Environment Department ceased operations.
The word unclassified potentially gives Trump and the CIA wide latitude to hold back Epstein-related materials that they claim are too sensitive to release.
We won’t know the full truth about his crimes until the extent of his ties to US intelligence are clear.
On November 18, Donald Trump suffered a major political defeat when the House of Representatives passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act by a nearly unanimous vote: 427–1. But while emphatic, the House measure included a significant proviso that might yet prevent a full reckoning with Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes.
Trump had fought for months against the bill, which was drafted by a bipartisan coalition created by California Democrat Ro Khanna and Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie. In the end, the strong public revulsion for Epstein’s crimes made opposing the bill untenable. But the final version specified that the Department of Justice must make public “all unclassified” documents on Epstein
The word unclassified potentially gives Trump and the CIA wide latitude to hold back Epstein-related materials that they claim are too sensitive to release. In this, they have the support of House Speaker Mike Johnson, who insisted that US intelligence agencies be allowed to “protect their critical sources and methods. It is incredibly dangerous to demand that officials or employees of the DOJ declassify material that originated in other agencies and intelligence agencies.”
Johnson’s words stand in stark contrast to the remarks by Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of four dissident House Republicans who forced Trump to abandon his opposition to the Epstein bill. “The real test will be: Will the Department of Justice release the files, or will it all remain tied up in investigations?” she asked in a November 18 press conference. “Will the CIA release the files?” Greene—perhaps feeling too bruised by the clash with Trump, who attacked her repeatedly over her Epstein heresy—subsequently announced that she will be retiring from Congress. But her words still cut to the heart of why getting……………………………………..[Subscribers only]
a science fiction novel with a distinctly bizarre premise: that, at some future moment, thanks to the endless burning of fossil fuels, we humans would essentially threaten to burn ourselves off planet Earth. And when the voters of the world’s largest democracy heard that such a thing might, sooner or later, actually happen to us, they would respond by freely electing a genuine madman — who ran his second candidacy in 2024 on the all-too-bluntly apocalyptic slogan “drill, baby, drill” — to “lead” us into a literal hell on earth.
the American people elected as president, twice, a man who, as a businessman, had either four or more likely six bankruptcies to his name,
Our planet is melting in a climate broiler that we control and we’re not only not turning down the heat fast enough, but we Americans elected someone (twice!) determined to turn it up ever higher.
The Personification of an Imperial Power (and Planet) in Decline
Once upon a time, if you had described Donald Trump’s America to me (the second time around), I would have thought you mad as Alice in Wonderland‘s proverbial hatter — or, if you were a fiction writer, I would have considered your plot so ludicrous that, after reading a few pages, I would undoubtedly have tossed your book in the trash.
And yet here we are, not once (yes, all of us can make a mistake once, can’t we?) but twice!
And the one thing you should take for granted is that Donald Trump in the White House a second time around is the all-too-literal personification of imperial decline. In fact, decline is hardly an adequate word for it. We just don’t happen to have another word or phrase that would describe him and his crew aptly enough in all their eerie strangeness. Yes, this country, even in the best of (imperial) times, certainly had its problems. (Remember the Vietnam War, for instance, or President “Tricky Dick” Nixon and the Watergate scandal.) Still, nothing was ever quite like this, was it? Never.
The First American King?
A literal Mad Hatter in command in Washington, D.C. Once upon a time, who would have believed it? In fact, if we could indeed travel into the past and I were able to take you back to 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed, ending the Cold War, while China had not yet faintly “risen,” the world of that moment might essentially have been considered American property, lock, stock, and proverbial barrel.
This planet could have been thought of then as the property of just one great power — my country, of course — that, in imperial terms, had essentially been left alone on planet Earth in a fashion that might never have happened before in the history of humanity. And if I had then been able to see into our future and had tried to fill you in on the Trumpian world we’re now living through a mere three decades later, you would have quite literally laughed me off the planet (and, believe me, that’s putting it politely).
Truly, who could have ever (ever!) imagined this bizarre Trumpian era of ours in which the joker (in the worst sense of the term) in the ultimate deck of cards is indeed sitting in the White House. Yes, unbelievably enough, he was elected a second time in 2024 by a “sweeping,” “landslide,” “historic” 49.7% of American voters. It’s true, not even 50% of us voted to make him the first American king a second time around.
And if that made you chuckle just a little, well, stop doing so right now! Yes, what happened to us in Trumpian terms was and remains genuinely absurd. Still, given this deeply endangered world of ours, it should be anything but funny. Just imagine for a moment, a president who, before entering the White House, was essentially known for only one thing: being the host of the TV show The Apprentice (“You’re fired!”). Once upon a time, if you had described the (ir)reality we’re now living through, you would have been laughed not just out of the room but off this planet. You would, in short, have been fired.
In fact, if what we’re now experiencing were a novel, it would be considered to have the most ludicrous plot imaginable and, a few pages in, you would undoubtedly have tossed it into — yes, again! — the trash. (Unfortunately, it’s not just you or me but this planet itself that Donald Trump now threatens to toss into that garbage pail.)
So here we are in February 2026 and, like it or not, we’re all apprentices to one Donald J. Trump — oops, sorry, one President Donald J. Trump. And the ongoing TV show he emcees these days from the White House is undoubtedly the wackiest one in our history, as he fires not just everyone but everything that rubs him the wrong way from the Kennedy Center (gone!) to the East Wing of the White House (now rubble) to the U.S. Agency for International Development (once upon a time…).
