The Friday Edition

Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

February 12, 2026

Helping to Heal a Broken Humanity (Part 71)

The Hague, 13 February 2026 | If you know of a decisive story, tell the world! We're still searching.

In this article, Alexander Dugin interprets Western power as a gravitational system organized around a hidden nucleus, toward which all elite trajectories inevitably converge.

The Epstein network serves as the central hub of the collective West. Surrounding it are various spheres—politics, culture, media, fashion, movies, education, markets, science, and intelligence agencies—that act like layers of gravity, pulling the masses towards the island.

The true network of the global Western elite centers on Epstein. Regardless of where you begin — whether in education, business, fashion, politics, science, media, prostitution, or crime – achieving real success in your career leads you to Epstein Island.

The elite are those who access the core—like Epstein’s island or his Zorro land—where you can be both victim and predator. In this space, roles often overlap.

Please continue reading ...

_________________________

Editor’s Note | World Leaders of Goodwill?

To preserve our sanity, we must believe there are world leaders of goodwill.

Where?

Who are they?

How do they affect us?

What exactly are they doing for us? Or, are they all or just some on the Yellow Brick Road to the Wizard of Oz, as suggested by renowned philosopher Alexander Dugin?

Our Guest Editor, Mr. Glenn Boyd Smith, profoundly asks each of us why we’re letting the superfluities hit the fan.

Can we unify, or are we doomed to divide?

Who divides us? Only some of the world leaders?

_________________________

GUEST EDITORIAL | Leaders of Goodwill ...

By Glenn Boyd Smith
Guest Editor
13 February 2026

An Open Letter to World Political Leaders of Goodwill: WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF PRESIDENT TRUMP AND COMPANY

People around the world are affected by the capable and incapable behaviors of our leaders. We urgently need effective actions to shield us from the reckless actions of those who do not align with universal and developmental values and are not dedicated to practicing human rights.

“President Trump acts as he does because we are not fulfilling our responsibilities." This brief, straightforward summary of a complex issue points to the root of the chaos caused by a leader's unskillful behavior. The root cause, whether driven by good intentions or malicious motives, is the persistent attachment to a primitive mindset that sees aggression as the main solution to problems and a means to achieve personal and political aims. Although conflicting narratives and statements about President Trump often prompt questions about his mental fitness, it is his outwardly aggressive behaviors that should concern us most. His political actions, combined with the resulting fear, urgency, chaos, anger, division, and frustration, highlight a critical global issue: how to prevent and manage harmful behavior.

This crucial presenting problem is also our most urgent and vital need. It connects to all of the urgent global problems and crises. Humanity is not managing its affairs effectively, and at the root of this is our failure to skillfully handle destructive, aggressive behavior.

Our way of life is mostly unstable, often spiraling out of control, and our social institutions are degrading faster than they are advancing. This decline is driven by habitual unskillful behavior we often adopt. Much of the damage to our socio-political and cultural groups results from random acts of ill will. Our political, legislative, and judicial organizations have the necessary resources and personnel to foster ongoing social and political growth and enhance the quality of life. We also possess everything needed to manage and curb our destructive, unskillful actions.

However, although these organizations or structures exist at the personal, local, or national level, they lack the necessary binding powers or jurisdiction at a global or international level to effectively promote proper socio-political growth and development.

Codified, legally binding legislation designed to serve humanity and guide us in managing misguided human behavior does not exist within a global legal system. Instead, it remains mostly theoretical or exists as fragmented legal frameworks. Although various organized initiatives in these fields do exist, they usually operate within covenants driven by motives such as self-preservation, protection, conquest, control, or competition.

Without comprehensive global agreements with enforceable rules covering all aspects of health and welfare, as mentioned in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, genuine progress in human potential remains out of reach. Without binding international laws, we cannot undertake essential actions or fulfill our responsibilities as humans. On a global level, we need legal frameworks similar to those that guide individual nations' socio-political conduct, established through democratic decision-making and negotiated treaties. The chance to create a democratic international governing body with enforcement and military capabilities may slip away if we do not act now.

The urgent need for what appears obvious and vital is unmistakably seen in the ongoing global conflicts, which require international intervention. Our collective leadership’s failure to create effective international consultation, binding laws, and actions for peace and sustainable development seems to enable destructive behaviors, such as the political maneuvers of the USA guided by a president who appears to be out of control.

