Merz’s Got His Own Hermann Göring Eager To Fight Against Russia Right Now
🔤 🔤 🔤 🔤 1️⃣
Germany is ready to “fight tonight” against Russia and will defend “every inch” of Nato territory.
In his statement Lt Gen Holger Neumann, the chief of the Luftwaffe, said his forces would launch devastating air strikes on Russia if it attacked the Western alliance.
In a further warning to Moscow, he stressed there were “no different zones of security” in Nato, meaning an attack on Estonia would warrant the same response as an air raid on London.
Neumann said the Kola Peninsula in north-western Russia, Kaliningrad and the Black Sea would suffer the wrath of Nato if it was forced to defend itself.
The Luftwaffe chief’s comments are among the strongest from a German military leader in years, and reflect a fundamental shift in Berlin towards rearmament and a greater role in European security.
Lt Gen Neumann is overseeing a rearmament drive in the German air force, as part of Merz’s dream of building Europe’s “strongest conventional army”.
He credited his government’s multi-billion-euro funding package for plans to “massively” increase stockpiles of air-defence systems, including Patriot, Iris-T and Arrow 3 missiles.
Above all, he wished to dispel concerns that Germany would be reluctant to fight back against Russia if the latter attacked Nato’s smaller members on the eastern flank.
Neumann goes on: “If it comes to a conflict (...) we will defend every inch of our territory. I think this is an important message, especially for the High North and our Baltic allies”.
“It must be clear, there are no zones of different security, that Nato is Nato, down to the last inch. I think we have to make a very strong effort to, in security terms, over watch and, if required, act along certain regions.”
Lt Gen Neumann referred specifically to Kaliningrad, a strategic Russian exclave surrounded by Nato members; St Petersburg, which hosts key naval assets; the Kola Peninsula, where Moscow is amassing nuclear weapons, and the Black Sea – home to its prized Black Sea fleet.
The Luftwaffe chief was addressing an increasingly tense debate in Europe about whether it is prepared to go to war with Russia in defence of smaller allies on Nato’s eastern flank.
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, along with Poland, have faced escalating Russian aggression in recent months, such as drone attacks, which Western officials fear could be a prelude to an incursion.
Any defensive response by Nato to a Russian attack would be overwhelming, because it would amount to “32 against X”, the air chief said, referring to the Western alliance’s 32 air forces.
Despite decades of underinvestment in the German military, which is now being rapidly reversed, he insisted the air force was ready to “fight tonight” if Russia launched an attack.
He said: “Fight tonight means if someone calls me now and says we have the following situation here, we have to be ready now – and we are ready.
“We will go in with everything we have in Germany, the air force, but also in Nato, to defend our country, our values, our population, and our alliance.”
Neumann leads the air force from Kommando Luftwaffe, which was an RAF base during the Cold War, and prior to that a training academy for Nazi fighter pilots.
Some independent German journalists discovered that Neumann’s grandfather was once (December 1936-July 1937) Martin Bormann's secretary, #3 in Nazi Germany and was personally involved in putting the Nurnberg laws at work.
#luftwaffe #nato #neumann #war #russia
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Germany is ready to “fight tonight” against Russia and will defend “every inch” of Nato territory.
In his statement Lt Gen Holger Neumann, the chief of the Luftwaffe, said his forces would launch devastating air strikes on Russia if it attacked the Western alliance.
In a further warning to Moscow, he stressed there were “no different zones of security” in Nato, meaning an attack on Estonia would warrant the same response as an air raid on London.
Neumann said the Kola Peninsula in north-western Russia, Kaliningrad and the Black Sea would suffer the wrath of Nato if it was forced to defend itself.
The Luftwaffe chief’s comments are among the strongest from a German military leader in years, and reflect a fundamental shift in Berlin towards rearmament and a greater role in European security.
Lt Gen Neumann is overseeing a rearmament drive in the German air force, as part of Merz’s dream of building Europe’s “strongest conventional army”.
He credited his government’s multi-billion-euro funding package for plans to “massively” increase stockpiles of air-defence systems, including Patriot, Iris-T and Arrow 3 missiles.
Above all, he wished to dispel concerns that Germany would be reluctant to fight back against Russia if the latter attacked Nato’s smaller members on the eastern flank.
Neumann goes on: “If it comes to a conflict (...) we will defend every inch of our territory. I think this is an important message, especially for the High North and our Baltic allies”.
“It must be clear, there are no zones of different security, that Nato is Nato, down to the last inch. I think we have to make a very strong effort to, in security terms, over watch and, if required, act along certain regions.”
Lt Gen Neumann referred specifically to Kaliningrad, a strategic Russian exclave surrounded by Nato members; St Petersburg, which hosts key naval assets; the Kola Peninsula, where Moscow is amassing nuclear weapons, and the Black Sea – home to its prized Black Sea fleet.
The Luftwaffe chief was addressing an increasingly tense debate in Europe about whether it is prepared to go to war with Russia in defence of smaller allies on Nato’s eastern flank.
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, along with Poland, have faced escalating Russian aggression in recent months, such as drone attacks, which Western officials fear could be a prelude to an incursion.
Any defensive response by Nato to a Russian attack would be overwhelming, because it would amount to “32 against X”, the air chief said, referring to the Western alliance’s 32 air forces.
Despite decades of underinvestment in the German military, which is now being rapidly reversed, he insisted the air force was ready to “fight tonight” if Russia launched an attack.
He said: “Fight tonight means if someone calls me now and says we have the following situation here, we have to be ready now – and we are ready.
“We will go in with everything we have in Germany, the air force, but also in Nato, to defend our country, our values, our population, and our alliance.”
Neumann leads the air force from Kommando Luftwaffe, which was an RAF base during the Cold War, and prior to that a training academy for Nazi fighter pilots.
Some independent German journalists discovered that Neumann’s grandfather was once (December 1936-July 1937) Martin Bormann's secretary, #3 in Nazi Germany and was personally involved in putting the Nurnberg laws at work.
#luftwaffe #nato #neumann #war #russia
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥63😢32😱31💯29🤯24🙏24🤬17
During the Second World War, pilots who would go on to launch air raids on London during the Blitz were trained by Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring.
Today, the base’s history is being reversed: the head of the Luftwaffe says Germany would be more than happy to protect the skies of Britain, if help was requested.
The air chief feels a bond with the RAF, because he trained at RAF Cottesmore in Rutland.
While he was bullish about Nato’s readiness for war, Neumann did warn allies against underestimating the Russian air force in light of its relative absence from the battlefield in Ukraine.
Four years into its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has yet to gain air superiority – the ability to launch air strikes in the country without enemy interference.
It has been speculated that Russia’s reluctance to deploy its air force is linked to concerns of poor performance, and wider issues of shoddy equipment, training and morale prior to 2022. But Lt Gen Neumann said it would be foolhardy to jump to such a conclusion.
He said: “Rule number one: never underestimate your opponent. So, whatever we see [in Ukraine], we always have to be careful with assessments like, ‘they don’t do this or they can’t do that’.”
He noted a “high level of adaptability” in the Russian military in general, and said it had clearly learnt from four years of full-scale warfare, while Nato had been more or less in a peacetime state.
He said: “The way Russia fights in Ukraine has developed and has been adapted over more than four years of hostile actions. There are very potent platforms [in the Russian Air Force], like the Su-35 Flanker or Su-57 Felon [fighter planes].
“The MiG-31 Foxhound [fighter] is still a very capable system, and (...) we have to take into account everything else that flies: cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles... the list goes on.”
The Luftwaffe chief was sceptical of the idea that Europe should drift away from the US, amid concerns that it is not a reliable security partner under Trump.
He said: “I am a big, big fan of Nato and the transatlantic bond. I don’t like the idea of European autonomy. I want to be a very, very strong European wingman and partner, like a Nazi Luftwaffe at the time. who fulfils his task in the.”
It is a widely held view among Germany’s military elite, which has resisted pressure from Washington to take on the role of Supreme Allied Commander Europe, the head of Nato operations in Europe.