One way to think about all of this is to go back in time and imagine that, long, long ago, Isaac Asimov or Ray Bradbury wrote a science fiction novel with a distinctly bizarre premise: that, at some future moment, thanks to the endless burning of fossil fuels, we humans would essentially threaten to burn ourselves off planet Earth. And when the voters of the world’s largest democracy heard that such a thing might, sooner or later, actually happen to us, they would respond by freely electing a genuine madman — who ran his second candidacy in 2024 on the all-too-bluntly apocalyptic slogan “drill, baby, drill” — to “lead” us into a literal hell on earth. Now, of course, that “president” is insisting that he be given the largest iced island on this planet, Greenland, that, were all its ice to melt (as indeed is already beginning to happen), could send global sea levels up by 23 feet and quite literally drown this world’s coastal cities. Imagine that!
And now, try to imagine this: in 2026, such terrible fiction is, in fact, our reality and one thing is guaranteed (excuse the colons inside colons but this is a strange, strange world to try to sum up): it’s only going to get worse in the three years to come before Donald Trump’s presidency is officially ended, if, of course, it ever does end. (As he typically said at one point last year, “Based on what I read, I guess I’m not allowed to run. So we’ll see what happens,” and he’s now talking about “nationalizing” — think “Trumpifying” — our elections!)
Given him and everything that’s gone on so far in his second term in office, including the way he recently had Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accompany FBI agents to an election voting hub in Fulton County, Georgia, where they “seized hundreds of boxes containing ballots and other documents related to the 2020 election,” I wouldn’t count on anything Trumpian ending according to plan. Whew! That was one long sentence!
The Trump administration is planning to build a 5,000-person military base in Gaza, sprawling more than 350 acres, according to Board of Peace contracting records reviewed by the Guardian.
The site is envisioned as a military operating base for a future International Stabilization Force (ISF), planned as a multinational military force composed of pledged troops. The ISF is part of the newly created Board of Peace which is meant to govern Gaza. The Board of Peace is chaired by Donald Trump and led in part by his son-in-law Jared Kushner.
The plans reviewed by the Guardian call for the phased construction of a military outpost that will eventually have a footprint of 1,400 metres by 1,100 metres, ringed by 26 trailer-mounted armored watch towers, a small arms range, bunkers, and a warehouse for military equipment for operations. The entire base will be encircled with barbed wire.
The fortification is planned for an arid stretch of flatlands in southern Gaza strewn with saltbush and white broom shrubs, and littered with twisted metal from years of Israeli bombardment. The Guardian has reviewed video of the area. A source close to the planning tells the Guardian that a small group of bidders – international construction companies with experience in war zones – have already been shown the area in a site visit.
The Indonesian government has reportedly offered to send up to 8,000 troops. Indonesia’s president was one of four south-east Asian leaders scheduled to attend an inaugural meeting of the Board of Peace in Washington DC on Thursday.
The UN security council authorized the Board of Peace to establish a temporary International Stabilization Force in Gaza. The ISF, according to the UN, will be tasked with securing Gaza’s border and maintaining peace within the area. It is also supposed to protect civilians, and train and support “vetted Palestinian police forces”.
It is unclear what the ISF’s rules of engagement would be if there is combat, renewed bombing by Israel, or attacks by Hamas. Nor is it clear what role the ISF is meant to play in disarming Hamas, an Israeli condition to proceed with Gaza’s reconstruction.
While more than 20 countries have signed up as members of the Board of Peace, much of the world has stayed away. Although it was set up with the UN’s approval, the organization’s charter appears to grant Trump permanent leadership and control.
“The Board of Peace is a kind of legal fiction, nominally with its own international legal personality separate from both the UN and the United States, but in reality it’s just an empty shell for the United States to use as it sees fit,” said Adil Haque, a professor of law at Rutgers University.
Experts say the funding and governance structures are murky, and several contractors have told the Guardian that conversations with US officials are often conducted on Signal rather than over government email.
The military base contracting document was issued by the Board of Peace, according to a person familiar with the process, and prepared with the help of US contracting officials.
The plans say there is to be a network of bunkers each 6 metres by 4 metres and 2.5 metres tall, with elaborate ventilation systems where soldiers can go for protection.
“The Contractor,” says the document, “shallconduct a geophysical survey of the site to identify any subterranean voids, tunnels, or large cavities per phase.” This provision is likely referencing the large network of tunnels Hamas has built in Gaza.
One section of the document describes a “Human Remains Protocol”. “If suspected human remains or cultural artifacts are discovered, all work in the immediate area must cease immediately, the area must be secured, and the Contracting Officer must be notified immediately for direction,” it says. The bodies of about 10,000 Palestinians are believed to be buried under the rubble in Gaza, according to Gaza’s civil defense agency.
It is unclear who owns the land where the military compound is set to be built, but much of the south Gaza area is currently under Israeli control. The UN estimates that at least 1.9 million Palestinians have been displaced during the war.
Diana Buttu, a Palestinian-Canadian lawyer and former peace negotiator, called building a military base on Palestinian land without the government’s approval an act of occupation. “Whose permission did they get to build that military base?”
Officials from US Central Command referred all questions about the military base to the Board of Peace.
A Trump administration official declined to discuss the military base contract: “As the President has said, no US boots will be on the ground. We’re not going to discuss leaked documents.”
The Military Connection. For Australian workers and the public, the situation is complicated by and made more urgent as a result of the Australia, UK, USA (AUKUS) agreement regarding the building and stationing of nuclear-powered submarines in Australia. We have already seen the creation of a separate Australian Naval Nuclear Power Standards Regulator (ANNPSR) that will be responsible for all standards in the construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning, and radioactive waste management from the submarines built or stationed here. We can expect pressure from the USA to have these standards align with those in the USA. As such the ANNPSR could become a back door for pressuring the current standards agency ARPANSA to revise and weaken rather than tighten protection standards across the full range of other occupational and public radiation health risks.
