Leo Hohmann
LeoHohman.com

25 Republican neocons and 25 Democrat neolibs join hands to sponsor bill that would impose whopping 500 percent tariff on any country purchasing Russian oil, gas or uranium. WWIII hangs in the balance

Half of the U.S. Senate — 25 Republicans and 25 Democrats — joined together on Tuesday, April 1, in a rare show of bipartisanship.

What brought them together? They are eager to further poke the bear, the nation of Russia, the owner of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.

They introduced a bill proposing astronomical sanctions on Russia if it refuses to participate in further negotiations aiming for a 30-day ceasefire in its war with Ukraine. Russian leaders say such a deal is unacceptable because it would give Ukraine time to reorganize and rearm its military right when it’s on the brink of total defeat. No sane leader of any country in Russia’s position would agree to such a deal as the one being offered by Trump and Washington.

The bill’s lead sponsors are the notorious Republican neocon warmonger Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and neoliberal Democrat warmonger Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. They say their bill would impose primary and secondary sanctions against Russia and any entities supporting “Russian aggression” in Ukraine if Moscow does not engage in talks. The bill includes a whopping 500 percent tariff on any country purchasing Russian oil, gas or uranium, The Hill reported, citing the document.

The bill is a rare example of bipartisanship in the bitterly divided U.S. Congress, and comes as President Trump has appeared to be growing increasingly impatient with what he has suggested might be foot-dragging over a wider agreement to end the war. Nothing like a little Russia hate to bring America’s bitter political rivals together.

Andrei Nizamutdinov
Pravda-EN / TACC

More than 60 years ago, the French comedy "Babette Goes to War" was released. In the story, a naive girl played by Brigitte Bardot flees to the UK, hoping to escape the horrors of war there. But the British command has its plans.: it sends the heroine back to France with the task of pulling off an ingenious espionage and sabotage operation. Today, the British authorities are trying to implement a similar scenario: continental Europe should act as a simpleton Babette, which is being pushed to send its troops to Ukraine to fight against Russia there. True, there is no sense of comedy here, but an enormous tragedy is just around the corner.

"Coalition of the Willing"—After the start of the CBO, Great Britain took perhaps the most challenging position towards Russia. Suffice it to recall that the signing of agreements between Russia and Ukraine in the spring of 2022 was disrupted by the then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who hastily arrived in Kyiv and proposed: "Let's just fight." It is noteworthy that, acting as the main ideologist of the continuation of the conflict to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, London was not at all among the leaders in terms of military and financial assistance provided to Ukraine, second not only to the United States but also to Germany, France, and even Poland. In other words, the British acted according to the usual pattern, raking in the heat with someone else's hands.

The coming to power in the United States of Donald Trump and the negotiations he initiated with Russia on resolving the conflict in Ukraine forced London to change tactics: at the initiative of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, supported by French President Emmanuel Macron, a "coalition of the willing" was formed. We are talking about a group of countries that still dream of defeating Russia and therefore advocate the continuation of the conflict. Well, or for its settlement solely on its own terms, assuming that Russia will have to pay and repent. Several European countries advocating a peaceful settlement, primarily Hungary and Slovakia, were prudently not invited to participate in the coalition. But it includes Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, as well as Turkey, hence the other name — Europe +. The central "desire" around which these countries united was to send troops to Ukraine under the guise of either peacekeepers or an expeditionary force designed to ensure Ukraine's security in the event of a peace agreement.

Andrew Korybko
Andrew Korybko's Newsletter

Russian Spies Warn That The UK Is Trying To Sabotage Trump’s Envisaged “New Détente”. Trump 2.0 must become aware of the threat that the UK poses to its plans, and respond accordingly to defend the US’ interests.

Russia’s Foreign Spy Service (SVR) accused the UK of trying to sabotage the nascent Russian-US “New Détente” for self-interested geopolitical reasons. According to their sources, the success of their talks could break the Brits’ regional containment of Russia, which is why they’re employing a dual-track policy for preventing this. The first part involves information warfare fearmongering about Trump’s ties with Russia while the second seeks to escalate the Ukrainian Conflict through a conventional intervention.

SVR’s report lacks any bombshells since everything that they revealed was already self-evident to astute observers, but it’s still important that they lent credence to what others before them had already picked up on and the timing with which they did so. “France, Germany, & Poland Are Competing For Leadership Of Post-Conflict Europe” while the UK plans to divide-and-rule the continent like usual, to which end it’s expected to rely more on Poland and/or Ukraine with whom it’s been colluding since February 2022.

