Featured

Col. Douglas Macgregor and Dr. Francis Boyle Talk Biological Warfare, Medical Tyranny, Prosecutions and WHO Global Police State.

On By Jerry AlataloIn Biological Warfare, Col. Douglas Macgregor, Commentary, Corruption, Dr. Francis Boyle, Earth Matters, Economics / Trade, Environment, Eugenics and Transhumanism, GMO Food, GMO Vaccines, Government Lies / False Flags, History, Law Enforcement, Solutions, The Media, Truth Reporting, Videos, War and Peace4 Comments

By Jerry Alatalo | April 12, 2024

After searching Rumble for any recent interviews of international law professor Dr. Francis Boyle, it was our good fortune to come across his recent, wide-ranging and explosive discussion with Col. Douglas Macgregor, where two of the most truthful and courageous men in America revealed for Americans the most important issues facing the country.

Col. Macgregor is the CEO of the organization “Our Country, Our Choice”, which opposes digital IDs, central bank digital currency (CBDC), weather manipulation, transhumanism, globalism and the World Health Organization’s Pandemic Treaty.  After his retirement from the U.S. military, he has become a popular, much sought after, frequent guest commentator on independent and traditional media news/world affairs programs.

Dr. Francis Boyle is a renowned legal expert on biological warfare/weapons, Harvard Law graduate, professor of international law and international human rights law, and authored The Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 (BWATA).

Please listen closely to the tremendously important, extremely timely facts and details discussed by Col. Douglas Macgregor and Dr. Francis Boyle. Then think seriously about ways to effectively support their wise, necessary recommendations. Thank you. Peace.

Spiritual Enlightenment is #1 Priority for the Human Race – Not AI-Driven War.

On By Jerry AlataloIn Artificial Intellligence Warfare, Artist Activism, Awareness, Banks and Wars, BRICS, Earth Matters, Higher Consciousness, Money / Banks, Native American, New Thought, Omission, Rolling Thunder, Solutions, Spirit Matters, The Media, War and Peace2 Comments

Article republished by Jerry Alatalo | April 30, 2026

(Source: ConsortiumNews.com)

[Editor’s note: Here is my response to the article:

Another briefing by Defence Minister Luke Pollard, which was delivered in private but obtained by Declassified, offers additional clues about the role of British satellite operations in the war.

Pollard said last month that artificial intelligence (AI) applications were “helping save lives in the Middle East, protecting British citizens, British bases and British allies across the Gulf.”

He went on to acknowledge that the U.K. government was “using AI to enhance the speed of backfield decision making, to analyse satellite images.”

This effort might be assisted by Palantir, [the data analysis and AI software company], which sponsored a U.K. Space Command conference in 2024 and said it was “pushing AI to the very edge of space in ways that’s never been seen before” while supporting “agile operations for our allies in the U.S. [and] U.K.”

*

Criticism of artificial intelligence-driven warfare includes concerns about the loss of human judgment in life-and-death decisions, the opacity of algorithmic decision-making, and the potential for unintended civilian casualties due to errors in targeting. Additionally, there are significant ethical and legal challenges regarding accountability when autonomous systems malfunction or misclassify targets.

(Source: DuckDuckGo “Search Assist” – response to query: “Criticism of artificial intelligence-driven warfare”)

*

The Pentagon is aiming to increase funding more than a hundredfold for an autonomous drone warfare program, according to budget documents released this week, signalling a major pivot towards AI-powered war.

In its 2027 budget, the Pentagon has asked for over $54bn to fund the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, a 24,000% increase on last year.

An overview of the budget describes this money as going towards “autonomous and remotely operated systems across air, land, and above and below the sea,” including the “Drone Dominance” program.

The amount is over half the entire defence budget of the UK. In an opinion piece published yesterday, former CIA director David Petraeus said it was “the largest single commitment to autonomous warfare in history”.

(Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/22/pentagon-asks-for-54bn-in-pivot-towards-ai-powered-war)

*

The human race needs a healthy dose of spiritual enlightenment as noted by the late Native American spiritual leader Rolling Thunder (1916-1997): “The most basic principle of all is that of not harming others, and that means all people, all life, and all things.”

The LAST thing the human race needs at this pivotal, precarious, wars-and-rumors-of-wars moment in history is soulless, non-discerning, coldly-harmful-and-destructive, autonomous (artificial intelligence-driven) war.

