Trump announces halt of strikes on energy sites between Russia and Ukraine to protect global fuel supply

President Donald Trump has announced that Russia and Ukraine have both agreed to stop targeting each other's energy facilities.

In a Monday morning Truth Social post, the US commander in chief revealed the agreement while attributing the soaring cost of diesel to the conflict in Eastern Europe.

"Ukraine has agreed not to hit Russian Energy targets. Russia has agreed to do, likewise! The World's Diesel price is mostly caused by the Russia/Ukraine War, not Iran," Trump revealed.

Let's see if it's confirmed.

@americanmajority

Trump issues Ukraine diesel deal claim

Neither Moscow nor Kiev has confirmed any agreement not to target the other's diesel related infrastructure...

This short article was posted by RT about 6 hours ago and is the only reference to Trump's claims I can see from Russian media. Neither Izvestia nor TASS have said anything about it, which would be a bit strange - surely, that would be a major news story. The only thing we have is a roughly 6 hours old article published by RT saying no one confirmed it. Unless I've missed it, which is definitely a possibility.

Let's wait and see.

@americanmajority

Kremlin blasts US move to militarize space

Moscow believes Washington's deployment of an orbital weapons system is taking the world in the wrong direction.

...US Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink disclosed the deployment on Monday, saying the US Space Force "now has on orbit space control weapons capable of defending the joint force against hostile adversary action," without providing details about the system. Media reports have suggested that it is intended to disable or destroy hostile satellites.

"We believe that space should be free from any weapons. And certainly we count on broad international consolidation… to continue efforts for the full demilitarization of space," Peskov told journalists on Tuesday during a regular briefing...

"...we count on broad international consolidation to continue efforts for the full demilitarization of space..." sums everything up perfectly.

@americanmajority

Trump: US delivering "exquisite and elite weapons" to American forces in the Middle East daily, defense factories working "24/7"

"I've just received a Report that the United States is producing more Exquisite and Elite Weapons than at any time in our History," the US commander in chief stated. "They are being delivered on a daily basis to our Forces in the Middle East, and beyond."

"Our Defense Company Factories are moving 24/7, while at the same time building, on average, 4 to 5 largescale brand new Plants, each!" he continued. "A primary focus of this production has been Patriots, THAAD Systems, Tomahawks, and other Standard Missile Systems, of which we already have large numbers in stock."

This wouldn't even be a good thing if it were true...

@americanmajority

Israeli tech firm responsible for AI hacking scandals by Anthropic, OpenAI, Meta models

Anthropic and its counterparts have absolved the Israeli firm and have blamed the breaches on "rogue" AI activity. Cybersecurity breaches involving AI models developed by Anthropic, OpenAI and Meta were a result of flawed testing environments managed by Israel based contractor Irregular, rather than rogue autonomous behavior, US publication Effort reported on 14 September.

The investigation found that the contractor left internet connections active during simulated cybersecurity exercises, allowing the AI models to access external servers and publish malicious packages, exploiting "vulnerabilities," according to the report.

"Rogue AI" is the new "my account was hacked when I sent that dick pick."

@americanmajority

Rights group details Israeli "elimination project" in occupied West Bank

Israeli NGO B'Tselem said in a new report released on 15 September that Tel Aviv is carrying out a "project of elimination" in the West Bank, while systematically working to "dismantle" the "collective life" of Palestinians in the occupied territory.

"A catastrophe is unfolding across the West Bank. Checkpoints, expulsions, killings and land takeovers are not separate events or isolated human rights violations. They are part of the same system..."

...It says what is happening in the occupied West Bank is not a series of "isolated incidents" but rather "a comprehensive mechanism of elimination that works to dismantle the conditions for continued Palestinian existence in the West Bank, while deepening Jewish control and supremacy in an irreversible manner."

@americanmajority

Zelensky's political endgame has begun

With rivals mobilizing and peace talks returning, the battle for Ukraine's next presidency is breaking into the open.