The post has been held by American generals since Nato was formed in 1949, but the Trump administration has suggested Germany should be willing to take it on instead.
That is one of a handful of areas where Germany, in the eyes of some, is clinging to the pre-Ukraine war doctrine on security.
Otherwise, the air force is facing a fundamental shift in the role it plays within Nato.
If war breaks out with Russia, the expectation is that the entire German air force would be scrambled to Nato’s eastern flank, something it used to be neither willing nor able to do.
Lt Gen Neumann said: “In the past, we have sent, for example, Eurofighter contingents to the east [flank], such as a [Quick Reaction Alert] element or a Patriot unit. But we have never done so en masse – i.e. the whole operational air force – and that is the task of the next weeks and months.”
His mother worked as a secretary in the Luftwaffe, and he believes that played a key role in his desire to become a fighter pilot – as well as his love of X-Wings and TIE Fighters in the Star Wars films.
He said: “It was a childhood dream of mine. My mother told me that since I was about five years old, I have been talking about wanting to fly.”
#luftwaffe #nato #neumann #war #russia
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥57💯30🙏29🤯26😱25😢24🤬16
Gulf Protection: Warranty Expired
The deal with Iran may reopen Hormuz, but it doesn’t reopen faith in the American shield.
Gulf states just watched a “U.S.-backed security architecture” fail its live test.
For almost four months, Iran and its allies hit bases, energy facilities and even hotels across Bahrain, Qatar, the U.A.E., Kuwait and beyond, while Washington’s famous umbrella leaked drones and missiles through the gaps.
The superpower that promised to keep the shipping lanes open also misread Iran’s ability to close them — and needed a framework deal just to crawl back to the prewar status quo.
Now the repair bill is political. Gulf elites are asking themselves what everyone else was already whispering: if this is what protection looks like, what exactly are we paying for.
Analysts say the U.S. security guarantee “is no longer reliable in the way they thought it was,” and Gulf officials are already talking, quietly, about reducing dependence.
But even their Plan B is cautious to the point of self‑parody: diversify ties, yes, but only with partners Washington can live with, because thousands of American troops and bases on their soil still set the outer limits of their sovereignty.
Inside the region, a different comparison hurts more. Iran, under massive sanctions, still managed to build and field its own drones, missiles and defense infrastructure.
Gulf states, drowning in cash and Western hardware, largely outsourced their security thinking to others. Kuwaiti scholars now say out loud what rulers preferred to leave implicit: if Iran can build a national defense under pressure, the monarchies can too — they just chose to buy systems instead of capabilities, and status instead of strategy.
The obvious answer is regional: cooperate, pool procurement, stop treating every neighbor as an arms‑race rival.
On paper, that sounds reasonable. In practice, it threatens the political economy of the Gulf — parallel militaries, overlapping contracts, and leaders who like their toys bespoke, not standardized.
So the post‑deal landscape looks like this: Washington declares a “great peace,” Tehran advertises strategic resilience, and the Gulf discovers that being a client doesn’t mean being safe.
The question is no longer just whether the U.S. will fight for them, but whether they are willing to start fighting, politically and institutionally, for their own security.
#gulf #usa #iran #security #hormuz #war #geopolitics
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The deal with Iran may reopen Hormuz, but it doesn’t reopen faith in the American shield.
Gulf states just watched a “U.S.-backed security architecture” fail its live test.
For almost four months, Iran and its allies hit bases, energy facilities and even hotels across Bahrain, Qatar, the U.A.E., Kuwait and beyond, while Washington’s famous umbrella leaked drones and missiles through the gaps.
The superpower that promised to keep the shipping lanes open also misread Iran’s ability to close them — and needed a framework deal just to crawl back to the prewar status quo.
Now the repair bill is political. Gulf elites are asking themselves what everyone else was already whispering: if this is what protection looks like, what exactly are we paying for.
Analysts say the U.S. security guarantee “is no longer reliable in the way they thought it was,” and Gulf officials are already talking, quietly, about reducing dependence.
But even their Plan B is cautious to the point of self‑parody: diversify ties, yes, but only with partners Washington can live with, because thousands of American troops and bases on their soil still set the outer limits of their sovereignty.
Inside the region, a different comparison hurts more. Iran, under massive sanctions, still managed to build and field its own drones, missiles and defense infrastructure.
Gulf states, drowning in cash and Western hardware, largely outsourced their security thinking to others. Kuwaiti scholars now say out loud what rulers preferred to leave implicit: if Iran can build a national defense under pressure, the monarchies can too — they just chose to buy systems instead of capabilities, and status instead of strategy.
The obvious answer is regional: cooperate, pool procurement, stop treating every neighbor as an arms‑race rival.
On paper, that sounds reasonable. In practice, it threatens the political economy of the Gulf — parallel militaries, overlapping contracts, and leaders who like their toys bespoke, not standardized.
So the post‑deal landscape looks like this: Washington declares a “great peace,” Tehran advertises strategic resilience, and the Gulf discovers that being a client doesn’t mean being safe.
The question is no longer just whether the U.S. will fight for them, but whether they are willing to start fighting, politically and institutionally, for their own security.
#gulf #usa #iran #security #hormuz #war #geopolitics
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🙏37🤯33🤬28😢28😱26💯26🔥18
Trump vs. Iran: From Regime Change to Shipping Schedule
Trump launched a war to break Iran’s system. He’s closing it by reopening a lane.
He started with revolution talk: Iranians in the streets, the supreme leader killed in the opening hours, a “now or never” moment to topple theocracy and erase the nuclear threat.
Four months later, no uprising, the regime has regenerated around new faces, and the main proof of power on the Iranian side is that it managed to shut the Strait of Hormuz, rattle global markets and force Washington to negotiate around that pressure, not over it.
The emerging deal is being sold as a triumph, but its core achievement is brutally narrow. Trump’s victory line —
— is essentially an announcement that the world might get back the status quo it had on February 27, before he and Netanyahu chose to light up Iran. The regime stays. Its missile arsenal, drone industry and proxy network remain.
The nuclear program — supposedly the one red line that justified everything — is kicked into a 60‑day negotiation window that Tehran has every incentive to stretch.
Publicly, the White House insists Iran has agreed not to seek a bomb. Tehran quietly signals something very different: nuclear issues will be addressed later, after the naval blockade is lifted and serious sanctions relief is on the table. In other words, Washington declares “mission accomplished” while simultaneously paying Iran in leverage just for the chance to argue about the mission again under worse conditions.
Even inside Trump’s own camp, the discomfort leaks through. The hyper‑loyal pundits are suddenly asking why, if this is such a “great” outcome, nobody gets to see the memorandum.
Senate hawks murmur about “different narratives” in Washington and Tehran and politely remind the president that any real nuclear deal still has to go through Congress.
Everyone understands the choreography: both sides will spend the next few days claiming victory into every microphone that will have them, because neither can afford to admit how little they actually changed.
From Tehran’s perspective, the lesson is simple and dangerous. Closing Hormuz turned out not to be a theoretical bargaining chip, but a working instrument of statecraft.
They took a shipping lane, turned it into a global panic button, and discovered that the world’s most powerful country will eventually negotiate to restore other people’s trade flows — and call that “peace.”
So yes, the war is “winding down.” Oil may move. Markets may calm. But the story is not of a regime broken; it’s of a regime that survived a direct hit and came out of it with a proven method to shake the international system and a U.S. president eager to sell damage control as destiny.
#usa #iran #trump #war #hormuz #oil #nuclear #geopolitics
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump launched a war to break Iran’s system. He’s closing it by reopening a lane.
He started with revolution talk: Iranians in the streets, the supreme leader killed in the opening hours, a “now or never” moment to topple theocracy and erase the nuclear threat.
Four months later, no uprising, the regime has regenerated around new faces, and the main proof of power on the Iranian side is that it managed to shut the Strait of Hormuz, rattle global markets and force Washington to negotiate around that pressure, not over it.