The existence of the United Nations with a ‘veto’ system can enable destructive and malicious actions. Current talks about a global alliance need to move from discussion to action, urging all willing nations to adopt this proposal and establish a plan quickly. Implementing this proposal can help stop some damaging behaviors. Permitting ongoing destructive acts by President Trump and others holding humanity hostage risks creating a situation where unification becomes impossible. It is vital to act now and work toward forming a united world governance to address this urgent issue.

Respectfully submitted,

Glenn Boyd Smith

Building the Bridge Foundation, The Hague

A Way to Get to Know One Another and the Other

AI SAFETY RESEARCHER QUITS WITH A CRYPTIC WARNING

“The world is in peril,” the head of Anthropic’s Safeguards Research Team wrote in his resignation letter

Mrinank Sharma © LinkedIn

HomeWorld News
11 February 2026

Edited by Abraham A. van Kempen

A leading AI safety researcher left Anthropic, warning of ‘interconnected crises’ and plans to go ‘invisible for a period of time.”

Mrinank Sharma, an Oxford graduate and leader of the Safeguards Research Team at the Claude chatbot maker, shared his resignation letter on X Monday, reflecting on "our situation.”

“The world is in peril. And not just from AI, or bioweapons, but from a whole series of interconnected crises unfolding in this very moment,” Sharma wrote to colleagues.

The departure happens amid rising tensions at the San Francisco AI lab, which is racing to develop powerful systems while warning of potential risks to humanity.

Reports indicate a widening gap between Anthropic and the Pentagon as the military seeks AI for autonomous weapons targeting without the company's safeguards.

READ MORE: Pentagon wants killer AI without safeguards – Reuters

Sharma’s resignation shortly after Anthropic launched Opus 4.6, an upgraded version of the Claude model, hints at internal safety disagreements.

“Throughout my time here, I’ve repeatedly seen how hard it is to truly let our values govern our actions,” he wrote.

“I’ve seen this within myself, within the organization, where we constantly face pressures to set aside what matters most, and throughout broader society too.”

The researcher’s team was formed over a year ago to tackle AI security issues such as ‘model misuse and misalignment,’ bioterrorism, and ‘catastrophe prevention.”

READ MORE: Tech boss issues warning over ‘unimaginable’ power of AI

Sharma is proud of his work on AI defense and his project on AI's impact on humanity. He plans to return to the UK to study poetry and become invisible for a while.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei warned about risks from the very AI technology his company is developing. In a nearly 20,000-word essay last month, he stated that AI systems with "almost unimaginable power" are "imminent" and will challenge our human identity.

Amodei warned about 'autonomy,' where AI might 'go rogue and overpower humanity,' and suggested that it could cause 'a global totalitarian dictatorship' through AI surveillance and weapons.

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited and annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

JEFFREY SACHS: U.S. ECONOMIC COERCION & THE DEATH OF THE DOLLAR

Prof. Jeffrey Sachs explains that using coercive economic measures destabilizes the global system and becomes counterproductive as the world adapts to a future without the US.

Prof. Glenn Diesen’s conversation with Prof. Jeffrey Sachs analyzes U.S. regime-change strategies, emphasizing the use of economic pressure and covert operations to weaken targeted governments rather than through direct territorial expansion.
It highlights recent examples in Venezuela and Iran, detailing how the U.S. has sought to overthrow left-wing regimes through interventions such as supporting coups, instigating "color revolutions," and imposing sanctions.
The discussion covers the involvement of organizations like the CIA and various U.S. institutions, and notes how American corporate interests, particularly in oil, play a significant role in these strategies.

Watch the Video Here (34 minutes, 25 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
11 February 2025

Economic Statecraft and Its Consequences: A Conversation with Professor Jeffrey Sachs Exploring the Shift from Diplomacy to Economic Coercion and Its Global Impacts

Welcome back. Professor Jeffrey Sachs discusses the potential for economic statecraft to be overused and to coerce. Thanks for joining. While it can be a powerful tool—using money, trade, finance, and market access—it needs careful handling.