Peace.]

***

UK Intel Role in Iran War UK Says It’s Not In

April 30, 2026

Ministry of Defence satellite data analysed by Declassified UK indicate Britain had a more active role in Iran war than ministers admit, Abdullah Farooq and John McEvoy report.

The UK Space Command uniform patch, being worn by personnel at RAF Fylingdales. (Charliehaines /Wikimedia Commons /CC BY-SA 4.0)

By Abdullah Farooq and John McEvoy
Declassified UK

The U.K. government has played a quiet intelligence role in the illegal U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, satellite data analysed by Declassified suggests.

Britain’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) sent its first earth imaging satellite, named Tyche, into space in August 2024.

The satellite can obtain images with a 90cm resolution within a 5-kilometer imaging swath, enabling the identification of military targets with high resolution.

“The washing machine-sized spacecraft will have sufficient resolution to identify battlefield troop positions and vehicles,” the BBC reported.

Analysis of Tyche’s recent movements indicates the satellite increased passes over Iran before the Twelve-Day War last June as well as the latest conflict.

While the MoD says Tyche’s orbit has not been deliberately altered, the number of passes over Iran spiked from 12 in April last year to 39 in May and 50 in June, representing an overall increase of over 300 percent. 

Passes over Iran declined between July and September before increasing again in October to 55, reaching an all-time high of 69 in December and remaining elevated during the 2026 war.

The satellite also passed over some military targets in Iran shortly before they were attacked by the U.S. or Israel.

The information suggests Britain has played a more active intelligence role than ministers admit, and appears to further challenge the government’s claim of only “defensive” participation.

An MoD spokesperson refused to say whether British satellite imagery over Iran had been shared with the U.S. or Israel, citing “intelligence” reasons. 

[On April 29, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said:

“My position on the Iran war has been clear from the start. We’re not going to get dragged into this war. It is not our war and a lot of pressure has been applied to me to take a different course… I’m not going to change my mind. I’m not going to yield. It is not in our national interest to join this war and we will not do so. I know where I stand.”

However, the BBC reported that Starmer said on March 6:

“Look, the special relationship is in operation right now. We’re sharing intelligence on a 24/7 basis in the usual way. That is the special relationship.”

Satellite activity

Declassified used open-source two-line element (TLE) data and a propagation algorithm to determine where the satellite had gone since September 2024, and calculated the imaging swath based on the scene width, resolution, and inclination of the satellite.

Two-line element data provides the satellite’s position and timestamp, the algorithm shows where the satellite is in Earth-centered coordinates, and the swath calculation determines where the satellite could have been imaging.

Passes over the earth at night were filtered out, as the satellite is only capable of acquiring daytime imagery.

The results show a high concentration of daytime passes over Iran before and during the Twelve-Day War as well as before and during the latest conflict.

Data show increase in passes over Iran during key moments of geopolitical significance. (Data from space-track.org analysed by Abdullah Farooq)

The data was compared with randomly chosen locations in Mexico and western Europe with the same measurement area to assess if the increase in passes over Iran was not part of a broader trend.

No significant increase was observed in these other areas over the same period.

Open source tracking of airstrikes on Iranian targets was also compared with the calculated imaging swath of the satellite.

This data indicates that Tyche passed over the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)  Amand missile base just north of Tabriz, the IRGC Aerospace Force’s air defence command in Tehran and the Parachin military complex, shortly before those sites were attacked.

Taken together, the data points to a deliberate decision by the MoD to collect aerial imagery over Iran at key moments of geopolitical significance, consistent with ministerial statements on U.K. Space Command’s support to allies in the region.

The MoD denies altering the movements of Tyche at any point since it was launched, even though the Royal Air Force (RAF) explicitly stated last year that the satellite had “demonstrate[d]” its “ability to capture imagery from anywhere on earth when Defence needs it.”

Satellite imagery taken by Tyche over Heathrow Airport in London. (MoD via Declassified UK)

When asked to clarify the RAF’s statement and explain apparent changes in the Tyche’s orbital trajectory, the MoD stopped responding.

While the U.S. has its own military satellites (many of which are more powerful than Tyche), Britain’s contribution appears to focus on burden sharing and developing operational capacity, particularly in terms of locating, tracking, and intercepting missiles.