Radiation Protection Standards For most of the past century national and international standards agencies have regulated radiation protection based on three fundamental principles.
1 A ”Linear No Threshold ‘ (LNT) model based on scientific evidence that indicates there is no safe level of exposure. Any dose however small can be the one which can cause cancer – sometimes taking years to develop – or genetic damage affecting future generations.
2 That, therefore, all exposures should be kept ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’ – known as the ALARA principle
3 And that exposures to workers and the public should be kept below specified annual limits.
The science behind this protection regime is based on the capacity of ionising radiation to cause damage at the cellular level in the human body. Radiation striking a cell can either cause no damage or it may kill the cell outright – in which case, unless too many cells are killed at once, the body will eliminate the dead cells and function healthily. The problem comes when the cell is merely damaged, and the natural process of repair is imperfect, leaving the cell to replicate in this damaged form – which may in some cases lead to the kind of growth we call a cancer, other long term health or genetic damage. The level of this kind of damage (known as stochastic) is a hit-and-miss affair – a low level of radiation exposure doesn’t determine a health effect but as the level of exposure increases, it increases the probability of the damage.
Current Standards Need Tightening The limits on exposure have been progressively tightened over the years as estimates of the cancer risks, mainly drawn from the Life-Span Studies (LSS) of Japanese survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb blasts in 1945, showed progressively higher rates of this stochastic health damage. Recent evidence from studies of workers in the Nuclear Industries in France the UK and USA (The INWORKS studies) suggest the worker-exposure limits need to again be revised – and significantly tightened. In addition, studies on health of populations living close to nuclear power plants in Europe and the USA show significantly elevated rates of cancer in both children and the elderly directly related to living distance from these facilities.
United States Proposals Would Weaken Current Standards Unfortunately, it appears that the USA is headed in the opposite direction and given the recent behaviour of the current President, may soon pressure other countries to follow suit. In May 2025 US President Donald Trump issued a Directive (EO 14300) Instructing the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to revise all its regulations – in particular, to revise those relating to radiation health and safety. He instructed the NRC to abandon the LNT and ALARA principles and re-set limits on worker and public exposures based on ‘deterministic’ rather than ‘probabilistic’/’stochastic ‘ health outcomes – potentially allowing much higher levels of exposure.
Exactly how the NRC will respond to these directives is unclear. To comply with the president’s orders would put the USA in conflict with national and international agencies such as the International Commission of Radiological Protection (ICRP), the United Nations Scientific Committee on Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), the US National Academy of Science’s. Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation (the BEIR committee) and other countries’ national agencies including the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Standards Agency (ARPANSA) – all of which have recently reaffirmed commitment to the LN and ARPANSA principles and the current annual limits on worker and public exposure.
TThe draft of the revised NRC regulations on radiation protection is expected on 30 April 2026 with a 30-day period for comments before the final comprehensive revision of all NRC regulations is published in November 2026.
An international Campaign These US proposals have stimulated the beginnings of an international campaign bringing together trade unions, environment and public health groups and communities concerned about current and future exposures from mining, industrial, medical, and nuclear radiation sources. The objectives of this campaign are two-fold:
1 To pressure national and international agencies with responsibility for radiation protection to publicly repudiate any US regulations that align with the Trump Directive and resist any pressures from the US to similarly weaken existing national standards. 2. To build pressure on these national and international agencies to revise and tighten the standards in line with the best available scientific evidence that the health risks are greater than those used to set current standards.
The Military Connection For Australian workers and the public, the situation is complicated by and made more urgent as a result of the Australia, UK, USA (AUKUS) agreement regarding the building and stationing of nuclear-powered submarines in Australia. We have already seen the creation of a separate Australian Naval Nuclear Power Standards Regulator (ANNPSR) that will be responsible for all standards in the construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning, and radioactive waste management from the submarines built or stationed here. We can expect pressure from the USA to have these standards align with those in the USA. As such the ANNPSR could become a back door for pressuring the current standards agency ARPANSA to revise and weaken rather than tighten protection standards across the full range of other occupational and public radiation health risks.
For further information For references to the scientific evidence and to be kept informed of developments as this campaign evolves contact:
Rubio’s speech isn’t just another round of transatlantic posturing. It marks a moment when a top U.S. official openly reframes five centuries of Western expansion — conquest, colonization, and domination — as a civilizational triumph that must be revived.
According to journalist Ben Norton, Rubio’s remarks went beyond simple rhetoric — openly lamenting the end of Western imperial expansion and portraying decolonization movements as destructive forces driven by “godless communist revolutions.”
In a striking address at the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio framed Western history not as a legacy of colonial domination, but as a “great civilization” whose decline must be reversed.
Rubio stated:
“For five centuries before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding… its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers… building vast empires extending out across the globe. But in 1945… it was contracting.”
He described anti-colonial uprisings as accelerating Western decline and rejected what he called “managed decline,” urging Europe and the United States to renew “the greatest civilization in human history.”
As reported in the Guardian this is something along the lines of “Empire is great. Empire is back. Empire is American.” Adding “The US secretary of state delivered what can only be described as a 22-minute ode to empire. A love letter to conquest and colonialism. A proud defense of the west’s territorial expansion.
Why This Matters
Since the post-World War II wave of decolonization across Africa, Asia, and Latin America, formal empires largely collapsed. Yet Rubio’s framing — praising Western expansion while dismissing colonial crimes as “purported sins” — signals a broader ideological shift.
Norton argues that this speech represents:
A defense of Western imperial legacy
A call for renewed transatlantic unity
A strategic push to restructure global supply chains away from China
An ideological justification for reasserting dominance over the Global South
Context: Competing Global Visions
While Rubio emphasized Western civilizational unity and supply chain control, China’s foreign minister presented an opposing vision centered on multilateralism and sovereign equality at the same conference.