The Shift from Diplomacy to Economic Coercion

Economic statecraft replaces traditional diplomacy with coercion. What are the long-term risks of relying on economic coercion over negotiated multilateral solutions?

Reframing Economic Statecraft

Economic statecraft is a euphemism for coercion, meaning waging war through economic means. Though it can imply promoting development, cooperation, trade, or stabilization, it's often used cynically.

The U.S. Approach to Economic Statecraft

Using US economic tools to weaken other countries' economies is a harmful misinterpretation. I find this upsetting because my career aims to help economies grow and improve people's well-being.

In Davos, Treasury Secretary Scott Besant said 'economic statecraft' aims to weaken Iran's economy to stir unrest and push regime change.

Economic Statecraft as Warfare

This shows economic power as destructive warfare, aiming to weaken economies instead of fostering well-being or profit, unlike efforts that build prosperity and reduce poverty, which take years.

It's disturbing to see these instruments cause suffering, health crises, higher infant and child mortality, and reduced life expectancy. Their extensive use, now as euphemisms or tools of American influence, is condemnable.

Historical Context: American Imperialism and Regime Change

Understanding the American Imperium requires recognizing its unique form of imperialism, distinct from those of the 19th-century British and French empires. The U.S. mostly uses indirect control, rarely invading territories directly. Instead, it often intervenes to install puppet regimes, a key strategy in American foreign policy.

For most of history, nations used diplomacy and deterrence instead of overthrowing governments. But from the 1890s, the U.S. shifted tactics, overthrowing the Hawaiian monarchy and winning the Spanish-American War to expand its empire through regime change.

The idea originates from the U.S. history of regime changes, conflicts, and wars, especially with Mexico in the 19th century. The overseas empire expanded later. Under the Roosevelt Corollary, Theodore Roosevelt said the U.S. would act as the policeman of the Americas, deciding which governments stayed in power. Governments threatening U.S. land interests or land reform—like Jacob Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954—faced U.S. intervention.

United Fruit enlisted Sullivan and Cromwell, which contacted former associate John Foster Dulles, then U.S. Secretary of State. He coordinated with CIA director Alan Dulles to orchestrate Arbenz's overthrow, making it a regime change operation. Similar efforts occurred across the Americas.

Lindsay O'Rourke's 2018 book details 64 covert U.S. regime-change efforts from 1947-1989, showing how economic statecraft is used to weaken nations, sparking protests and unrest.

You carried out 'color revolutions' for over 30 years, often as CIA operations using symbolic colors like the Rose Revolution or Orange Revolution in Ukraine around 2005.

These operations often involve regime changes and the use of economic tools to weaken regimes. Statecraft is part of a larger imperial strategy. The American empire usually governs through puppet governments instead of directly changing borders to display the U.S. flag.

Trump, known for his vulgarity, plans to move away from secrecy and pursue overt regime changes, possibly targeting Canada and Greenland. But this isn't his usual approach.

Recent Examples: Venezuela and Iran

Recent events show the US targeting Venezuela's 25-year left-wing government through regime change efforts and economic measures, with the US also involved.

At the government level, America seeks to topple left-wing regimes threatening its interests through tactics like extortion, resource exploitation, or influence. The U.S. has tried to remove Venezuela's Chavez-Maduro government for over 25 years. In 2002, the CIA backed a coup that initially succeeded but was overturned when Chavez regained power. The U.S. then used economic sanctions after learning Venezuela's petroleum reserves belonged to the country and PDVSA. Venezuela resists U.S. interests, especially as corporations like ExxonMobil and Chevron threaten its regime. In 2014, the U.S. attempted to incite a color revolution via mass protests.

I have more stories showing how color revolutions involve the CIA, NED, NDI, and NRI working with local media to incite unrest. Though not secret, these activities are called covert since the U.S. denies involvement, while the government suppresses protests.

Local protesters exist, as many oppose the government. However, organization, funding, transportation, and media coverage are planned rather than spontaneous. The U.S. contributed to the crackdown.

Part of the game involves responding to crackdowns with sanctions. In 2015, Obama declared a state of emergency, claiming Venezuela threatened U.S. security. Can you believe it? We saw Venezuela as so risky that Obama officially declared an emergency.