Any such intelligence collaboration, moreover, could be part of an effort to placate Trump amid deteriorating diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Britain.

Last month, a parliamentary defence committee issued a cryptic statement based on a secret official briefing about the U.K. government’s role in the war.

It found a “considerable gap between some of the political rhetoric circulating internationally, and the reality of the U.K.’s support to the United States and regional partners”.

‘Monitoring Daily Iranian Missile Activity’

U.K. Defence Secretary John Healey and Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the Munich Security Conference on Feb. 14. (Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street /Flickr/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

The U.K. government has remained guarded about the extent of its intelligence collaboration with the U.S. and Israel amid the war on Iran.

Last month, for instance, the MoD refused to say which countries it was sharing Tyche’s satellite imagery with. Defence Minister Al Carns said: “We cannot comment on the sharing of data from… Tyche satellite with other countries.”

In an overlooked speech from last month, however, U.K. Defence Secretary John Healey admitted that “UK Space Command is monitoring daily Iranian missile activity.”

He added that U.K. Space Command had

“provided early warning to our armed forces and our allies operating across the region.”

As the only MoD-owned aerial imaging satellite, Tyche would seem a primary contender for assisting in such operations.

Another briefing by Defence Minister Luke Pollard, which was delivered in private but obtained by Declassified, offers additional clues about the role of British satellite operations in the war.

Pollard said last month that artificial intelligence (AI) applications were “helping save lives in the Middle East, protecting British citizens, British bases and British allies across the Gulf.”

He went on to acknowledge that the U.K. government was “using AI to enhance the speed of backfield decision making, to analyse satellite images.”

This effort might be assisted by Palantir, [the data analysis and AI software company], which sponsored a U.K. Space Command conference in 2024 and said it was “pushing AI to the very edge of space in ways that’s never been seen before” while supporting “agile operations for our allies in the U.S. [and] U.K.”

This month, the U.K. and U.S. also signed a joint declaration on deepening military cooperation in space.

The statement, signed by senior members of the Royal Air Force and U.S. Space Force, notes that this includes “military collaboration and cooperation in the current threat environment to avoid operational surprise.”

US Dependence

As part of his “Arsenal of Freedom Tour,” U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth tours SpaceX facilities in Brownsville, Texas, with SpaceX CEO Elon Musk in January. (DoW/Alexander Kubitza)

While the Tyche is branded as the MoD’s first “wholly owned” earth imaging satellite, it was launched into orbit with the assistance of a SpaceX Falcon rocket flying out of California.

Black Arrow, Britain’s first satellite launch system, was retired in 1971 — making the U.K. the only country to have developed and then abandoned a satellite launch capability.

Recent efforts to build domestic spaceports are yet to result in any successful launches of satellites into orbit, with Richard Branson’s Virgin Orbit project in Cornwall going bankrupt after a failed mission. 

As a result, satellites owned by the U.K. government — as well as those produced commercially with MoD support — require international assistance to get them into space.

The MoD plans to launch several more spy satellites — including Juno, Oberon, and Titania – in the coming years, all of which appear likely to be launched by SpaceX.

Juno will build on the capabilities of Tyche by also capturing daytime images of the Earth’s surface, “strengthening the U.K.’s Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance capabilities.”

Oberon will use synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) imaging, allowing it to obtain high-resolution imagery during the day and night, providing even deeper surveillance capabilities. 

Another MoD satellite, SKYNET 6A, will enhance space-based communications capabilities and serve GCHQ, [Government Communications Headquarters, a U.K. intelligence agency], and is scheduled for launch by SpaceX in 2027.

The reliance on SpaceX raises questions about how sovereign Britain’s satellite capabilities really are, and prompts concerns about dependency on the company and its CEO, Elon Musk.

Musk, a South African resident of the U.S., was revealed to have discussed ways to oust Starmer before the next election, and has emerged as an ally of far-right activist Tommy Robinson.

Similar concerns have even been acknowledged in Whitehall.

In November 2025, a parliamentary report entitled “The Space Economy: Act Now or Lose Out” observed how Musk’s Starlink had threatened to “cut off users to gain political leverage”.

The report recommended that “future plans for UK space capabilities should reckon with the impacts of U.K. dependence on SpaceX and look to ensure access to diversified and/or sovereign services where possible”.

It added: “The government should conduct research on the potential impacts of loss of access to SpaceX services.”