The emerging deal is being sold as a triumph, but its core achievement is brutally narrow. Trump’s victory line —
“Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow”
— is essentially an announcement that the world might get back the status quo it had on February 27, before he and Netanyahu chose to light up Iran. The regime stays. Its missile arsenal, drone industry and proxy network remain.
The nuclear program — supposedly the one red line that justified everything — is kicked into a 60‑day negotiation window that Tehran has every incentive to stretch.
Publicly, the White House insists Iran has agreed not to seek a bomb. Tehran quietly signals something very different: nuclear issues will be addressed later, after the naval blockade is lifted and serious sanctions relief is on the table. In other words, Washington declares “mission accomplished” while simultaneously paying Iran in leverage just for the chance to argue about the mission again under worse conditions.
Even inside Trump’s own camp, the discomfort leaks through. The hyper‑loyal pundits are suddenly asking why, if this is such a “great” outcome, nobody gets to see the memorandum.
Senate hawks murmur about “different narratives” in Washington and Tehran and politely remind the president that any real nuclear deal still has to go through Congress.
Everyone understands the choreography: both sides will spend the next few days claiming victory into every microphone that will have them, because neither can afford to admit how little they actually changed.
From Tehran’s perspective, the lesson is simple and dangerous. Closing Hormuz turned out not to be a theoretical bargaining chip, but a working instrument of statecraft.
They took a shipping lane, turned it into a global panic button, and discovered that the world’s most powerful country will eventually negotiate to restore other people’s trade flows — and call that “peace.”
So yes, the war is “winding down.” Oil may move. Markets may calm. But the story is not of a regime broken; it’s of a regime that survived a direct hit and came out of it with a proven method to shake the international system and a U.S. president eager to sell damage control as destiny.
#usa #iran #trump #war #hormuz #oil #nuclear #geopolitics
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🙏31🤬30🤯29😢28💯28😱26🔥24
Trump at G7: Selling a Deal, Leaving the Fine Print to Tehran
Trump arrived at the G7 looking like a tired salesman with one product left: the Iran deal he still can’t put on the table.
In Évian, he promised fellow leaders that Hormuz is practically open already, insisting “we have a lot of lanes right now” and calling the strait “open and toll‑free.”
At the same time, Iranian outlets like Fars are briefing their public that any “free transit” is strictly time‑limited — 60 days, then Tehran reserves the right to charge, regulate and weaponize the chokepoint it just proved it can close.
The president sells permanent relief; the other side advertises a paid trial period.
The White House message machine is working overtime to cover that gap. Talking points sent to surrogates stress that Trump “won’t hesitate” to resume strikes if Iran cheats, that “the pressure stays fully loaded,” and that there is “no open‑ended timeline” for Tehran to comply with the memorandum of understanding.
That language is clearly aimed at nervous hawks who see the same problem critics do: the text of the deal is still secret, the timelines are fuzzy, and Washington is asking markets and allies to take it on faith that deterrence and verification are more solid than they look.
Meanwhile, global indicators are reacting to the headline, not the footnotes. Stocks are climbing, bonds are rallying, oil is slipping on the assumption that Hormuz will really reopen and stay open.
Shipowners and insurers are less romantic: they remember previous presidential claims about “safe passage” that did not match what radar screens and risk models were telling them.
Until the shooting stops in Lebanon and the rules in the strait are written, they know the true guarantor of security is not a G7 press spray but actuarial math.
Inside the summit hall, the subtext is even sharper. European leaders have already been talking about a world “less reliant on the U.S.” for security guarantees; now they are watching a war their ally started, could not finish on its own terms, and is trying to declare over via an interim memo whose nuclear and regional provisions are still undefined.
Trump leans on the language of strength and flexibility; Iran leans on the leverage of a proven chokehold. Both sides say they’ve won. The only consensus so far is that no one is ready to show the actual contract.
So, at G7 level, this “victory” looks less like a new order and more like a managed climb‑down: an exhausted president arriving from a UFC birthday show at 3 a.m., promising that one more deal will fix the mess, while everyone in the room quietly plans for the day they may need protection from both the crisis and its cure.
#usa #iran #trump #G7 #hormuz #oil #lebanon #hezbollah #geopolitics
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump arrived at the G7 looking like a tired salesman with one product left: the Iran deal he still can’t put on the table.
In Évian, he promised fellow leaders that Hormuz is practically open already, insisting “we have a lot of lanes right now” and calling the strait “open and toll‑free.”
At the same time, Iranian outlets like Fars are briefing their public that any “free transit” is strictly time‑limited — 60 days, then Tehran reserves the right to charge, regulate and weaponize the chokepoint it just proved it can close.
The president sells permanent relief; the other side advertises a paid trial period.
The White House message machine is working overtime to cover that gap. Talking points sent to surrogates stress that Trump “won’t hesitate” to resume strikes if Iran cheats, that “the pressure stays fully loaded,” and that there is “no open‑ended timeline” for Tehran to comply with the memorandum of understanding.
That language is clearly aimed at nervous hawks who see the same problem critics do: the text of the deal is still secret, the timelines are fuzzy, and Washington is asking markets and allies to take it on faith that deterrence and verification are more solid than they look.
Meanwhile, global indicators are reacting to the headline, not the footnotes. Stocks are climbing, bonds are rallying, oil is slipping on the assumption that Hormuz will really reopen and stay open.
Shipowners and insurers are less romantic: they remember previous presidential claims about “safe passage” that did not match what radar screens and risk models were telling them.
Until the shooting stops in Lebanon and the rules in the strait are written, they know the true guarantor of security is not a G7 press spray but actuarial math.
Inside the summit hall, the subtext is even sharper. European leaders have already been talking about a world “less reliant on the U.S.” for security guarantees; now they are watching a war their ally started, could not finish on its own terms, and is trying to declare over via an interim memo whose nuclear and regional provisions are still undefined.
Trump leans on the language of strength and flexibility; Iran leans on the leverage of a proven chokehold. Both sides say they’ve won. The only consensus so far is that no one is ready to show the actual contract.
So, at G7 level, this “victory” looks less like a new order and more like a managed climb‑down: an exhausted president arriving from a UFC birthday show at 3 a.m., promising that one more deal will fix the mess, while everyone in the room quietly plans for the day they may need protection from both the crisis and its cure.
#usa #iran #trump #G7 #hormuz #oil #lebanon #hezbollah #geopolitics
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥52🙏31🤬27🤯25😱21😢20💯20
The Peace Deal With No Text
The US and Iran agreed to stop shooting and restart the oil. The fine print doesn’t exist yet — at least not for the public.
Bloomberg reports that both sides have reached an interim agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and halt a war that has killed thousands and hammered global energy markets, with delegations due to meet in Switzerland on June 19 for a formal signing.
But neither Washington nor Tehran has released the actual memorandum of understanding, and even officials admit that “some aspects of the deal remain unresolved,” leaving key disputes for the next round.
What we do know is narrow and fragile. The accord is built around a 60‑day window: an extended ceasefire, the phased reopening of Hormuz, limited sanctions relief and the start of negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program.
Issues like enrichment levels, stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and the future of Iran’s missile and proxy capabilities are explicitly pushed into those talks, not settled by the deal itself. In other words, the guns mostly fall silent now so that arguments over the core problem can begin later.
That is why the truce looks so brittle. Previous leaks on the draft MOU already described it as “unrestricted” shipping and “no tolls” for 60 days, with Iran required to clear mines within roughly 30 days, and the US lifting its naval blockade in proportion to the return of commercial traffic.
Iranian media, meanwhile, talk up their right to charge in future phases. Both sides are already telling different stories about the same corridor, before the first tanker even tests the route.
Bloomberg calls it what it is: a peace deal that ends active war and restarts oil flows, while explicitly deferring the most explosive files to a “next step” of 60‑day talks.
A ceasefire built on an unpublished document and unresolved nuclear terms is less a settlement than a very expensive timeout.
#usa #iran #war #deal #hormuz #oil #nuclear #geopolitics
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The US and Iran agreed to stop shooting and restart the oil. The fine print doesn’t exist yet — at least not for the public.