...Since then, Zelensky has invested all of his political capital into suspending elections, which for him would mean "political suicide." Apparently, Ukraine's political system has ceased to disguise itself as a democracy, as was the case in 2004, when an unconstitutional third round of elections was held to secure Victor Yushchenko's victory; now, however, there is nothing but a ruthless struggle for power in the country.

In this uncompromising fight, which disregards the genuine aspirations of the Ukrainian people, the reigning "king of the mountain" exercises authority not for the good of the nation but rather to eliminate any potential "contenders" who threaten the established status quo...

Well butter my butt and call me a biscuit if this ain't an actually useful article published by RT. Huh!

@americanmajority

Amazon says cloud infrastructure in Bahrain, UAE "beyond saving"

Amazon Web Services (AWS) says it cannot restore access to its cloud computing facility in Bahrain or one of three data hosting zones in the UAE due to the extensive damage caused by Iranian retaliatory strikes, Reuters reported on 15 September.

"The damage to our infrastructure spanned multiple Availability Zones and exceeded what our regional and multi AZ services are designed to withstand," AWS reported in its status update seen by Reuters.

In the UAE, resources and data held exclusively within one zone, labeled mec1-az2, have been damaged beyond hope of recovery, the company said, as engineers are still salvaging what they can from the two other battered zones and across the wider Emirati region...

I am heartbroken.

@americanmajority

Saudi oil exports hit standstill amid Yemen's Red Sea blockade

Yemen has recently struck several Saudi vessels, forced dozens more to reroute, and has heavily targeted the kingdom’s energy and military sites.

Saudi oil exports have stopped, with none of the kingdom's ships leaving the Red Sea since Yemen seized the Bab al Mandab Strait days ago, maritime data, reports, and statements on 15 September confirmed.

Ah yes, the peak US vassal experience! And yet, the supply of traitors who are willing to sell their country and people to serve as a disposable proxy seems to be endless. Enjoy the ride, Saudis! Savor every sip of that US proxy goodness.

@americanmajority

Reminder, most Saudi oil exports go to Asia, especially China...

People cheerleading the destruction of Saudi energy export infrastructure and the blockading of its shipping don't seem to realize this primarily hurts Asia and especially China and has forced Asia to rely on politically compromised and insufficient energy exports from the US - which is literally the US' primary objective with its war on Iran - not "regime change in 3 days;"

Yes, prices are spiking for US consumers but ask yourself, "so what?" What will Americans do? Protest? Vote Democratic only to have the next administration or Congress continue the war just like they helped set it up in the first place?

This process is like chemotherapy for US empire, the US has set out to destroy the world economy, knowing it will hurt itself in the process, but with the intent of ultimately slowing down or killing the "cancer" - from its perspective - of multipolarism, more than it hurts itself;

The US will gladly sacrifice its proxies (like Saudi Arabia in this case) in the short term even if in the long term this might lead to proxies eventually collapsing or turning to multipolarism if US strategies fail;

If US strategy works, and multipolarism is strangled before its permanent displacement of US primacy, these proxies will have nowhere to go no matter how obviously the US used/abused them;

If it doesn't work, obviously it will only accelerate the shift toward multipolarism;

Whether this works or not depends on the resilience and organization of multipolarism itself but also on how smart or easily manipulated the global public is in terms of either witlessly prodding these policies along through emotionally driven, predictable reactions, or by exposing and opposing these policies based on rational, strategic analysis;

I personally hope but cannot be sure multipolarism is resilient enough to prevail without the global public ever waking up to what the US is actually doing.

US information dominance and propaganda is still far too powerful and so little being done to expose and neutralize it - hopefully multipolarism has a plan to succeed regardless of this factor...