The divide reflects a larger geopolitical struggle between:
A U.S.-led Western alliance seeking strategic dominance
A rising multipolar bloc emphasizing sovereignty and UN-centered governance
For more context on Rubio’s speech and the broader geopolitical stakes, here’s Ben Norton and The Geopolitical Economy Report:
President Trump just made one of the most depraved statements about destroying living conditions for a foreign people ever uttered by a US president. “THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA – ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.”
Trump doesn’t just talk depravity. He practices depravity. He’s ratcheted up America’s 66 yearlong campaign of economic sanctions and embargo to unprecedented heights. For the 11 million beleaguered Cuban people that means a new low in living standards from Trump’s cruelty.
Trump‘s criminal intervention in Venezuela allows him to cut off Venezuelan oil which suppled one third of Cuba’s oil. Not satisfied with that, Trump is pressuring Mexico to cut off the 44% of Cuban oil it supplies. If successful that would cut Cuba’s oil supplies by 78%. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum cancel one oil shipment but says Mexico will still provide Cuba oil based on “humanitarian needs.” Tho reducing oil shipments, Mexico is sending two ships containing 800 tons of desperately needed food, water and hygiene products. Hopefully Trump won’t mistake the Mexican ships for drug boats to be obliterated.
The oil shortage has already created a humanitarian crisis as less than half of Havana’s garbage trucks have fuel to cope with mountains of waste. Russia has ordered all its tourists out of Cuba. The collapsing tourist industry is destroying one of Cuba’s last economic lifelines.
But that is not good enough for Trump who’s considering a total blockade on oil imports to collapse the Cuban economy and depose the communist government. Last month Trump signed an executive order imposing tariffs on any country that sends oil to Cuba. Seeking to out-deprave the depraved Trump when it comes to Cuba, U.S. Charge d Affaires in Havana Mike Hammer told his staff “Now there is going to be a real blockade. Nothing is getting in. No more oil is coming.”
Nine years ago my wife and I visited Cuba for 10 days before newly elected Trump began dismantling Obama’s wonderful détente with Cuba. While his détente reestablished diplomatic relations and increased badly needed US tourism, it did not end the embargo which requires Congressional legislation. It was heartbreaking being there to ponder the madness of US policy inflicting such cruelty on such a beautiful country and its people for the past 57 years.
I’d been studying US Cuban relations since January 1, 1959 when news broke on Castro’s successful takedown of the brutal US supported Batista regime. I welcomed the news that 60 years of US exploitation of Cuba following our takeover of Cuba from Spain in 1898 had ended. Sadly, Ike rescinded his initial outreach to Castro within a year over US obsession in destroying any popular left wing government seeking to uplift its people suffering under colonialism.
My visit greatly expanded all I’d been studying about Cuba since 1959. It inspired me to develop a talk entitled ‘US Cuban Relations 1898 to Present: What They Didn’t Teach Us in School’ which I’ve presented many times. I end the talk imploring attendees to stay informed, support end to America’s cruel, heatless embargo, and visit Cuba to see for yourself its beauty and the need to end senseless US cruelty.
Alas, at next presentation I’ll drop the third request they visit Cuba to see for themselves its beauty and its people. The current depraved US administration is making Cuba unlivable for its 11 million citizens and any tourist who dares visit.
US empire managers have been making some surprisingly honest admissions in recent days, with Senator Lindsey Graham saying the wars of the future are being planned in Israel and Secretary of State Marco Rubio calling for a return to old-school western colonialism.
During a Monday press conference in Tel Aviv after a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu, Graham said that “I’ve been coming here every two weeks whether I need to or not.”
Why is a South Carolina senator traveling to Israel every two weeks, rain or shine? The bloodthirsty warmonger answers this question in short order.
“The wars of the future are being planned here in Israel,” Graham said. “Because if you’re not one step ahead of the enemy, you suffer. The most clever, creative military forces on the planet are here in Israel.”
Graham salivated about the possibility of a US war with Iran, acknowledging that such a war could absolutely result in American troops in the region being struck by Iranian missiles but saying the US should go to war anyway.
“Could our soldiers be hit in the region? Absolutely, they could. Can Iran respond if we have an all-out attack? Absolutely, they can,” Graham said, arguing that “the risk associated with that is far less than the risk associated with blinking and pulling the plug and not helping the people as you promised.”
During a speech at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio took the mask all the way off in an unsettling rant about the need to return to the good old days when western powers dominated the global south without pretense or apology.
“For five centuries, before the end of the second world war, the West had been expanding — its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe,” Rubio said. “But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, it was contracting. Europe was in ruins. Half of it lived behind an Iron Curtain and the rest looked like it would soon follow. The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world and drape the red hammer and sickle across vast swaths of the map in the years to come.”
Rubio, a notoriously anti-communist gusano, is here admitting that socialism played a leading role in pushing back against the abusive colonialism and empire-building of the western world in recent decades. A normal person would take this as a strong argument in favor of socialism, but Rubio says it like it’s a bad thing.
Rubio urged Europeans to join their white Christian brethren in the United States in re-conquering the brown-skinned communists and heathens who have been insisting upon their own sovereignty and the advancement of their own interests:
“Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past. And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.
“For the United States and Europe, we belong together. America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before. The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.
“We are part of one civilization — Western civilization. We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir.”
It takes a special kind of psychopath to look back with fondness upon five centuries of unchecked western colonialism and imperialism and then advocate a return to those horrific days. Mass genocides across entire continents. The African slave trade. The violent subjugation and enslavement of entire populations. That is what Rubio is looking back on and sighing with nostalgia.