Satellite Wars

Satellites have become a heavy focus of media attention during the war on Iran. 

Planet Labs, a California-based satellite imagery company, was asked by the U.S. government last month to restrict “access to images of Iran and large parts of the Middle East.”

The request came amid apparent embarrassment within the Trump administration about the heavy losses incurred to its military and intelligence infrastructure in the region, as well as concerns that the platform could be used to enhance Iran’s intelligence capabilities.

Commercial satellite companies have been sent guidance by the U.S. military on what “language and terms to avoid” when describing damage caused to its bases.

Meanwhile, concerns have been raised about Chinese and Russian satellite support to Iran, indicating that the sharing of satellite imagery may be seen as co-belligerency.

On April 15, for instance, it was reported that the IRGC had “secretly acquired” a Chinese military satellite system.

The Financial Times reported that Iranian military commanders “tasked the satellite to monitor key U.S. military sites” before using it “to guide strikes” against them.

Abdullah Farooq is a researcher and independent journalist. His work focuses on mapping military logistics around the world.

John McEvoy is Chief Reporter for Declassified UK. John is an historian and filmmaker whose work focuses on British foreign policy and Latin America. His PhD was on Britain’s Secret Wars in Colombia between 1948 and 2009, and he is currently working on a documentary about Britain’s role in the rise of Augusto Pinochet.

This article is from Declassified UK.

Professor Seyed Marandi to Americans: “I Hope Sincerely that Cooler Heads Prevail.”

On By Jerry AlataloIn Banks and Wars, BRICS, BRICS, Constitutional Law, Corruption, Earth Matters, Economics / Trade, Government Lies / False Flags, History, International Criminal Court, Iran, Middle East, Money / Banks, Solutions, The Media, Truth Reporting, Wall Street Corruption, War and Peace1 Comment

Posted by Jerry Alatalo | April 29, 2026

[Editor’s note: What follows is a partial transcript, followed by the video of Iranian Professor Seyed Marandi’s full powerful, timely public statement. Please share this information far and wide, and, – most especially, if you reside in the United States, share this important information with your fellow Americans. Feel free to share your thoughts and/or responses in the comments. Thank you very much. Peace.]

***

TRANSCRIPT

I want to say something about the human cost here because I think it is important not to lose sight of this in the geopolitical analysis. Over 3,300 Iranians were killed in this conflict.

Among them were 168 young girls.

Scientists were killed alongside their families. Military commanders were killed alongside their families. The Americans and the Israelis struck civilian infrastructure. They struck populated areas. They used a kind of firepower that is designed to maximize destruction. Now look at the other side.

Iran fired thousands of missiles and drones at the military and energy infrastructure of these Gulf states that facilitated the attacks on Iran. And the total number of civilian casualties in Kuwait, the Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar combined is fewer than 20 people. Fewer than 20. You can go and verify this yourself. This is not Iranian television telling you this.

Look it up on any search engine. The disparity in civilian casualties tells you something very important about how these two sides are conducting this conflict. Now, I need to talk about what comes next because this is why this matters to everyone watching this video, not just to people in the region.

Trump has said he may restart military operations within days. His stated intention, if the conflict resumes, is to strike Iranian electrical power generation facilities. I want you to think carefully about what that means. If the Americans strike Iranian power plants, Iran will strike the power plants of the countries that provided their territory and airspace for these attacks.

I am talking about the Gulf States. These are desert countries. They have almost no natural fresh water. They have no agriculture of any significance. Their populations survive because of electricity. Electricity runs their desalination plants. Electricity runs their air conditioning.

In a few weeks, the summer heat in the Persian Gulf will be extreme. We are talking about temperatures that are genuinely life, threatening without climate control. If the power goes out, these countries cannot function. People will have to leave. These states will effectively collapse.

Iran is in a very different situation. Iran has the Albors mountain range running east to west across the north of the country. It has the Zagros mountain range running north to south along the west. Iran has forests. Iran has lakes. Iran has agriculture that covers roughly 90% of domestic food needs. Iran has borders with Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmanistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey, and Iraq. It has access to the Caspian Sea, which connects it to Russia and Central Asia.