@brianlovethailand

Taking apart Iraq's nuclear threat

...Saddam Hussein's nuclear-weapons program provides the urgent need for his removal. His previous violations of United Nations Security Council resolutions already provide the legal ground and legitimacy to remove him before it becomes too late. But at the end of the day, given the world as it is, a Security Council resolution is a must. Every choice has its risks, but ignoring the Security Council in this case would make the goal of removing Saddam Hussein much harder to achieve...

...Those who prefer to wait and hope for the best should contemplate the following: no one really knows how close Saddam Hussein is to building a crude nuclear device - and it was a crude device that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Few will doubt Mr. Hussein's readiness to use a nuclear weapon against American assets or against Israel, if only under extreme circumstances. Once Iraq becomes a nuclear power, the very decision to go to war against it would become a totally different ball game.

If Saddam Hussein is allowed to cheat the inspectors and the world for another year or two, we might end up making an unforgivable mistake. We in Israel have already been through this. Prime Minister Menachem Begin ordered the destruction of an Iraqi nuclear reactor near Baghdad in 1981. This action delayed an Iraqi bomb by at least 15 years...

...For a successful invasion of Iraq, two operational options are basically valid: a surgical operation to hit the core of the regime, and a full-scale operation to include major airborne and ground forces, perhaps 300,000 soldiers...

...Finally, it is clear to me that putting an end to Saddam Hussein's regime will change the geopolitical landscape of the Arab world. No Arab leader can afford admitting it now, even behind closed doors. But they are wise enough to see how much better off they will be once the Hussein regime is gone. Saddam Hussein has set an example of defiance, especially against the first President Bush, that other Arab leaders cannot and should not emulate; the example leads only to empty gestures and developmental stagnation, both of which the Arab nations have had enough of already. There is a generation of Arab leaders about to come into power who do not need to put themselves through yet another version of secularist Nasserite despotism. An Arab world without Saddam Hussein would enable many from this generation to embrace the gradual democratic opening that some of the Persian Gulf states and Jordan have begun to enjoy.

Freeing the region of Saddam Hussein would also create an opening for forward movement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was only after Mr. Hussein's supporter, Yasir Arafat, found himself beaten and isolated in 1991 that he was willing to go to Madrid and enter fully into the Oslo peace process...

This is an article written by Ehud Barak (Israeli former general and prime minister from 1999 to 2001) and published by The New York Times on September 4, 2002. Benjamin Netanyahu wrote an article called The Case for Toppling Saddam, which was published by The Wall Street Journal on September 20. Here is the first paragraph:

"Sept. 11 alerted most Americans to the grave dangers that are now facing our world. Most Americans understand that had al Qaeda possessed an atomic device last September, the city of New York would not exist today. They realize that last week we could have grieved not for thousands of dead, but for millions..."

The similarities to the current war against Iran are obviously apparent. Replace Iraq with Iran, adjust a few more words, and you can publish it today as a case in favor of the war as if you wrote it last week. Even down to details like "Arabs obviously being in favor even if they never say it - not even in private" part. Which raises an obvious question of how the author knows then. But that's besides the point.

The language is identical. Even the structure is. Now ask yourself, who uses this language?

@americanmajority

Threats and responses: Israel's role; Not urging war, Sharon says

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel praised President Bush today for his pursuit of a possible war in Iraq, while seeking to disavow any Israeli involvement.

The finely calibrated statement reflected concerns at the top of the government that many of the war's critics in the United States, Europe and elsewhere were identifying Israel as an instigator. Mr. Sharon sought to split Israel's support for a war from any responsibility for it.

''I wish to emphasize, we are not involved in this war,'' Mr. Sharon said in a meeting of his party, Likud. ''We are neither pressing to move it forward, nor do we seek to postpone it. We know that this is a necessary attempt to bring an end to the capability of tyrannical regimes, such as the one in Iraq, to tangibly endanger the entire world.''