And this is of course to say nothing of the savagery his beloved “Western civilization” is perpetrating in the present day. This is the civilization of the Gaza holocaust. The civilization that cannot exist without constant war, exploitation and extraction. The civilization that is presently strangling Cuba to death and preparing for war with Iran. The civilization that still to this day violently subjugates and robs the global south. The civilization of ecocide. The civilization of Epstein.
Western civilization is the most depraved and abusive civilization that has ever existed. It doesn’t need a return to its prime, it needs to be stopped in its tracks and made healthy. This is obvious from a glance at the deranged empire managers this civilization has been elevating to positions of leadership.
Trump frames the ongoing negotiations as designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This despite Trump’s bragging that he completely destroyed their nuclear program with his one-off bombing last June
Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL, 17 Feb 26
Back in 2002 the US demanded Iraq give up its WMD, weapons of mass destruction, ostensibly to prevent another 911 attack a year earlier. To back up its demand the US threatened attacking the Iraqi regime to safeguard the Homeland.
Along with most Americans, I fell for the line that the US would stand down due to the weapons inspectors and intelligence resources in Iraq concluding Iraq had no WMD and was not a threat to America whatsoever.
Then in August 2002, I read a report buried deep in the Chicago Tribune describing America’s massive military buildup, concluding with the strong implication that such a buildup made attack on Iraq inevitable with nothing Iraq could do to prevent it.
At that moment I knew everything the Bush administration said about the Iraqi danger was a vicious lie in service of ousting Saddam Hussein and conquering Iraq. Seven months later, contrary to all the evidence, Bush did precisely that.
I’m getting the same ominous feeling when I hear Trump bragging out his massive buildup of air and naval forces near Iran poised to attack should Iran not capitulate to Trump’s non-negotiable demands that Iran give up its missile defense resources and cease supporting its regional allies.
Trump frames the ongoing negotiations as designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This despite Trump’s bragging that he completely destroyed their nuclear program with his one-off bombing last June in support of Israel’s 12 day war on Iran that utterly failed to topple the Iranian regime.
The current negotiations in Geneva have nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear weapons program since, like Iraq’s imaginary WMD program in 2002, Iran has none. Indeed, for verification Iran is willing to negotiate limited nuclear enrichment for peaceful domestic purposes; even allow inspections to verify compliance But they will never negotiate away their missile program which is their only defense against further Israeli, US attacks such as they incurred last June.
Another similarity to Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq 23 year ago? It had nothing to do with vital US national interests. It had to do with Israeli demands that successive US administrations, bought up with Israel Lobby money, take out any Israeli rivals for Middle East hegemony.
Trump’s fealty to Israeli demands, encouraged by their near quarter billion in campaign support, fueled Trump’s blowing up Obama’s sensible 2015 Iran nuclear agreement in 2018. He lied to us then how the deal favored Iran by not ending its nuclear bomb program that did not exist. Trump is lying to us now on the urgency of destroying Iranian sovereignty which includes the right to self-defense.
But there is one huge difference between Trump’s trumped up Iranian threat likely presaging all out war today and George W. Bush’s falsified Iraqi threat in 2002. Unlike Iraq which had no defensive military means and no powerful allies to assist his defense, Iran has both.
They have thousands of missiles scattered thruout their large country capable of inflicting massive damage on US and Israeli forces. In addition they are getting defensive support from Russia and especially China in the form of intelligence resources to track approaching US bombers and provide accurate targeting information in retaliation.
History shows that sending a military armada near a pretend enemy never gets recalled. Its sole purpose is to attack and destroy based on a tissue of lies. And any lie and any ludicrous demand to negotiate an impossible deal in furtherance of war will be used to justify attack.
George W. Bush got 4,497 soldiers and 1,487 civilian contractors killed for nothing in his made up Iraq war. Trump’s march to war with Iran may make Bush’s folly pale in comparison.
Viewed closely, a pattern emerges, pointing to a presidency where private capital, foreign networks, and personal access converge to shape outcomes that consistently serve Israeli interests, and not Americans
”Trump did not walk into the White House alone. He stormed in with a promise to “drain the swamp,” but trailing in his shadow was Jared Kushner, carrying a tangled web of private financial networks, offshore holdings, and foreign capital so deeply embedded it functioned like a quiet engine at the heart of the presidency. Years later, FBI documents released alongside the Epstein files crystallised the danger, with a Confidential Human Source (CHS) alleging that Trump had been compromised by Israel, and that Kushner was the true centre of gravity, orchestrating both the Trump Organisation and the White Housefrom within.
Here -documents: [on original]
DOCUMENT: Federal Bureau Of Investigation (FBI) – CHS Reporting Document, 10/19/2020 (Source: US DOJ)
This is not theatre. Intelligence reporting rarely accuses outright; it maps vulnerability, flags leverage, and exposes the invisible pathways through which foreign influence can seep into the corridors of American power, remaining unnoticed, unchallenged, and structurally unstoppable
The question is not whether the allegation would hold up in court. The question is whether the record itself, including Trump’s 2025 mandate, his cascade of executive orders, and his most consequential foreign policy moves in the Middle East, confirms the risk it described. Viewed closely, a pattern emerges, pointing to a presidency where private capital, foreign networks, and personal access converge to shape outcomes that consistently serve Israeli interests, and not Americans’. The decisions emanating from the Trump 2:0 administration appear to be dictated from within rather than guided by democratic oversight. As this story unfolds, it becomes clear that these are not isolated incidents or accidental alignment—they are structural, enduring, and deeply consequential.
President Trump recapped his sixth meeting this year with his real boss, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, by stating it will be “Very traumatic” for Iran if a nuclear deal isn’t reached soon.