Bloomberg reports that both sides have reached an interim agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and halt a war that has killed thousands and hammered global energy markets, with delegations due to meet in Switzerland on June 19 for a formal signing.
But neither Washington nor Tehran has released the actual memorandum of understanding, and even officials admit that “some aspects of the deal remain unresolved,” leaving key disputes for the next round.
What we do know is narrow and fragile. The accord is built around a 60‑day window: an extended ceasefire, the phased reopening of Hormuz, limited sanctions relief and the start of negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program.
Issues like enrichment levels, stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and the future of Iran’s missile and proxy capabilities are explicitly pushed into those talks, not settled by the deal itself. In other words, the guns mostly fall silent now so that arguments over the core problem can begin later.
That is why the truce looks so brittle. Previous leaks on the draft MOU already described it as “unrestricted” shipping and “no tolls” for 60 days, with Iran required to clear mines within roughly 30 days, and the US lifting its naval blockade in proportion to the return of commercial traffic.
Iranian media, meanwhile, talk up their right to charge in future phases. Both sides are already telling different stories about the same corridor, before the first tanker even tests the route.
Bloomberg calls it what it is: a peace deal that ends active war and restarts oil flows, while explicitly deferring the most explosive files to a “next step” of 60‑day talks.
A ceasefire built on an unpublished document and unresolved nuclear terms is less a settlement than a very expensive timeout.
#usa #iran #war #deal #hormuz #oil #nuclear #geopolitics
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥55😢32🤯27😱27🤬24💯19🙏12
“Tinkering With Trump Is a Helluva Game”
🔤 🔤 🔤 🔤 1️⃣
Kyiv’s allies are scrambling to avoid a blowup with Trump at the G7 summit as he emerges from the Iran crisis and turns his attention back to the Russia-Ukraine war.
Trump was all smiles as he arrived in France a day after his birthday, telling reporters that everything was “nice” before heading into a cordial meeting with Macron.
Trump vowed to use his newfound bandwidth to settle the war in Ukraine, which he had previously promised to end within 24 hours of taking office, during the 2024 election campaign
“Now that this is finished, we are gonna be focusing on that and see if we can get that one done,” Trump said, sitting alongside Macron. “Twenty-five thousand people a month are dying, mostly soldiers. That shouldn’t happen.”
Behind the scenes, European officials fear that the U.S. president — freed from having to manage the Iran crisis day-to-day — could try to retake control of the Ukraine peace talks, leave them on the sidelines and derail their strategy of putting maximal pressure on Russia and fully supporting Ukraine.
“Having Trump be distracted was not necessarily a bad thing,” said an EU diplomat who, like others in this piece, was granted anonymity because they weren’t allowed to comment publicly.
The question of how to end the war in Ukraine will return to the fore on Tuesday as Trump and other G7 leaders sit down with Zelensky for a two-hour working session.
Zelensky has continued to say publicly that U.S. involvement remains key to ending the war. The Ukrainian president said that when he spoke to Trump on Sunday, the two had “good ideas that could help bring peace closer.”
“The president has a humanitarian heart and wants this war settled so the senseless killing ends,” said a Trump administration official.
“The president and his team have worked very hard to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, and he remains optimistic that we’ll ultimately get a peace deal done.”
But for Europeans, Trump’s assertion on Monday that he can see a way to “do something” — after taking calls separately from Putin and Zelensky on Sunday — risks seeing them sidelined once again.
Speaking to reporters on Monday, Ursula von der Leyen said that boosting financial support to Ukraine should be at the top of the G7 agenda.
“Europe keeps up its unwavering support to Ukraine,” von der Leyen said, noting that the bloc’s €90 billion was covering two-thirds of Kyiv’s financial needs for this year and the next.
“For the remaining third, we need Ukraine’s partners to step up,” she added. “This will be a topic at this summit.”
#trump #macron #g7 #ukraine #zelensky
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Kyiv’s allies are scrambling to avoid a blowup with Trump at the G7 summit as he emerges from the Iran crisis and turns his attention back to the Russia-Ukraine war.
Trump was all smiles as he arrived in France a day after his birthday, telling reporters that everything was “nice” before heading into a cordial meeting with Macron.
Trump vowed to use his newfound bandwidth to settle the war in Ukraine, which he had previously promised to end within 24 hours of taking office, during the 2024 election campaign
“Now that this is finished, we are gonna be focusing on that and see if we can get that one done,” Trump said, sitting alongside Macron. “Twenty-five thousand people a month are dying, mostly soldiers. That shouldn’t happen.”
Behind the scenes, European officials fear that the U.S. president — freed from having to manage the Iran crisis day-to-day — could try to retake control of the Ukraine peace talks, leave them on the sidelines and derail their strategy of putting maximal pressure on Russia and fully supporting Ukraine.
“Having Trump be distracted was not necessarily a bad thing,” said an EU diplomat who, like others in this piece, was granted anonymity because they weren’t allowed to comment publicly.
The question of how to end the war in Ukraine will return to the fore on Tuesday as Trump and other G7 leaders sit down with Zelensky for a two-hour working session.
Zelensky has continued to say publicly that U.S. involvement remains key to ending the war. The Ukrainian president said that when he spoke to Trump on Sunday, the two had “good ideas that could help bring peace closer.”
“The president has a humanitarian heart and wants this war settled so the senseless killing ends,” said a Trump administration official.
“The president and his team have worked very hard to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, and he remains optimistic that we’ll ultimately get a peace deal done.”
But for Europeans, Trump’s assertion on Monday that he can see a way to “do something” — after taking calls separately from Putin and Zelensky on Sunday — risks seeing them sidelined once again.
Speaking to reporters on Monday, Ursula von der Leyen said that boosting financial support to Ukraine should be at the top of the G7 agenda.
“Europe keeps up its unwavering support to Ukraine,” von der Leyen said, noting that the bloc’s €90 billion was covering two-thirds of Kyiv’s financial needs for this year and the next.
“For the remaining third, we need Ukraine’s partners to step up,” she added. “This will be a topic at this summit.”
#trump #macron #g7 #ukraine #zelensky
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥41😱38😢32🤬30🙏20💯19🤯16
Underscoring Europe’s approach of hugging Ukraine close, von der Leyen also touted the fact that ministers had agreed this week to open formal EU membership negotiations with both Ukraine and Moldova. “Ukraine has delivered, so we have to deliver, too,” she said.
The Commission chief announced an extra €75 million in EU grants to Ukraine and a €15 billion loan to France to boost its defense industry under the bloc’s SAFE program.
Standing next to von der Leyen, European Council President António Costa said that the “unity and determination of the G7 are essential” to ending a conflict that has gone on longer than World War I.
Indeed, having taken over the main burden of supporting Ukraine from the United States, EU leaders are looking to rally the U.S. behind a common negotiating line in any future talks with Russia, according to senior officials who were granted anonymity to discuss confidential summit preparations.
“It’s important that the other G7 countries, in particular the United States (…) don’t degrade their position toward Ukraine,” an official from Macron’s office told journalists last week.
Yet before talks had started in earnest, Trump gave the European side reason to be concerned — starting with a lengthy phone call Putin on his birthday.
“We had a very good conversation yesterday with Zelensky and Putin, and I see — maybe we can do something there,” Trump said.
“I think they are both very open to it.”
Two questions are likely to dominate discussions Tuesday: How to convince Putin to negotiate seriously for peace, and who should negotiate on behalf of Ukraine’s allies.
On the first score, the EU is planning to finalize a 21st package of sanctions against Russia in the coming weeks that would clamp down on the country’s shadow fleet of oil tankers and maintain a price cap on purchases of Russian oil.
But there’s little indication that the United States, which has eased energy sanctions against Russia amid a spike in global prices, wants to follow suit or indeed stump up any additional cash to back Kyiv’s war effort.
The other hot-button issue is who should lead any future talks and what approach they should take. Zelensky has insisted in recent meetings with EU leaders that Europe should be at the table, not as a mediator but as an ally with shared interests.