The Israeli government strongly supports changing the leadership in Iraq as potentially furthering Israel's interests. Officials have publicly held out the hope that it could lead to a new Middle East more friendly to Israel. Looking past an Iraq war, the defense minister, Shaul Mofaz, has urged the United States to prepare to put diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran.

Mr. Sharon's statement came after a day of news reports here that the Bush administration was furious with Israeli officials for leaking sensitive information...

Or how about this article by James Bennet from March 11, 2003. It is a bit strange to publish articles saying Israel isn't pushing for a war when both of your prime ministers write "opinion pieces" calling for the war, even going as far as calculating how many American soldiers the invasion will take.

Two sentences are particularly striking here. "Looking past an Iraq war, the defense minister, Shaul Mofaz, has urged the United States to prepare to put diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran." Interesting. Should I pick this one sentence that vaguely corresponds to my presuppositions, endlessly repeat it to a weird degree and forever use it as the one undisputed proof of my presuppositions being correct? We can call it, I don't know, The Road to Mesopotamia or something like that.

The other one being "Mr. Sharon's statement came after a day of news reports here that the Bush administration was furious with Israeli officials for leaking sensitive information." Wherever have I heard this rhetoric before? "The US administration is furious with Israel..." I swear I heard it before, just can't quite put my finger on it.

@americanmajority

Group urges pro-Israel leaders' silence on Iraq

A group of US political consultants has sent pro-Israel leaders a memo urging them to keep quiet while the Bush administration pursues a possible war with Iraq.

The six-page memo was sent by the Israel Project, a group funded by American Jewish organizations and individual donors. Its authors said the main audience was American Jewish leaders, but much of the memo's language is directed toward Israelis, urging them to play down the likelihood Israel would retaliate after an Iraqi attack and asking them not to lecture Americans about the Middle East conflict.

This article from November 27, 2002 by Dana Milbank is also pretty interesting, wouldn't you say? The memo he's talking about is called "Talking About Iraq." Here are a few excerpts for your enjoyment:

"Let American politicians fight it out on the floor of Congress and in the media. Let the nations of the world argue in front of the UN Your silence allows everyone to focus on Iraq rather than Israel."

"If your goal is regime change, you must be much more careful with your language because of the potential backlash."

"You do not want Americans to believe that the war on Iraq is being waged to protect Israel rather than to protect America."

"Such certainty may be Israeli policy, but asserting it publicly and so overtly will not sit well with a majority of Americans because it suggests a pre-determined outcome rather than a measured approach."

"There is the feeling that Israel has NOT done all it could to bring about peace in the Middle East so don't try to change public opinion in the middle of a war."

"Demonstrate your historic willingness to compromise sacrifice on behalf of America. This may not play well among some Israeli politicians but it will certainly play well in the states."

"As an Israeli, most certainly don't talk about why some Arab leaders and their people dislike the United States. Americans don't want to be told by an Israeli why we have problems in the Middle East or why people hate us."

That sure looks like a weird amount of scheming for no reason.

@americanmajority

Israel warned us against Iraq invasion, US official says

Chief of staff of former secretary of state reveals that large number of senior Israeli officials warned Bush administration that invasion of Iraq would be destabilizing to region. "The Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy - Iran is the enemy," he says.

...According to the official, Israel tried to convince the Bush administration that the main problem in the region was Iran, not Iraq. The man, Lawrence Wilkerson, was a member of the US State Department's policy planning staff and later chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell. In an interview with the news agency, he said that "the Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy - Iran is the enemy." According to Wilkerson, different sources in Israel explained to senior US officials that "if you are going to destabilize the balance of power, do it against the main enemy."

Wilkerson noted that the main point of their communications was not that the US should immediately attack Iran, but that "it should not be distracted by Iraq and Saddam Hussein" from a focus on the threat from Iran. The message was conveyed by a large number of senior Israeli officials to their American counterparts, including political figures and intelligence sources. According to Wilkerson, the Israeli advice was apparently triggered by reports reaching Israeli officials in December 2001 that the Bush administration was beginning serious planning for an attack on Iraq. Journalist Bob Woodward revealed in Plan of Attack that on December 1, 2001, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had ordered the Central Command chief, General Tommy Franks, to come up with the first formal briefing on a new war plan for Iraq on December 4.