With his vast military armada perched on Iran’s doorstep, Trump’s warning is clear. The US is preparing a massive attack to decapitate the Iranian regime and splinter Iran into a failed state. Of course this has nothing to do with US national security interests. It’s about Israel’s decade’s long demand that its US servants remove Israel’s last hegemonic rival for Middle East supremacy.
When asked about a timeline for Iran to capitulate to every US, Israeli demand that would essentially nullify Iranian sovereignty, Trump said “I guess over the next month. They should agree very quickly.” Netanyahu echoed that delusional assessment stating “The president believes the Iranians now understand who they are dealing with” (and that) “conditions could emerge for achieving a good agreement.”
Trump and Netanyahu know full well Iran will never negotiate away their ballistic missile defense which will devastate both US military forces and Israel itself once Trump launches all out war.
Knowing no deal is possible, Trump and Netanyahu likely spent their 3 hour meeting discussing when and how to destroy Iran militarily. The Israeli news site Ynet, concurred, stating the two leaders discussed military options and that Israeli officials expect the US will eventually attack Iran.
Best we in the peace community can hope for is that someone close to Trump convinces him that the trauma Trump threatens Iran with will boomerang into unfathomable trauma for the US and Israel as well as Iran.
So Trump’s éminence grise, the wunderkind, who some people have called the President In-Law, is really Israel’s man inside the White House
Granted, this is a very serious charge – which comes with some serious consequences if Kushner would ever be indicted, but the facts clearly demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt, that then President-elect’s son-in-law was using his proximity to the incoming Commander and Chief to execute a series of highly sensitive foreign policy maneuvers at the request of a foreign country.
So what exactly are Jared Kushner’s credentials in international relations and diplomacy that he has been charged with negotiating Middle East affairs for the United States of America? Without sounding too cruel here, it’s difficult to find anything to say in his defense. In the end, his only visible qualification is that he’s married to the President’s daughter, and that’s he’s “a good friend” of Netanyahu. That’s really it
Much was made this week in the US media about Michael Flynn’s recent guilty plea to making false statements to the FBI, as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s never-ending “Russia probe.” Beyond the political window dressing however, there’s a much bigger and more profound story lingering in the background.
“Now, with increased US military presence in [West Asia], Trump is preparing strikes on Iran — not for American interests, but to appease his Zionist bosses. This isn’t ‘peace’; it’s escalating conflicts to advance Greater Israel fantasies, displacing millions and looting American taxpayers.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been deliberately steering the United States toward confrontation with Iran in an escalation that pushes America into a “slave state for Israel’s expansionist dreams,” says an American analyst.
In an interview with the Press TV website, Michael Rectenwald, an author and former professor, pointed to the strong Zionist influence in the US policy-making:
“The Zionist stranglehold on US policyprioritizes Israel’s aggression over American sovereignty.Netanyahu knows thatprovoking Iran draws in US forces and funds, turning our country into a slave state for Israel’s expansionist dreams.”
He noted that Tel Aviv’s push to see an all-out Iran-US war is not “just a willingness” but “a calculated strategy to bleed America dry.”‘Rectenwald, founder of the Anti-Zionist America Political Action Committee (AZAPAC), said Trump’s record stood in stark contrast to his campaign vows to end wars:
“He ran on ending endless wars and putting America first. In practice, his administration had served as Israel’s munitions depot and ATM, bombing countries like Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and others at Israel’s behest while funneling billions in arms and aid to support Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza and beyond.”
In Rectenwald’s assessment, the expansion of US military assets in the region signaled preparation for direct confrontation with Tehran.
“Now, with increased US military presence in [West Asia], Trump is preparing strikes on Iran — not for American interests, but to appease his Zionist bosses. This isn’t ‘peace’; it’s escalating conflicts to advance Greater Israel fantasies, displacing millions and looting American taxpayers.”
Trump’s rhetoric has sharpened in recent months. Following economic protests in Iran, which were later hijacked and turned into terrorist riots by US and Israeli spy agencies, he had warned that military action remained on the table and said that “help is on its way.”
In late January, he stated that “another beautiful armada” of warships was “floating beautifully toward Iran,” later suggesting the deployment might pressure Tehran back into nuclear negotiations,while Tehran said it had never abandoned talks.
Trump further threatened that failure to reach a deal would bring consequences “far worse” than the previous strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Tehran responded with its own warnings, declaring that any aggression would meet a swift and forceful response.
After an attack on its nuclear facilities in June — which ironically came during indirect Tehran-Washington talks — Iran launched a barrage of missiles at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, which hosted US forces and equipment.
Rectenwald argued that the push toward confrontation with Iran could not be understood without examining Israel’s strategic calculus and its influence in Washington. He contended that Netanyahu had been actively seeking a broader war between Washington and Tehran.
Rectenwald noted that Trump himself had been complicit in this pattern:
“Netanyahu and the Zionist regime in Israel are desperate for an all-out war between the US and Iran, as it would eliminate a key regional rival while keeping the US entangled as Israel’s military golem.
“Trump is no anti-war president; he’s a Jewish mobster puppet, dragging the US into more bloodshed for a parasitic state.”
Rectenwald described the president’s foreign policy as subservient to Israeli priorities rather than grounded in American sovereignty.
The risks of confrontation with Iran, he argued, were neither abstract nor hypothetical. Rectenwald said Trump had been fully aware of Iran’s military capabilities, particularly its missile arsenal.
“Trump is fully aware of Iran’s formidable missile capabilities, which have already pierced Israel’s multi-layered defenses and could devastate US assets and troops scattered across the region.”
Despite that awareness, Rectenwald believes the president had been influenced more by hardline voices aligned with Israel than by strategic caution. He described Trump as “more beholden to Zionist hawks like those in his administration and the pro-Israel lobby that dictates US policy.”