[Editor: Alborz Mountains, major mountain range in northern Iran, 560 miles (900 km) long, which serves as a defining landmark both geographically and in Iranian culture. (Britannica.com) The Zagros Mountains are a major mountain range in West Asia, extending approximately 1,600 kilometers across Iran, northern Iraq, and southeastern Turkey. They are known for their geological significance, rich biodiversity, and as a natural barrier that has historically protected various cultures.(Wikipedia)]

Iran has lived under sanctions for decades. It knows how to survive under pressure. The Gulf States do not have this experience. They cannot survive the same level of disruption. And this brings me back to the fundamental question of who can outlast whom.

This is a war of survival for Iran. Every Iranian understands what is at stake. When your country is under attack, when your people are being killed, when your cities are being bombed, you fight. You endure. You find ways to survive that an outside observer might not expect.

For the United States, this is a war of choice. [Editor: Bold added) A war being fought thousands of miles from American territory for reasons that most ordinary Americans do not fully understand at a cost in weapons and money and international reputation that is already becoming very significant.

Iran has not started a war in over 300 years. Since the revolution, three wars have been imposed on Iran. The 8-year war with Iraq, where Saddam Hussein was encouraged, armed, and financed by the West and by these very same Gulf states.

I personally survived two chemical weapons attacks during that war. Those chemical weapons were supplied by Western companies. They were funded by Gulf money. And then this war, Iran did not start any of these conflicts. But Iran survived all of them. So here’s where we are. Trump has a decision to make within days. He can restart military operations. If he does, the Iranians are ready. They have been preparing since the ceasefire began.

They know that Trump has violated agreements before. They are not going to be caught off guard. The underground bases that were never used during the first round of fighting will begin to be used. Production facilities that have been running throughout the ceasefire will provide a continuous supply of munitions and the straight of hormones will remain closed to the countries that facilitated this war.

Or Trump can honor the ceasefire he agreed to. He can lift the siege. He can give Iran what was promised under the agreement and then genuine negotiations can begin on a comprehensive deal that addresses the nuclear question, addresses regional security and gives everyone an off ramp from a crisis that is already beginning to destabilize the global economy in ways that will affect ordinary people everywhere.

The second option was available to Trump several times already. After the ceasefire, when Iran announced it was opening the Strait, that was his off ramp. He could have said, “I lifted the siege. Iran opened the straight. I won. This is a great deal. The best deal anyone has ever made.” He could have said this and walked away with something he could present as a victory. Instead, he escalated. He maintained the siege. And the crisis deepened.

I am not optimistic that he will make the right choice this time. Not because I think Trump is irrational in the way people sometimes say, but because the people around him are feeding him a version of reality that does not match what is actually on the ground. They told him Iran would collapse under military pressure. It did not. They told him the Iranian military would be quickly degraded. It was not. They are now telling him that a few more days of pressure will bring Iran to the table on American terms. I do not believe this is correct.

The Iranians are not going to negotiate under the threat of renewed bombardment. They are not going to make concessions that compromise their national security and their sovereignty because someone in Washington sets a deadline. This is not how Iran works. This is not how any country with real institutional depth and genuine popular support for its resistance works.

What I hope is that there are people in the American system, in the State Department, perhaps in the military establishment, perhaps even in the White House who understand the real situation on the ground and who are telling the president this path does not lead where you think it leads.

Because the alternative to diplomacy here is not a quick military victory. The alternative is a longer conflict with unpredictable escalation, a global energy crisis that will hit the American economy hard and a strategic realignment in the Persian Gulf that will take a generation to undo.

The world is watching. The people of Iran are watching. The people of the region are watching. And they are all wondering whether the United States is capable of making a rational decision when the pressure is on. I genuinely do not know the answer to that question, but I know that the next few days will tell us a great deal about where this situation is heading.

And I hope sincerely that cooler heads prevail because the alternative is something that nobody who has seen war up close, nobody who has survived a chemical attack, nobody who has watched families buried under rubble, would ever wish for anyone.

Nixon, Brando, and Findley Walk Into a Bar Filled With Cell Phone Users…

On By Jerry AlataloIn Artist Activism, Awareness, Earth Matters, Higher Consciousness, Solutions, Spirit Matters, The Media, Truth ReportingLeave a comment

Article republished by Jerry Alatalo | April 27, 2026

(Source: MiddleEastMonitor.com)

Jasim Al-Azzawi

Jasim Al-Azzawi

Jasim Al-Azzawi worked for several media organisations, including MBC, Abu Dhabi TV, and Aljazeera English as a news anchor, program presenter, and Executive Producer. He covered significant conflicts, interviewed world leaders, and taught media courses.