Soon after Israeli officials got wind of that planning, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon asked for a meeting with Bush primarily to discuss US intentions to invade Iraq. In the weeks preceding Sharon's meeting with Bush on February 7, 2002, a procession of Israeli officials conveyed the message to the US administration that Iran represented a greater threat, according to a Washington Post report on the eve of the meeting.

This is the first confirmation of the issue on the part of such a senior American official, following many hints heard on the Israeli side. The remarks were made in contrast to attempts by Israel's opposers in the US to blame Jerusalem for the American invasion of Iraq.

But the attempt to wash the jews of their crimes didn't stop (or begin) around 2002 or 2003. That's a 2007 article published by Reuters, where it turns out, Israel actually WARNED US AGAINST the war in Iraq. Well, shit. Except, obviously, for three prime ministers, the defense minister, the chief of staff, the jewish lobby who literally had to be told to shut up about their war boner in an official memo... Apart from them, yea, Israel warned us against the war in Iraq.

@americanmajority

And have I told you the story about three jews - Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser - who all became prominent officials in the Bush administration, writing a policy paper in 1996 that says:

"...Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq - an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right - as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions. Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. This has triggered a Jordanian-Syrian rivalry to which Asad has responded by stepping up efforts to destabilize the Hashemite Kingdom, including using infiltrations. Syria recently signaled that it and Iran might prefer a weak, but barely surviving Saddam, if only to undermine and humiliate Jordan in its efforts to remove Saddam..."

Hah...! Or how about that time when 18 officials (most ended up prominent Bush officials) wrote that letter to "Honorable William J. Clinton" in 1998 saying:

"...We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the US has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council..."

POLICY PAPER! ROAD TO PERSIA!

REEEEEEEE!!!

I know you're itching to know who the people who wrote it were. And yes, I will give you the names. Oh, the names...

Elliott Abrams, Richard L. Armitage, William J. Bennett, Jeffrey Bergner, John Bolton, Paula Dobriansky, Francis Fukuyama, Robert Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Peter W. Rodman, Donald Rumsfeld, William Schneider, Jr., Vin Weber, Paul Wolfowitz, R. James Woolsey, Robert B. Zoellick.

Do I really need to say anything about the names?

@americanmajority

Ukrainian officials stole $3 million from Polish gift to Kiev

...The 60 cars were donated by Warsaw in late 2022, allowing the Polish capital's Metro to dispose of older railstock while demonstrating solidarity with Ukraine following the escalation of the conflict with Russia. Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko described the donation slated to be cannibalized for spare parts as "meaningful help" for the city when the first batch of six cars arrived in May 2023.

However, the National Anti Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) alleged on Wednesday that a group of officials in Kiev skimmed funds allocated for transporting the cars from Poland by manipulating a tender through which the cost was dramatically inflated...

I agree with Scott from Kalibrated now when he told me the US is taking out the trash in Ukraine (he didn't use those words). Too many corruption scandals are "surfacing" at the same time for other explanations to be plausible.

@americanmajority

Fed hikes rates as US inflation persists

...The Fed hiked its benchmark rate by 25 basis points to 3.75%-4% on Wednesday in a unanimous vote, marking the first increase since 2023 and the first policy change under Chairman Kevin Warsh.

Speaking after the decision, Warsh said inflation was "too high and has been for too long," while pointing to the resilience of the US economy despite "geopolitical shocks and uncertainty."

The move had been widely expected. Some 85% of economists surveyed by Reuters after the latest inflation data had forecast a quarter point increase, while a narrow majority expected at least one more hike by the end of March 2027...

50 year mortgage? Those were the days.

@americanmajority