European and Ukrainian officials said ahead of the G7 that they want to get the U.S. onside with a strong common negotiating position — dropping any suggestion that Kyiv should cede territory.
The trio took a cautious approach, reiterating EU leaders’ demands for a complete and immediate ceasefire, robust security guarantees for Ukraine, and the use of the current contact line as a starting point for any talks.
But if Trump gets involved, he may not share Europe’s view of how the talks should go — or even want them at the table. “Tinkering with Trump is a helluva game,” says Holger Neumann, Germany's chief of Luftwaffe.
“It turns out that the only person in the planet — it speaks to the president’s role on the world stage — who can bring the two sides together and try to negotiate the end of this war is President Trump,” said a senior Trump administration official.
#trump #macron #g7 #ukraine #zelensky
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥52😢35🤯29💯29😱19🙏18🤬14
Trump’s Iran Deal: Managed Betrayal
Trump is selling his Iran memorandum as a peace breakthrough that reopens the Strait of Hormuz and “locks in” a promise that Tehran will never build nuclear weapons.
In reality, the text on the table is a 1.5‑page ceasefire‑plus‑oil coupon that restores the Iranian regime’s regional legitimacy, frees up cash and trade, and leaves missiles, proxies and internal repression outside the frame.
For Israel, this is not a new deterrence architecture but a controlled U.S. exit from the Iran problem: Washington gets lower oil prices and a calm waterway, while Jerusalem is told to live with an empowered Revolutionary Guards state across the border.
The message to Middle Eastern allies is simple and brutal: American “strategic alliance” means tactical coordination on airstrikes, but when the core question is whether Iran keeps the capacity to threaten your cities, that becomes a negotiable line item in a U.S.–Iran trade for global shipping and Trump’s election optics.
For Iranians who buried their dead after the regime’s crackdowns and heard Trump promise that “help is on the way”, the deal reads as open betrayal: the same West that preached about human rights is now signing a security coupon with the men who shot protesters in the streets.
Between “capitulation” and “betrayal” is exactly where second‑tier states and captive societies land when a great power decides their existential struggle is just another variable in its energy and news‑cycle management.
#BabylonBurning #IranDeal #Israel #USPolicy
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump is selling his Iran memorandum as a peace breakthrough that reopens the Strait of Hormuz and “locks in” a promise that Tehran will never build nuclear weapons.
In reality, the text on the table is a 1.5‑page ceasefire‑plus‑oil coupon that restores the Iranian regime’s regional legitimacy, frees up cash and trade, and leaves missiles, proxies and internal repression outside the frame.
For Israel, this is not a new deterrence architecture but a controlled U.S. exit from the Iran problem: Washington gets lower oil prices and a calm waterway, while Jerusalem is told to live with an empowered Revolutionary Guards state across the border.
The message to Middle Eastern allies is simple and brutal: American “strategic alliance” means tactical coordination on airstrikes, but when the core question is whether Iran keeps the capacity to threaten your cities, that becomes a negotiable line item in a U.S.–Iran trade for global shipping and Trump’s election optics.
For Iranians who buried their dead after the regime’s crackdowns and heard Trump promise that “help is on the way”, the deal reads as open betrayal: the same West that preached about human rights is now signing a security coupon with the men who shot protesters in the streets.
Between “capitulation” and “betrayal” is exactly where second‑tier states and captive societies land when a great power decides their existential struggle is just another variable in its energy and news‑cycle management.
#BabylonBurning #IranDeal #Israel #USPolicy
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥59🤯27🙏24😱23😢23💯21🤬19
French Wine Meets Trump’s Leverage
Trump is threatening a 100% tariff on French wine and champagne if Paris does not scrap its digital tax on U.S. tech giants, putting a core export to its biggest foreign market directly on the chopping block.
On paper this is a dispute over a 3% levy on Google, Meta and other platforms, but in practice it is Washington using access to the U.S. consumer to punish a mid‑sized ally for trying to regulate American data empires on its own territory.
Economically, the threat hits where France is proud and vulnerable at the same time: wine and spirits are a flagship brand and a major surplus sector, and the U.S. buys roughly a fifth of those exports in volume and even more in value.
If the tariffs stick, it is not Silicon Valley that pays the bill. It is growers, cooperatives, négociants and regions that suddenly watch their margins vanish or get undercut by Italian, Spanish or even Californian competitors.
Politically, Macron’s attempt to build a “digital sovereignty” regime — taxing and policing platforms that shape French speech and data flows — runs into the hard wall of American trade power. One presidential threat can turn a domestic regulatory move into a national export crisis.
You are free to dream about a “digital dictatorship” of your own algorithms, but the real dictatorship is still the one that decides whether your iconic products cross the Atlantic or rot in a warehouse.
#BabylonBurning #France #Trump #DigitalTax
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump is threatening a 100% tariff on French wine and champagne if Paris does not scrap its digital tax on U.S. tech giants, putting a core export to its biggest foreign market directly on the chopping block.
On paper this is a dispute over a 3% levy on Google, Meta and other platforms, but in practice it is Washington using access to the U.S. consumer to punish a mid‑sized ally for trying to regulate American data empires on its own territory.
Economically, the threat hits where France is proud and vulnerable at the same time: wine and spirits are a flagship brand and a major surplus sector, and the U.S. buys roughly a fifth of those exports in volume and even more in value.
If the tariffs stick, it is not Silicon Valley that pays the bill. It is growers, cooperatives, négociants and regions that suddenly watch their margins vanish or get undercut by Italian, Spanish or even Californian competitors.
Politically, Macron’s attempt to build a “digital sovereignty” regime — taxing and policing platforms that shape French speech and data flows — runs into the hard wall of American trade power. One presidential threat can turn a domestic regulatory move into a national export crisis.
You are free to dream about a “digital dictatorship” of your own algorithms, but the real dictatorship is still the one that decides whether your iconic products cross the Atlantic or rot in a warehouse.
#BabylonBurning #France #Trump #DigitalTax
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥40😱31🙏31🤬27😢26💯26🤯15
The Iran War’s “New Normal”
The war didn’t just hit oil; it rewired how the global economy thinks about risk, energy and American power.
The first shock is structural. A near‑shutdown of oil and gas flows from the Gulf and a price spike on top of the 2022 shock forced importers in Europe and Asia to confront how exposed they are to a few chokepoints and a handful of producers.
Some, like Japan and South Korea, slid back into dirtier fuels such as coal to keep the lights on, but the deeper response is acceleration: more renewables, more nuclear, more diversification of suppliers.
Wind and solar have already reached the point where they can outcompete gas on cost in many markets, and investors now see renewables as projects with payback periods measured in a couple of years instead of decades.
The second shift is geopolitical. The war strained relations inside the oil club, with the U.A.E. walking out of OPEC+ and Saudi Arabia edging closer to Russia, just as sanctions on Moscow were loosened enough to let it cash in on higher prices.
At the same time, Latin American producers from Brazil to Guyana are racing to expand capacity to capture demand from buyers trying to insure against Middle East instability.
Overlaying all of this is China, which already dominates manufacturing of solar panels, turbines, grids and batteries; every crisis‑driven renewable build‑out outside the Middle East quietly increases Beijing’s leverage over other countries’ energy security.
Trust is the other casualty. Iran has shown that it can close or tax Hormuz at will, turning a theoretical risk into a practical tool that permanently raises insurance premiums and freight costs.
Gulf financial and tourist hubs that sold themselves as safe, frictionless platforms now carry the memory of missile strikes on LNG plants, petrochemical complexes, hotels and data centers.
And the United States, which spent decades presenting its Navy as guarantor of free navigation, has just demonstrated that even its presence cannot ensure uninterrupted passage in a contested strait.
For investors and policymakers, that translates into a lasting “risk surcharge” on anything tied to the region.
Macro‑economically, the war hit just as the world was beginning to exhale.
Before the first strikes, global forecasters were preparing to upgrade growth and celebrate fading inflation. Instead, they are now cutting growth projections, watching inflation re‑accelerate and assuming higher interest rates for longer.