What a President, a Movie Star, a Congressman, and a Cell Phone All Dared to Say

They all, in their own way and in their own time, dared to speak a truth that power worked hard to silence.

Paul Findley (L), Richard Nixon (M), Marlon Brando (R) [Wikipedia]

Paul Findley (L), Richard Nixon (M), Marlon Brando (R) [Wikipedia]

Richard Nixon was not a man given to moral clarity. But in the privacy of the Oval Office, away from the choreography of statecraft, he spoke with a bluntness that history rarely forgives and seldom forge “Let me explain something about the Jewish lobby in this country. They believe that being for Israel first does not mean that you’re putting America second. But an American president”, he insisted, “has to approach it differently. He’s always got to think first of what is best for America. An American president must make a decision that does not, in effect, give the Israelis a blank check”.

Nixon went further. “Every Jewish prime minister that I have known has enlisted American Jews to bring as much pressure as possible in the political process on American presidents”. These were not the words of a fringe voice or a conspiracy theorist. They were the words of the thirty-seventh president of the United States, speaking in the calculated, unsentimental register of realpolitik.

Marlon Brando, the greatest actor of his generation, arrived at similar conclusions through a different door, not the back corridors of power, but the front lots of Hollywood. When asked why he refused to accept the coveted Oscar award, he was unsparing: “Because of the increasing control of Zionists in Hollywood. They own the studios”, he said. “They shape the stories. They decide who gets heard and who doesn’t. I saw it clearly, and I couldn’t be part of that system anymore”. The actor who had made the whole world feel the weight of a man’s grief or ambition had looked behind the curtain and refused, on grounds of conscience, to keep performing.

Then there is Paul Findley, a Republican congressman from Illinois who served twenty-two years in the House of Representatives and, upon losing his seat, did the thing that defeated politicians rarely do: he told the truth about why. In his landmark 1985 book, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, Findley documented with meticulous and damning precision how the American Israel Public Affairs Committee — AIPAC — had become the dominant force shaping Washington’s posture toward the Middle East. The lobby, Findley wrote, had developed a near-perfect system for punishing those who deviated and rewarding those who complied. His conclusion was stark: what passed for American policy toward Israel and the Palestinians was not policy at all. It was capitulation, dressed in the language of alliance.

Starving the militias: Washington’s smartest move against Iran’s proxies

A president. A superstar. A congressman. Three men from entirely different worlds, operating across five decades, arriving at the same uncomfortable coordinate on the map of American power.

For nearly eighty years, that coordinate remained a forbidden zone in mainstream political discourse. The machinery that enforced the silence was formidable: campaign finance, editorial gatekeeping, and the constant threat of the career-ending accusation of anti-semitism.

Legacy media were not merely complicit in the silence; they were, in many ways, its architecture. What Nixon, Brando, and Findley observed about concentrated influence in studios, newsrooms, and legislative chambers was not paranoia. It was a structural description of how certain narratives achieved dominance, and others were quietly buried.

And then came Gaza. And then came the cell phone

No editorial board approved the footage. No network anchor contextualized it before broadcast. No studio executive decided what the audience was ready to see. The images came directly from the rubble of Jabalia, from the corridors of Al-Shifa, from the faces of mothers carrying children in plastic bags. Small children were buried alive under the rubble. Older people are torn limb from limb. Hospitals destroyed. Starvation renders human beings mere bones and skin. The International Criminal Court issued two arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who had threatened to cut off food, electricity, and water to an entire civilian population.

READ: The inevitable decline and fall of Zionism

The military has a phrase for what happened next: “quantity has a quality all of its own”. The sheer, relentless, unmediated volume of images from Gaza did something that decades of scholarship, congressional testimony, and presidential recordings had failed to do. It broke the monopoly of narrative. The tsunami of images horrified the world and compelled people, especially across Europe and in a growing segment of the American public, to say what had long been considered unsayable: enough. Not in our names. No more arms. No more blank cheques. No more diplomatic cover at the United Nations and in every international forum where Israeli impunity had been shielded from consequence.