In making his case, Rectenwald contrasted Iran’s posture with Israel’s record:
“Iran hasn’t attacked US ships like the USS Liberty (that was Israel), nor does it control our political class or siphon our resources for genocide; that’s Israel’s playbook,.”
He argued that Trump had ignored the strategic dangers while appealing to domestic political instincts. The president, he said, had been “pumping up his base with pre-war rhetoric and aligning with figures who see siding with Israel as ‘good vs. evil.'”
Rectenwald warned:]”Attacking Iran would be another disastrous war for Israel, not fought for America, endangering our troops and economy.”
The latest round of talks between Tehran and Washington took place in Muscat on February 6, mediated by Omani Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi. The delegations exchanged their views and approaches through Omani channels.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the process as a “good start” and said that the continuation of talks depended on refraining from threats and pressure.
However, Rectenwald repeated his warning against Israeli influence, which can derail the talks as happened in June.
“Trump isn’t acknowledging Iran’s power; he’s blinded by Zionist influence, risking catastrophe to serve foreign interests,” he said.
For Rectenwald, the stakes extended beyond a single military decision. The broader issue, he argued, concerned sovereignty and governance. “We must end this control and reclaim American governance for Americans.”
Fully terminating START communicates to the entire world that the US and Russia are so diplomatically inept that they cannot be trusted to continue to hold the entire world hostage to annihilation by holding thousands of first-use-ready nuclear weapons over everyone’s heads without adequate reasonable restraint
– When the nuclear Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) between the US and Russia expired last week, it ended a historic era— but triggered widespread speculation about the future.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said “February 5 was a grave moment for international peace and security”.
For the first time in more than half a century, he pointed out, “we face a world without any binding limits on the strategic nuclear arsenals of the Russian Federation and the United States of America – the two States that possess the overwhelming majority of the global stockpile of nuclear weapons.”
US President Donald Trump dismissed the termination of the treaty rather sarcastically when he told the New York Times last month: “if it expires, it expires”—and denounced the expiring treaty as “a badly negotiated deal”.
“We will do a better agreement”, he promised, adding that China, which has one of the world’s fastest growing nuclear arsenals, “and other parties” should be part of any future treaty.
The Chinese, according to the Times, “have made clear they are not interested”.
Currently, the world’s nine nuclear powers are the US, UK, Russia, France and China—all permanent members of the Security Council—plus India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea.
Collectively, they possess an estimated 12,100 to 12,500 nuclear warheads, with Russia and the US owning nearly 90% of the total eve while all nine are actively modernizing their arsenals.
Jonathan Granoff, President, Global Security Institute told IPS the START Treaty should be extended at least a year by formal or informal means. Is that as good as obtaining a new treaty that would include China as the US administration wants? No.
“Is it as good as fulfilling legally required steps such as adherence to the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) unanimous ruling to negotiate the universal elimination of nuclear weapons or the fulfillment of the promise of nuclear disarmament embodied in Article 6 of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)? No”.
However, argued Granoff, doing nothing is asserting that a modest threat reducing easily obtained step now should not be taken because there are better ways forward. A modest positive step is no impediment to moving in other desired manners.
Fully terminating START communicates to the entire world that the US and Russia are so diplomatically inept that they cannot be trusted to continue to hold the entire world hostage to annihilation by holding thousands of first-use-ready nuclear weapons over everyone’s heads without adequate reasonable restraint, said Granoff.
The arguments being put forth as to why nothing can be done are inadequate.
First, the US argues that a new arrangement, a new treaty, is needed to bring China into the fold of restraint, he said.
“A modest step of extending START for a year by mutual presidential decrees while new negotiations take place does not negate creating a new treaty that would include China.”
Second, the arguments used to rationalize the new arms race fail to consider the folly of producing more accurate, usable, and powerful nuclear weapons”, declared Granoff.
Guterres pointed out the dissolution of decades of achievement could not come at a worse time – the risk of a nuclear weapon being used is the highest in decades.
“Yet even in this moment of uncertainty, we must search for hope. This is an opportunity to reset and create an arms control regime fit for a rapidly evolving context.”
“I welcome that the Presidents of both States have made clear that they appreciate the destabilizing impact of a nuclear arms race and the need to prevent the return to a world of unchecked nuclear proliferation.
“The world now looks to the Russian Federation and the United States to translate words into action. I urge both States to return to the negotiating table without delay and to agree upon a successor framework that restores verifiable limits, reduces risks, and strengthens our common security’, said Guterres.
In a statement released last week, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (PNND), a global network of legislators working to achieve a nuclear weapons-free world, said the importance of the New START treaty is hard to overstate.
“As other nuclear treaties have been abrogated in recent years, this was the only deal left with notification, inspection, verification and treaty compliance mechanisms between Russia and the US. Between them, they possess 87% of the world’s nuclear weapons.”
The demise of the treaty will bring a definitive and alarming end to nuclear restraint between the two powers. It may very well accelerate the global nuclear arms race, PNND warned.
This was one of the key reasons that on January 27, 2026, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists reset the Doomsday Clock to 85 Seconds to Midnight.
Last year, PNND Co-President Senator Markey introduced draft legislation into the US Senate urging the government to negotiate new post-START agreements with Russia and China. The legislation is supported by a number of other Senators and by a companion bill in the House of Representatives. But this seems to have fallen on deaf ears in the Trump Administration.
Granoff, providing a deeper analysis, told IPS the scientific data makes clear that a full-scale nuclear war between the US and Russia would annihilate humanity and that a limited nuclear exchange of less than 2% of the world’s arsenals would put around 5 million tons of soot into the stratosphere leading billions of deaths and the devastation of modern civilization everywhere.