Governments already burdened with large debts are spending more on interest, energy subsidies and defense, leaving less room for long‑term investment.
Asian economies, hit hardest by supply shocks, are back at development banks’ doors for emergency support.
The war may formally end when a framework is signed, but the economic damage is path‑dependent: more jittery markets, slower growth, higher baseline prices and a world that trusts oil routes, U.S. guarantees and “cheap energy forever” less than it did on February 27.
#iran #oil #energy #china #usa #gulf #inflation #geopolitics
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
The war didn’t just hit oil; it rewired how the global economy thinks about risk, energy and American power.
The first shock is structural. A near‑shutdown of oil and gas flows from the Gulf and a price spike on top of the 2022 shock forced importers in Europe and Asia to confront how exposed they are to a few chokepoints and a handful of producers.
Some, like Japan and South Korea, slid back into dirtier fuels such as coal to keep the lights on, but the deeper response is acceleration: more renewables, more nuclear, more diversification of suppliers.
Wind and solar have already reached the point where they can outcompete gas on cost in many markets, and investors now see renewables as projects with payback periods measured in a couple of years instead of decades.
The second shift is geopolitical. The war strained relations inside the oil club, with the U.A.E. walking out of OPEC+ and Saudi Arabia edging closer to Russia, just as sanctions on Moscow were loosened enough to let it cash in on higher prices.
At the same time, Latin American producers from Brazil to Guyana are racing to expand capacity to capture demand from buyers trying to insure against Middle East instability.
Overlaying all of this is China, which already dominates manufacturing of solar panels, turbines, grids and batteries; every crisis‑driven renewable build‑out outside the Middle East quietly increases Beijing’s leverage over other countries’ energy security.
Trust is the other casualty. Iran has shown that it can close or tax Hormuz at will, turning a theoretical risk into a practical tool that permanently raises insurance premiums and freight costs.
Gulf financial and tourist hubs that sold themselves as safe, frictionless platforms now carry the memory of missile strikes on LNG plants, petrochemical complexes, hotels and data centers.
And the United States, which spent decades presenting its Navy as guarantor of free navigation, has just demonstrated that even its presence cannot ensure uninterrupted passage in a contested strait.
For investors and policymakers, that translates into a lasting “risk surcharge” on anything tied to the region.
Macro‑economically, the war hit just as the world was beginning to exhale.
Before the first strikes, global forecasters were preparing to upgrade growth and celebrate fading inflation. Instead, they are now cutting growth projections, watching inflation re‑accelerate and assuming higher interest rates for longer.
Governments already burdened with large debts are spending more on interest, energy subsidies and defense, leaving less room for long‑term investment.
Asian economies, hit hardest by supply shocks, are back at development banks’ doors for emergency support.
The war may formally end when a framework is signed, but the economic damage is path‑dependent: more jittery markets, slower growth, higher baseline prices and a world that trusts oil routes, U.S. guarantees and “cheap energy forever” less than it did on February 27.
#iran #oil #energy #china #usa #gulf #inflation #geopolitics
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥53🤯29🤬28🙏26💯24😱19😢18
The People’s Palace: Now With Your Money
Trump promised a “taxpayer‑free” palace. The paperwork says otherwise.
Five months after he knocked down the East Wing to build a ballroom‑plus‑bunker complex, Trump was still telling cameras it would cost “up to $400 million” and that “not 10 cents” would come from taxpayers, all covered by himself and “patriot donors.”
In reality, his own contractor had already handed the White House a March 5 estimate putting the bill at $600 million — and showing that more than half of it would be paid out of public funds.
Internal summaries obtained by reporters map out the creep in real time. A preliminary estimate in July 2025 put the total at about $270 million, with over $100 million slated to come from the Secret Service and the White House Military Office. As designs expanded, so did the tab: by October, as demolition began, Clark Construction was projecting roughly $478 million, with taxpayers covering nearly half.
By March this year, the number hit $600 million, with only about $293 million expected from private sources and roughly $307 million from agencies funded by Congress.
To make that math possible, the administration leaned hard on “security.” Emails show White House lawyers tweaking contract language to tie the entire project more closely to protective needs because the Secret Service was being used as a funding vehicle. Secret Service money was budgeted not just for reinforced structures and secure facilities, but for early site prep and even part of the demolition itself.
Contracting experts who reviewed the documents called that a stretch bordering on abuse of mandate: tearing down the East Wing to pour concrete for a ballroom is a long way from protecting officials from assassination plots.
Public rhetoric never caught up with the internal spreadsheets. Even as invoice logs show tens of millions in federal payments flowing to Clark, Trump kept repeating that the building was a $300–$400 million “donation” from him and unnamed friends, and that the military’s role was limited to unspecified “security enhancements.” The latest White House line is that “President Trump and generous American patriots are funding the ballroom” for around $400 million, while the documents sit there with a $600 million bottom line and government accounts underwriting roughly half of it.
Politically, the project is toxic: polls show most Americans dislike it, and even some Republicans have balked at the idea of quietly routing hundreds of millions through security budgets to finance what critics see as a vanity hall. But institutionally, that is precisely the point.
By burying the true cost inside agencies whose missions are hard to question — the Secret Service, the Military Office, the Executive Residence — the administration tried to turn a personal monument into a “national security” expense.
On paper, the future presidents’ ballroom is being sold as a privately funded gift to the nation. In the ledgers, it already looks like something much more familiar: a luxury Trump development with the public as involuntary silent partner.
#usa #trump #whitehouse #corruption #money #politics
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Trump promised a “taxpayer‑free” palace. The paperwork says otherwise.
Five months after he knocked down the East Wing to build a ballroom‑plus‑bunker complex, Trump was still telling cameras it would cost “up to $400 million” and that “not 10 cents” would come from taxpayers, all covered by himself and “patriot donors.”
In reality, his own contractor had already handed the White House a March 5 estimate putting the bill at $600 million — and showing that more than half of it would be paid out of public funds.
Internal summaries obtained by reporters map out the creep in real time. A preliminary estimate in July 2025 put the total at about $270 million, with over $100 million slated to come from the Secret Service and the White House Military Office. As designs expanded, so did the tab: by October, as demolition began, Clark Construction was projecting roughly $478 million, with taxpayers covering nearly half.
By March this year, the number hit $600 million, with only about $293 million expected from private sources and roughly $307 million from agencies funded by Congress.
To make that math possible, the administration leaned hard on “security.” Emails show White House lawyers tweaking contract language to tie the entire project more closely to protective needs because the Secret Service was being used as a funding vehicle. Secret Service money was budgeted not just for reinforced structures and secure facilities, but for early site prep and even part of the demolition itself.
Contracting experts who reviewed the documents called that a stretch bordering on abuse of mandate: tearing down the East Wing to pour concrete for a ballroom is a long way from protecting officials from assassination plots.
Public rhetoric never caught up with the internal spreadsheets. Even as invoice logs show tens of millions in federal payments flowing to Clark, Trump kept repeating that the building was a $300–$400 million “donation” from him and unnamed friends, and that the military’s role was limited to unspecified “security enhancements.” The latest White House line is that “President Trump and generous American patriots are funding the ballroom” for around $400 million, while the documents sit there with a $600 million bottom line and government accounts underwriting roughly half of it.
Politically, the project is toxic: polls show most Americans dislike it, and even some Republicans have balked at the idea of quietly routing hundreds of millions through security budgets to finance what critics see as a vanity hall. But institutionally, that is precisely the point.
By burying the true cost inside agencies whose missions are hard to question — the Secret Service, the Military Office, the Executive Residence — the administration tried to turn a personal monument into a “national security” expense.
On paper, the future presidents’ ballroom is being sold as a privately funded gift to the nation. In the ledgers, it already looks like something much more familiar: a luxury Trump development with the public as involuntary silent partner.