The journalist and war correspondent Sebastian Junger once observed that war is always a story told by survivors about the dead. For decades, in the American telling of the Israel-Palestine story, the dead were abstractions, statistics, footnotes, and regrettable collateral. The cell phone abolished that abstraction. It put a face, a name, a cry on every casualty. It made the dead impossible to manage.

We aren’t just seeing a shift in opinion; we’re seeing a shift in the architecture of permission. It’s a rewrite of who can speak, in which spaces, without risking their entire career. The young are leading it. The streets of London, Paris, and Chicago are leading it.

Even within the American political class, there is a whispered consensus that Findley described. We’re hearing the literal break in the silence. The unspoken rule that you must censor yourself before you speak is falling apart.

Nixon feared giving Israel a blank check. Brando feared a culture in which certain stories could not be told. Findley documented the machinery by which both fears were, for decades, well-founded. What they could not have foreseen was the device in every pocket that would, finally, make the silencing incomplete.

The cell phone did not create the suffering in Gaza. But it denied the world the comfort of not knowing.

That denial, it turns out, was what justice needed most.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

***

[Editor’s note: Here are the responses from DuckDuckGo’s “Search Assist” on what Nixon, Brando and Findley said and wrote about Israeli political power inside America:

Nixon (1913-1994): Richard Nixon acknowledged the significant influence of the Jewish lobby in the United States, noting its impact on U.S. policy decisions regarding Israel. He emphasized that U.S. security interests should not be subordinated to the interests of Israel due to this lobby’s influence, which he described as stemming from financial contributions and media control.

U.S. Department of State Duck of Minerva

Nixon’s Views on Israeli Political Power in America

Acknowledgment of Influence

Richard Nixon recognized the substantial influence of the Jewish lobby on U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding Israel. He noted that this influence was evident through:

  • Financial contributions to Congress members
  • Control over media narratives

Policy Implications

Nixon expressed concern that the interests of the United States were sometimes subordinated to those of Israel due to this lobby’s power. He articulated several key points regarding this dynamic:

  1. U.S. Security Interests: Nixon insisted that U.S. policy should prioritize national security over political considerations influenced by the Jewish lobby.
  2. Political Pressure: He acknowledged that political pressures from the Jewish community could affect decision-making, stating that he would not allow such pressures to dictate his policies.
  3. Historical Context: Nixon reflected on past U.S. actions, suggesting that while support for Israel was often justified on humanitarian grounds, it sometimes overshadowed the dire conditions faced by Israel’s neighbors.

Summary of Nixon’s Stance

Nixon’s approach can be summarized as follows:

Key PointsDescription
Support for IsraelConsistently supported Israel throughout his political career.
Caution Against Lobby InfluenceWarned against allowing the Jewish lobby to dictate U.S. foreign policy.
Focus on National InterestsEmphasized that U.S. decisions should be based on national security needs.

Nixon’s writings and statements reflect a complex relationship with the influence of the Jewish lobby, balancing support for Israel with a commitment to U.S. national interests.

Brando (1924-2004): Marlon Brando expressed admiration for Jewish culture and acknowledged the significant contributions of Jews to American arts and theater. He also highlighted the need for a Jewish homeland, advocating for the establishment of a state in Palestine, which he believed was essential for the survivors of the Holocaust to live freely. Brando stated that Jews have contributed more to American culture than any other group.

wrmea.org Literary Hub

Marlon Brando’s Views on Jewish Influence and Israeli Political Power

Admiration for Jewish Contributions

Marlon Brando expressed a deep admiration for Jewish culture, stating that Jews have made significant contributions to American arts and theater. He believed that without Jewish influence, American culture would lack much of its richness, particularly in areas like Broadway and popular music.

Advocacy for a Jewish Homeland

Brando was a strong advocate for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. He argued that this was essential for Holocaust survivors to have a place where they could live freely. His activism included participation in the play “A Flag Is Born,” which aimed to raise awareness and funds for Zionist causes, emphasizing the need for a Jewish state.

Remarks on Political Influence

In a notable interview, Brando commented on the influence of Jews in Hollywood and American culture. He suggested that Jewish individuals have played a pivotal role in shaping the best aspects of American culture, which has sparked discussions about their political power and influence within the United States.

Summary of Key Points

AspectDetails
Cultural ContributionsBrando stated that Jews contributed more to American culture than any other group.
AdvocacyHe supported the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine for Holocaust survivors.
Political InfluenceBrando acknowledged the significant role of Jews in shaping American arts and politics.