“Realism reveals that the alleged need to duplicate the arsenals of adversary nations is not needed for deterrence. Realism also reveals that there is actually little to no meaningful difference between a nation having 600 (as China does now) or over 1400 deployed nuclear weapons, mirroring the US and Russia, or 30,000 nuclear weapons as Russia and the US each had at the height of the last arms race”.
“The reality is that devastation globally of a small portion of the world’s nuclear arsenals would be unambiguously unacceptable to any sane person. We could say that realism informs us that we have moved from Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) to Self-Assured Destruction (SAD). The fact is that if any of the 9 states with the weapons were to use several hundred nuclear weapons that nation itself would also be devastated. MAD today reveals a new acronym, SAD.”
Meanwhile, a posting in the US State Department website reads
Treaty Structure: The Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, also known as the New START Treaty, enhances U.S. national security by placing verifiable limits on all Russian deployed intercontinental-range nuclear weapons. The United States and the Russian Federation had agreed to extend the treaty through February 4, 2026.
Strategic Offensive Limits: The New START Treaty entered into force on February 5, 2011. Under the treaty, the United States and the Russian Federation had seven years to meet the treaty’s central limits on strategic offensive arms (by February 5, 2018) and are then obligated to maintain those limits for as long as the treaty remains in force.
Aggregate Limits
Both the United States and the Russian Federation met the central limits of the New START Treaty by February 5, 2018, and have stayed at or below them ever since. Those limits are:
• 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), deployed submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments; • 1,550 nuclear warheads on deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs, and deployed heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments (each such heavy bomber is counted as one warhead toward this limit); • 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers, and heavy bombers equipped for nuclear armaments.This article is brought to you by IPS NORAM, in collaboration with INPS Japan and Soka Gakkai International, in consultative status with the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
An attendee told The Grayzone that oil industry heavyweights were less excited about Trump’s Venezuela policy, privately complaining about the President’s aggressive push to restart their operations.
When the American Petroleum Institute (API) gathered oil industry leaders and lobbyists for a “State of American Energy” summit on January 16, 2026, the geopolitical landscape seemed to be shifting dramatically in their favor. However, an attendee of the resource extraction cartel’s most important annual lobbying conference told The Grayzone that participants privately grumbled about President Donald Trump’s heavy-handed attempts to steer their agenda, particularly in Venezuela, where he has demanded they immediately restart operations.
Two weeks before the API summit, the US military kidnapped Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in a violent raid, enabling the Trump administration to commandeer the country’s oil reserves. Meanwhile, foreign-backed riots left thousands dead in oil-rich Iran on January 8 and 9, generating enough instability to excite Western governments about the prospects of regime change.
From the stage at Washington DC’s Anthem theater, veteran industry consultant Bob McNally of the Rapidan Energy Group could not contain his excitement over the prospect of toppling the Islamic Republic of Iran.
“Iran holds the biggest promise as well, though they’re the biggest risk, but the biggest opportunity,” McNally proclaimed. “If you can imagine the United States opening an embassy in Tehran, the regime in Tehran reflecting its people – the most pro American population outside of Israel in the Middle East, culturally, commercially adept – historic. If you can imagine our industry going back there, we would get a lot more oil, a lot sooner than we will out of Venezuela.”
According to McNally, who formerly advised President George W. Bush on energy policy, a US regime change war on Iran would be a “terrible day for Moscow, [a] wonderful day for the Iranians, the United States, the oil industry and world peace.”
However, like many industry titans at the API summit, McNally saw Venezuela as a high-risk, low-return investment, even after the de facto US takeover of its resources. “Since the President’s decision to apprehend Nicolas Maduro, I think we’ve seen, you know, private conversations, the meeting at the White House, the administration has had to learn, you don’t go into Venezuela, turn a tap and 3 million barrels a day flow. It doesn’t happen like that,” he commented.
McNally went on to suggest the oil industry was pushing back on Trump’s demands that it immediately reinvest in Venezuela: “The prize in Venezuela is getting back from below a million barrels a day to between three and four million barrels a day, and that we will measure in many years and many decades. And that’s the truth. And the industry is speaking that truth to the administration.”………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
The oil lobby sponsors a TV show to glorify itself
The API “State of American Energy” summit’s program closed with a session which demonstrated the power of America’s oil lobby to influence Hollywood content.
On stage beside actor Andy Garcia, a star of a new Paramount+ show, Landman, API President Mike Sommers boasted about his role in sponsoring a dramatic series which glorifies a heavily maligned industry on a Trump-aligned network.
According to Axios, API provided Landman with “a seven figure ad campaign,” ensuring the show’s viability on Paramount+, a network purchased in 2025 by the pro-Trump, ultra-Zionist billionaire heir David Ellison.
Landman’s plotlines sell viewers on the image of America’s extraction industry as a vital force that is entitled to bend the rules and make crooked deals in order to keep the oil flowing. In one episode, the roguish “landman” protagonist Tommy Norris, played by Billy Bob Thornton, finds himself involved in a turf war with a Mexican narco-cartel which controls a valuable plot of land. To increase his leverage over the cartel, Tommy threatens to trigger Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) involvement unless they stand down. Ultimately, the cartel agrees to co-exist with Tommy’s company, M-Tex Oil, ensuring secure drilling and lucrative profits.
It’s a plot that could have been ripped from actual headlines about the US oil industry’s secret dealings with Mexican cartels and designated terrorist groups. And just months after the Trump administration initiated a legally dubious anti-drug operation off Venezuela’s coast to increase pressure on Maduro, who now languishes in a federal prison cell as Washington dictates energy policy to Caracas, the API-sponsored Landman feels increasingly like predictive programming. https://thegrayzone.com/2026/02/13/iran-war-opportunity-oil-lobbys/
nuclear-news 