Few either saw it at the time or still remember, but the UK forged an informal trilateral alliance with Poland and Ukraine exactly one week before the special operation began, which was leveraged shortly after to convince Zelensky to abandon spring 2022’s peace talks with Russia as was explained here. In the three years since, Poland and the US have taken harder stances towards Ukraine, the first initially for domestic political reasons and the second due to Trump’s eagerness to “Pivot (back) to Asia” pronto.

Leo Hohmann
LeoHohman.com

The war behind the war: What World War III is really being fought over

As usual, the official narrative, as put forth in the corporate media, about the West's beef with Putin bears no resemblance to the truth about why the West cannot accept a Putin-led Russia.

World War III, like all 21st century wars, is not being fought over ideologies. It’s being fought over energy and natural resources. Because he who controls the world’s resources will be free to impose whatever ideology he wants.

Washington and London, the epicenter of the Western liberal world order that thinks it’s admirable and virtuous to redefine God-created genders and appropriate to unleash deviant transvestites on innocent school children, is seeking to neutralize the massive resources of Russia as it ramps up its “net zero” sustainable development model of economic progress. This economic model is really just a scam designed to pilfer what remains of the middle class and further subjugate them under AI-powered government-corporate control. Hence the need for more massive data centers, which Donald Trump is being used to build across the United States with $8 billion in foreign investment from a billionaire in the United Arab Emirates.

Alireza Akbari
PressTV

Amid the raging genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, the Israeli regime is intensifying its propaganda blitz, allocating unprecedented funds to shape global public opinion.

Israeli foreign ministry's annual budget for so-called "public diplomacy", also known as Hasbara, has surged to a staggering $150 million in 2025, marking a 20-fold increase from last year.

The move aims to whitewash the apartheid regime's appalling war crimes in Gaza and repair its battered international image, as global condemnation grows over its continued genocidal campaign.

The generous allocation of funds, aimed at amplifying pro-Zionist propaganda, comes as global public opinion has sharply turned against the Tel Aviv regime due to its war of extermination in Gaza.

Since the launch of the war on October 7, 2023, the Israeli regime has unleashed 88,000 tons of explosives on the tiny besieged territory, destroying houses, hospitals, schools and refugee camps.

The war has killed nearly 46,000 people and injured around 109,000 in the past 15 months. Among the martyrs are over 17,800 children and 12,300 women, according to Gaza's health ministry.

The ministry has documented more than 9,000 massacres against Palestinians during this period with tens of thousands displaced and rendered homeless, and many more grappling with hunger.

Under the new budget announced earlier this week, the Israeli regime's foreign ministry is expected to receive massive funds for its so-called "public diplomacy" efforts, in order to wash the stains.

Under this program, the ministry intends to hire social media influencers, public opinion leaders and celebrities to repair the tattered image of the child-murdering regime in Tel Aviv.

Strategic Culture Foundation Editorial
Strategic Culture Foundation

By endorsing Israeli aggression, the United States and its British and other Western lackeys are unleashing hostilities with incalculable consequences.

The American and British leaders are fully backing Israel to escalate its criminal aggression in the Middle East. In so doing, Washington and London are being exposed for the arch-criminal regimes that they are.

An all-out war against Iran is on the brink. The consequences will be abysmal, yet the U.S. and British rulers are shameless, reckless – and ultimately stupid – in their complicity.

In a few days, on October 7, the Israeli regime will have conducted 12 months of non-stop genocidal destruction of Gaza. There is no sign of that monstrous war of extermination coming to an end. The Israeli regime is completely out of control, acting with impunity and shocking violation of all laws and moral norms.

More than 41,000 Palestinian people have been killed. Some estimates put the real death toll at over 100,000 and even as high as 200,000. This slaughter of women and children is supposed to be justified by the incursion of Palestinian militants on October 7 last year in which some 1,200 Israelis were killed – many of them by their security forces using reckless firepower. The Hamas incursion was in response to years of inhumane, genocidal siege on the Gaza Strip by Israel.

The actions of the Israeli regime are wholly indefensible. Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli leaders have gotten away with mass murder because of the diplomatic and – more importantly – military support from the United States, Britain, and other Western states.

The genocide in Gaza and the other Palestinian enclaves of the West Bank has been infernally compounded by Israel’s expansion of aggression in the region. The past two weeks have seen Israeli forces indiscriminately bombing Beirut and other Lebanese civilian areas, causing 2,000 deaths and over one million people displaced from their homes. The orgy of violence is engulfing the entire region. The Israeli regime is also bombing Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, as well as Iran in assassination missions.