Brando’s views reflect a complex understanding of Jewish identity and political power in America, highlighting both admiration and advocacy for Jewish rights and representation.

Findley (1921-2019): Paul Findley, in his book “They Dare to Speak Out,” argued that the Israel lobby has significant influence over U.S. government policies, shaping a biased approach towards the Middle East. He highlighted how this influence stifles open debate and criticism of Israel within American political discourse, often leading to repercussions for those who challenge the status quo.

Wikipedia merip.org

Overview of Paul Findley’s Views

Paul Findley, a former U.S. Congressman, expressed significant concerns about the influence of the Israel lobby on American politics in his book “They Dare to Speak Out.” He argued that this lobby plays a crucial role in shaping U.S. foreign policy towards Israel and the Middle East.

Key Points from “They Dare to Speak Out”

Influence on U.S. Policy

  • Findley claimed that the Israel lobby has a strong grip on U.S. government policies, leading to a biased approach towards the Middle East.
  • He noted that this influence often stifles open debate and criticism of Israel within political circles.

Consequences for Dissent

  • Individuals who challenge the pro-Israel narrative face significant repercussions, including political backlash and social ostracism.
  • Findley himself experienced this firsthand, as his criticisms contributed to his defeat in the 1982 Congressional election.

Public Perception and Media

  • He highlighted how the media often reflects a lopsided view favoring Israel, which further complicates public understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
  • Findley emphasized the need for a more balanced discussion regarding U.S. involvement in the Middle East.

Reception of Findley’s Work

Critical Acclaim

  • “They Dare to Speak Out” became a Washington Post bestseller, indicating its impact and resonance with readers.
  • Reviews acknowledged Findley’s access to influential figures, providing original insights into the political dynamics surrounding U.S.-Israel relations.

Controversial Reception

  • Some critics described the book as one-sided, arguing that it presented a narrow perspective on complex issues.
  • Despite this, Findley’s work has been influential in discussions about the role of lobbying in American politics, particularly regarding Israel.

Findley’s writings continue to provoke thought and discussion about the intersection of politics, lobbying, and foreign policy in the United States.

***

Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you very much. Peace.]

Donald Duper’s Delight?

On By Jerry AlataloIn Banks and Wars, BRICS, Earth Matters, Government Lies / False Flags, Jeffrey Epstein, Law Enforcement, Money / Banks, Propaganda, Solutions, The Media, Wall Street Corruption, War and PeaceLeave a comment

Posted by Jerry Alatalo | April 26, 2026

(Image: Screenshot, YouTube)

Donald Trump’s facial expression is often described as “Duper’s Delight”…

(Duper’s delight is the thrill or pleasure some people experience when they successfully deceive or manipulate others, often leading them to repeat such behavior. This emotional high can become addictive and may not necessarily involve harming others directly.)

Was this a legitimate criminal event, or a carefully planned and executed covert staged psychological operation?

Donald Trump’s catastrophic criminal war-of-choice against the Iranian people; growing questions surrounding the Butler, PA assassination attempt on Donald Trump; growing questions surrounding the assassination of Charlie Kirk (Butler, PA and Kirk suspicions raised due to obstruction-of-justice revelations from former Trump Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, who resigned in mid-March as a protest against the Iran War); growing questions surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein Files scandal; increased criticism of Israel by Americans with respect to Benjamin Netanyahu’s unauthorized influence in launching the Iran War … have all been pushed off the front pages to the proverbial “back burner” as a result of the April 25, 2026 incident at the White House Correspondents Dinner.

This writer has no knowledge basis, neither the facts nor the confidence, to assert whether or not what happened at the White House Correspondents Dinner event was a sophisticated, choreographed psychological operation.

Let’s just say it’ll be very interesting indeed to see how this incident evolves and/or develops, – alongside the growing questions regarding the increasingly-controversial events/situations mentioned above, most especially: the reckless, ruthless, unnecessary, criminal war of aggression against the Iranian people.

Here is the question: Will the American people hear directly from the mouth of Cole Tomas Allen, – or will this person join Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro and Charlie Kirk murder suspect Tyler Robinson, both imprisoned-in-controversy during Donald Trump’s second presidency, by (also) effectively having his tongue cut out and becoming completely silenced?

What do you think? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments. Thank you.