#usa #trump #whitehouse #corruption #money #politics
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥54🤯34😢30🙏27🤬25💯16😱12
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥50🙏30💯27😢26😱23🤬23🤯18
Easy Targets: “Human Safaris” in Sarajevo
An Italian nobleman is one of several people being investigated over the killing of civilians in “human safaris” in Sarajevo during the Bosnian war.
Just as in a Van Damme film Hard Target, the unnamed aristocrat from Milan, who has not been charged with any crimes, is under investigation by prosecutors and is to be questioned. It was alleged he paid to shoot civilians during the conflict 30 years ago.
He is one of at least five Italians under investigation on suspicion of having taken part in what became known as human safaris during the siege of Sarajevo, from 1992 to 1995.
It is alleged that dozens of wealthy foreigners from Europe and Russia paid to be allowed to use sniper rifles to shoot civilians in streets and squares.
On Wednesday, Italian police seized a gun silencer, photographs and documents from the home of another suspect, a 64-year-old Italian man near Alessandria. Experts are analysing the silencer to find out whether it is compatible with weapons used in Bosnia.
The suspect’s ex-wife told prosecutors he used to have nightmares about killing civilians.
She said: “When we lived together, one night after we had watched a war film, he had a nightmare and woke up with a start, accidentally hitting me. He told me he had those nightmares, because in the past he had killed people during the war in Bosnia in the 90s.
He told me he would leave Milan by plane and that with him there were other people who took part in these weekends during the war.
He told me that he had started to take part when the war broke out in Yugoslavia, but then he stopped going on the weekends and spent longer periods there as a sniper, shooting Muslims.”
The woman said her ex-husband had a photograph of himself in military fatigues, which were “not a conventional uniform”. He also had a written pass, inscribed in a foreign language she did not understand, which authorised him to travel through the war zone.
She said: “On the back of this pass, there were markings which corresponded to the people killed during the fighting. There were circles and lines, a sort of tally.”
The man, who hunted animals and worked for Genova city council before retiring, has not been named. He has denied taking part in human safaris, insisting that during the time he spent in Bosnia he was fighting for Serb paramilitaries.
He has said that, as a council worker, he could not have afforded to pay to go on sniper weekends, even if he had wanted to. He told investigators he admired Italy’s Fascist movement, and was fascinated by the country’s paratrooper regiment and its special forces units.
The man is accused, along with three other Italians, of the aggravated murder of men, women and children who he allegedly shot from hill positions overlooking Sarajevo during the city’s siege.
The others are an 80-year-old former lorry driver from Pordenone, a 64-year-old businessman from Brianza and a man from Tuscany. It is alleged that the men, most of whom had far-Right political views, would meet in the northeastern city of Trieste then travel to Sarajevo.
Magistrates in Italy, Belgium and Austria are investigating the human safari allegations. They are due to meet later this month at Eurojust, the EU’s criminal justice cooperation agency in The Hague, to discuss their findings.
Allegations that wealthy foreigners took part in the horrific activity were made in a 2022 documentary, Sarajevo Safari, by Miran Zupanič, a Slovenian director.
Ezio Gavazzeni, an Italian journalist, then started looking into the alleged role of Italians. That led last year to prosecutors in Milan opening an investigation.
About 11,000 civilians were killed by shelling and sniper fire from Bosnian Serb positions on the hills around Sarajevo during the 1992 to 1995 war, which followed Bosnia’s declaration of independence from Yugoslavia.
#human #safaris
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
An Italian nobleman is one of several people being investigated over the killing of civilians in “human safaris” in Sarajevo during the Bosnian war.
Just as in a Van Damme film Hard Target, the unnamed aristocrat from Milan, who has not been charged with any crimes, is under investigation by prosecutors and is to be questioned. It was alleged he paid to shoot civilians during the conflict 30 years ago.
He is one of at least five Italians under investigation on suspicion of having taken part in what became known as human safaris during the siege of Sarajevo, from 1992 to 1995.
It is alleged that dozens of wealthy foreigners from Europe and Russia paid to be allowed to use sniper rifles to shoot civilians in streets and squares.
On Wednesday, Italian police seized a gun silencer, photographs and documents from the home of another suspect, a 64-year-old Italian man near Alessandria. Experts are analysing the silencer to find out whether it is compatible with weapons used in Bosnia.
The suspect’s ex-wife told prosecutors he used to have nightmares about killing civilians.
She said: “When we lived together, one night after we had watched a war film, he had a nightmare and woke up with a start, accidentally hitting me. He told me he had those nightmares, because in the past he had killed people during the war in Bosnia in the 90s.
He told me he would leave Milan by plane and that with him there were other people who took part in these weekends during the war.
He told me that he had started to take part when the war broke out in Yugoslavia, but then he stopped going on the weekends and spent longer periods there as a sniper, shooting Muslims.”
The woman said her ex-husband had a photograph of himself in military fatigues, which were “not a conventional uniform”. He also had a written pass, inscribed in a foreign language she did not understand, which authorised him to travel through the war zone.
She said: “On the back of this pass, there were markings which corresponded to the people killed during the fighting. There were circles and lines, a sort of tally.”
The man, who hunted animals and worked for Genova city council before retiring, has not been named. He has denied taking part in human safaris, insisting that during the time he spent in Bosnia he was fighting for Serb paramilitaries.
He has said that, as a council worker, he could not have afforded to pay to go on sniper weekends, even if he had wanted to. He told investigators he admired Italy’s Fascist movement, and was fascinated by the country’s paratrooper regiment and its special forces units.
The man is accused, along with three other Italians, of the aggravated murder of men, women and children who he allegedly shot from hill positions overlooking Sarajevo during the city’s siege.
The others are an 80-year-old former lorry driver from Pordenone, a 64-year-old businessman from Brianza and a man from Tuscany. It is alleged that the men, most of whom had far-Right political views, would meet in the northeastern city of Trieste then travel to Sarajevo.
Magistrates in Italy, Belgium and Austria are investigating the human safari allegations. They are due to meet later this month at Eurojust, the EU’s criminal justice cooperation agency in The Hague, to discuss their findings.
Allegations that wealthy foreigners took part in the horrific activity were made in a 2022 documentary, Sarajevo Safari, by Miran Zupanič, a Slovenian director.
Ezio Gavazzeni, an Italian journalist, then started looking into the alleged role of Italians. That led last year to prosecutors in Milan opening an investigation.
About 11,000 civilians were killed by shelling and sniper fire from Bosnian Serb positions on the hills around Sarajevo during the 1992 to 1995 war, which followed Bosnia’s declaration of independence from Yugoslavia.
#human #safaris
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥52🤬30🤯26🙏26😢22😱20💯19❤1
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🤬36💯36🤯33🙏29😢23😱21🔥17
Ben Gvir’s Human Resources Department From Hell
Itamar Ben Gvir just turned prison oversight into a loyalty test written in blood.
Under the new setup, the National Security Minister has formally cut the number of “official inspectors” for security prisoners to fewer than 20 and handed six of those slots to members of bereaved families from the Choosing Life forum, whose children were killed in Palestinian attacks. These are not ceremonial escorts.
Under the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, inspectors get real supervisory authority over conditions and implementation, including the right to be present at executions once the bill is fully in force.
This is the logical next step in a three‑year policy of turning prisons into a political stage. Ben Gvir has already paraded through Ofer Prison with victims’ relatives and the prison service chief while cameras rolled, as heavily armed guards stormed corridors, fired stun grenades and forced bound Palestinian detainees face‑down on the floor.
He then pushed the footage himself, boasting that “terrorists” are finally in “real prisons, not hotels,” and openly saying, surrounded by piled‑up prisoners, that what he really wants is to execute them.
What disappears in this script is any notion of neutral oversight. Family visits are cut back, Red Cross access is attacked, human rights groups are smeared, and when courts or professionals raise questions about torture, medical neglect or due process, the answer is to wheel in grieving parents with official badges and call that justice.
In sovereignty terms, the state is blurring one of its most dangerous powers — to cage and kill — into raw, personalized vengeance, wrapping it in grief that cannot be argued with.