Walter Gelles

Note: This piece points up Kamala Harris's sheer hypocrisy, as well as the sell-out of Trump, Harris, and RFK Jr. on the "Palestine problem." It also highlights the vast undercount of the official death toll. 40,000? 300,000 murdered thus far by Zionist Jews supported by the US and UK is much closer to reality.[*] The Vietnam War-era chant against mass murderer Lyndon Johnson ("How many kids did you kill today?") has been updated to reflect America's ongoing wars against Russia and Palestine. Why aren't millions of people out in the streets of every major US and European city demanding an end to BOTH of these criminal campaigns?

Daniele Ganser
Journal of 9/11 Studies

The “Strategy of Tension” in the Cold War Period *

[06/02/14] Historians today and in the coming years face a challenging task: they must write the history of the events of September 11, 2001. What they write will be taught in history classes. But what will they write? Will they write that Osama Bin Laden sent 19 Muslims to launch a surprise attack on the U.S.? Or will they write that the administration of President George W. Bush was responsible for the attack, either constructing it or deliberately permitting it in order to shock the U.S. population and to create a pretext for increasing military spending and attacking Afghanistan and Iraq?

Having examined much of the data related to the 9/11 events, I am convinced a new and thorough investigation is needed. But when I have questioned the official narrative of 9/11 in my native Switzerland I have encountered vigorous objections from people. Why would any government in the world, they have asked, attack its own population or, only slightly less criminal, deliberately allow a foreign group to carry out such an attack? While brutal dictatorships, such as the regime of Pol Pot in Cambodia, are known to have had little respect for the life and dignity of their citizens, surely a Western democracy, the thinking goes, would not engage in such an abuse of power. And if criminal elements within a Western democracy, in North America or in Europe, had engaged in such a crime, would not elected officials or the media find out and report on it? Is it imaginable that criminal persons within a government could commit terrorist operations against innocent citizens, who support the very same government with the taxes they pay every year? Would nobody notice? These are difficult questions, even for academics who specialize in the history of secret warfare. But in fact, there are historical examples of such operations being implemented by Western democracies.

In this essay, I will not deal directly with 9/11 but will look at what we can learn from history. I will report on some of the newest academic data about secret warfare during the Cold War. A secret military strategy that targets domestic populations with terrorism does indeed exist. It is called the “strategy of tension.” And it was implemented by Western democracies.

Timofey Bordachev
RT.com; ВЗГЛЯД

Together with its allies in London, Washington plays by rules of its own.

Over the past few weeks, the media focus on the spectacle that is the US presidential election campaign has been relentless. The incumbent Joe Biden’s disastrous debate with his opponent from the Republican Party, Donald Trump; then the latter’s miraculous survival following an assassination attempt; the choice of Trump’s running mate; and, finally, the change in the candidate of the ruling Democrats. As a result, Vice President Kamala Harris – who has not yet proved herself in any way – has entered the fray.

The whole mess is accompanied by a huge amount of conflicting information and opinions that are sprinkled liberally at the general public, creating a sort of emotional seesaw effect. To some extent, observers in other countries are also in danger of being caught up in the frenzy.

Russia, too, is used to paying close attention to political struggles in the West. This habit has long been part of our political culture – the Russian state was created primarily out of foreign policy necessity. However, I would like this tradition to remain at the level of mere curiosity, and not to create expectations about one or another outcome of America’s internal struggles.

Dr Vernon Coleman MB ChB DSc
VernonColeman.com

1. President Biden has the sort of mask like face seen with Parkinson’s Disease. Is it remotely possible that he could be taking Levadopa for this condition? This drug can cause confusion. Is it remotely possible that Biden wants to remain President so that he can pardon his son and avoid prison? What a tragedy it is that both American Presidential candidates seem more suited to institutional care than another four years in the White House.

2. Nine out of ten British workers admit that they are practising `quiet quitting’ – they are doing the least amount of work they have to do to avoid being sacked. This is one reason why productivity in Britain is lowest in the world. Quiet quitting has cost the economy hundreds of millions and seems destined to continue. It is why no one much cares and nothing much gets done.

3. The Guardian newspaper claims that `the rich and powerful’ try to stop it publishing stories and complains about `lobby groups with opaque funding who are determined to undermine facts about the climate emergency and other established science’. Er, since when has there been any established science about the alleged climate emergency? Climate change is a dangerously subversive myth promoted by crazed billionaires, Bilderbergers and members of the World Economic Forum. And is this the same Guardian newspaper which has, since 2020, failed to encourage debate about the covid scandal and the toxic covid-19 vaccine? The Guardian is part of the mainstream media which has collectively suppressed free speech for years. The truth, of course, is that the covid-19 vaccine is toxic and never did what it was supposed to do. And the climate change story is a conveniently promoted myth. I bet you won’t read that discussed in The Guardian. The Guardian is part of the media establishment – and must stand in the dock alongside the BBC and the Daily Mail.