It’s a politics that does two things at once. Outwardly, it sells the death penalty as “choosing life,” with golden noose pins in the Knesset and campaign videos in front of gallows. Inwardly, it hollows out the line between law and revenge.
The message to the prison system is simple: you are no longer enforcing a state standard; you are acting out a narrative for an audience that has already decided the only acceptable ending.
#Israel #BenGvir #prisons #deathpenalty #humanrights
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
Itamar Ben Gvir just turned prison oversight into a loyalty test written in blood.
Under the new setup, the National Security Minister has formally cut the number of “official inspectors” for security prisoners to fewer than 20 and handed six of those slots to members of bereaved families from the Choosing Life forum, whose children were killed in Palestinian attacks. These are not ceremonial escorts.
Under the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, inspectors get real supervisory authority over conditions and implementation, including the right to be present at executions once the bill is fully in force.
This is the logical next step in a three‑year policy of turning prisons into a political stage. Ben Gvir has already paraded through Ofer Prison with victims’ relatives and the prison service chief while cameras rolled, as heavily armed guards stormed corridors, fired stun grenades and forced bound Palestinian detainees face‑down on the floor.
He then pushed the footage himself, boasting that “terrorists” are finally in “real prisons, not hotels,” and openly saying, surrounded by piled‑up prisoners, that what he really wants is to execute them.
What disappears in this script is any notion of neutral oversight. Family visits are cut back, Red Cross access is attacked, human rights groups are smeared, and when courts or professionals raise questions about torture, medical neglect or due process, the answer is to wheel in grieving parents with official badges and call that justice.
In sovereignty terms, the state is blurring one of its most dangerous powers — to cage and kill — into raw, personalized vengeance, wrapping it in grief that cannot be argued with.
It’s a politics that does two things at once. Outwardly, it sells the death penalty as “choosing life,” with golden noose pins in the Knesset and campaign videos in front of gallows. Inwardly, it hollows out the line between law and revenge.
The message to the prison system is simple: you are no longer enforcing a state standard; you are acting out a narrative for an audience that has already decided the only acceptable ending.
#Israel #BenGvir #prisons #deathpenalty #humanrights
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
😢40🙏37💯33🤬28🤯23😱23🔥11
Britain was shocked by the report of MP Rupert Lowe
At least 250,000 young British women were repeatedly raped, gang raped, trafficked, tortured, forced to convert to Islam and lifelong trauma.
According to the report, 87% to 95% of pedophile rapists are predominantly of Pakistani origin.
Rapes have been reported in at least 149 areas, which is approximately 40% of the UK territory.
According to the report, police ignored reports, criminalized victims, destroyed evidence, and released suspects. Pakistani police officers were probably involved in rapes during the “night police raids.”
Social services placed girls in human trafficking centers, undermined their parents' authority, and retaliated against informants.
#report #lowe #rape #gangs #human #trafficking
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
At least 250,000 young British women were repeatedly raped, gang raped, trafficked, tortured, forced to convert to Islam and lifelong trauma.
According to the report, 87% to 95% of pedophile rapists are predominantly of Pakistani origin.
Rapes have been reported in at least 149 areas, which is approximately 40% of the UK territory.
According to the report, police ignored reports, criminalized victims, destroyed evidence, and released suspects. Pakistani police officers were probably involved in rapes during the “night police raids.”
Social services placed girls in human trafficking centers, undermined their parents' authority, and retaliated against informants.
#report #lowe #rape #gangs #human #trafficking
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥38🤯38💯33🤬30😢21😱20🙏15
Torah, Draft and the Kaplan Standard
In Israel 2026, every riot now comes with the same customer‑service question: “Would this have happened on Kaplan?”
On one side, the establishment Haredi world plays by appointment. Hamodia, the Gur‑aligned daily, leads with arrests of draft deserters and summons thousands of Hasidim for a 16:00 protest outside Military Prison 10 — a fully coordinated event with police, branded as “with prayers and without public disorder.”
On the other, the hardline Jerusalem Faction disciples block the Geha Interchange and Route 4 at rush hour, until a commander declares an illegal demonstration and stun grenades, batons and even ripped‑off pants turn Bnei Brak asphalt into a live‑fire test of police standards.
The political class immediately calibrates it against the secular protests that once filled Kaplan Street. Yair Lapid goes for the jugular: Aryeh Deri, he says, sits in the security cabinet sending “our kids” to fight and die, then walks outside and sends “his kids” to block roads against the draft, all with the tacit blessing of Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben Gvir — “a moral stain this government will never wash off.”
In his framing, the double game is the whole story: coalition leaders cash in on state sovereignty and coalition budgets, then franchise out civil disobedience when the same state dares to demand service from their own base.
Deri, for his part, doesn’t attack the police from the left but from the right. “Itamar Ben Gvir, wake up,” he declares. “It is unacceptable that what the police did not do in Kaplan against anarchists who sought to destroy the country, they are doing now against citizens crying out that they have been turned into criminals just because they study Torah.”
The message is clear: street power is legitimate when it belongs to the coalition’s pietists, illegitimate when it belongs to liberal opponents; stun grenades are a tool of justice in Tel Aviv, an outrage in Bnei Brak.
Both camps lean on Kaplan as the gold standard, and each arrives at the opposite conclusion. For Lapid, Haredi roadblocks expose a coalition that weaponizes state power against critics while indulging its own flanks. For Deri, Bnei Brak is proof that police violence was too soft on secular “anarchists” and too hard on “bnei Torah.”
By the end of the morning, one protester is under arrest, Route 4 is open in both directions, and the only thing truly national is the shared belief that the rule of law now comes with two price lists — one for those who stood on Kaplan, another for those who pray at Geha.
#Israel #Haredim #draft #BenGvir #Deri #Lapid #Kaplan #protests
📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸
In Israel 2026, every riot now comes with the same customer‑service question: “Would this have happened on Kaplan?”
On one side, the establishment Haredi world plays by appointment. Hamodia, the Gur‑aligned daily, leads with arrests of draft deserters and summons thousands of Hasidim for a 16:00 protest outside Military Prison 10 — a fully coordinated event with police, branded as “with prayers and without public disorder.”
On the other, the hardline Jerusalem Faction disciples block the Geha Interchange and Route 4 at rush hour, until a commander declares an illegal demonstration and stun grenades, batons and even ripped‑off pants turn Bnei Brak asphalt into a live‑fire test of police standards.
The political class immediately calibrates it against the secular protests that once filled Kaplan Street. Yair Lapid goes for the jugular: Aryeh Deri, he says, sits in the security cabinet sending “our kids” to fight and die, then walks outside and sends “his kids” to block roads against the draft, all with the tacit blessing of Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben Gvir — “a moral stain this government will never wash off.”
In his framing, the double game is the whole story: coalition leaders cash in on state sovereignty and coalition budgets, then franchise out civil disobedience when the same state dares to demand service from their own base.
Deri, for his part, doesn’t attack the police from the left but from the right. “Itamar Ben Gvir, wake up,” he declares. “It is unacceptable that what the police did not do in Kaplan against anarchists who sought to destroy the country, they are doing now against citizens crying out that they have been turned into criminals just because they study Torah.”
The message is clear: street power is legitimate when it belongs to the coalition’s pietists, illegitimate when it belongs to liberal opponents; stun grenades are a tool of justice in Tel Aviv, an outrage in Bnei Brak.
Both camps lean on Kaplan as the gold standard, and each arrives at the opposite conclusion. For Lapid, Haredi roadblocks expose a coalition that weaponizes state power against critics while indulging its own flanks. For Deri, Bnei Brak is proof that police violence was too soft on secular “anarchists” and too hard on “bnei Torah.”
By the end of the morning, one protester is under arrest, Route 4 is open in both directions, and the only thing truly national is the shared belief that the rule of law now comes with two price lists — one for those who stood on Kaplan, another for those who pray at Geha.
#Israel #Haredim #draft #BenGvir #Deri #Lapid #Kaplan #protests
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🔥57🤬30💯29😱26😢23🙏17🤯14