The U.S. Approach to Regime Change and Economic Sanctions

Trump’s Presidency: The Shift Toward Aggressive Policy

When Trump took office in 2017, he adopted a confrontational stance on international relations. At a UN dinner with Latin American leaders in September 2017, he asked, "Why don't we just invade?" setting the tone for his Venezuela policies.

Latin American Leaders’ Reactions

Two presidents at dinner shared stories. Trump suggested invading Venezuela, catching everyone off guard. Others warned it would be difficult, possibly cause backlash, chaos, displace millions, increase anti-American sentiment, and risk lives.

Escalation of Economic Measures

Despite efforts to deter him, Trump aimed to weaken Venezuela’s economy with sanctions: seizing reserves, freezing accounts, and sanctioning PDVSA to limit transactions. Using IEEPA, the U.S. imposed financial sanctions, blocking dollar payments. As a result, Venezuela couldn't access oil revenues, disrupting PDVSA’s funding and causing widespread sanctions.

Impact on Venezuela’s Economy

Between 2016 and 2020, Venezuela's oil production decreased by approximately 75%, leading to a major economic downturn, currency collapse, and deteriorating living standards. Inflation increased sharply, imports decreased, and per capita output dropped by two-thirds, exceeding wartime damages. Additionally, Trump’s administration appointed a new president.

Political Maneuvers: Declaring a New President

The White House recognized Juan Guaidó as Venezuela's legitimate president rather than Nicolás Maduro, leading to U.S. sanctions redirecting assets to Guaidó and to the IMF recognizing him as the official leader with appointment powers.

About 60 countries, mainly European allies, recognized Guaidó as president, raising tensions and prompting Trump to impose sanctions that harmed the economy.

Media Coverage and Further Comparisons

Mainstream media like the New York Times reported widespread dissatisfaction under Maduro but didn't explore the causes, possibly due to a lack of knowledge or pressure. Iran faced similar issues, and the U.S. has endured decades of sanctions.

Extending Sanctions: The Case of Iran

After Trump’s re-election, he aimed to weaken Iran’s economy by instructing Treasury Secretary Scott Besant to devalue Iran’s currency via emergency measures and disconnect from dollar transactions. Trump also declared Venezuela an emergency, warning banks that any dealings with Iran could result in sanctions, regardless of location or purpose.

Mechanisms and Outcomes of Sanctions

This approach shows how the U.S. enforces sanctions abroad. Besant noted the aim was to weaken Iran’s economy, leading to a currency collapse, reserve depletion, shortages, and protests by December.

Authorities admitted it, but mainstream media linked protests to regime corruption and mismanagement, ignoring U.S. sanctions influence. Even after the Treasury Secretary explained the strategy, coverage remained limited.

The Broader Context: Economic Tools and U.S. Power

The image shows a regime change driven by economic interests, with U.S. influence stemming from the dollar’s global dominance and the IMF's veto power.

The World Bank and IMF in Washington symbolize U.S. influence and pressure other governments.

Consequences and the Shift Toward Multipolarity

The landscape is shifting. Post-Cold War, America’s dominance allowed economic coercion with few consequences. In a multipolar world, these tactics are riskier, as emerging powers offer access to advanced technologies, industries, supply chains, transportation, banking, currencies, and SWIFT alternatives.

The Rise of Alternative Settlement Systems

As the U.S. escalates coercive measures, groups like BRICS develop alternatives. While transacting in non-dollar currencies is straightforward, institutional barriers pose the main challenge. Banks in the dollar system remain vulnerable to U.S. sanctions, despite using other currencies.

There is a rising need for independent institutions outside the dollar system, forming a parallel network for transactions in non-dollar currencies that bypass mainstream banks.

Digital Solutions and Future Trends

In Russia, digital entities are influencing cross-border settlements and may surpass SWIFT. China, under U.S. pressure, is building an alternative system, with Chinese banks creating institutions within their networks. This could accelerate, and in ten years, about 25% of global transactions might use non-dollar currencies.

Digital settlements offer a viable alternative to SWIFT, but institutions must avoid dollar transactions to prevent U.S. sanctions. A new framework is needed.

The Future of the Dollar as a Tool of U.S. Power

The U.S. dollar's influence may not last. Relying too much on it could weaken its power and alter global transactions. As U.S. dominance declines, sanctions might be weakened, but U.S. companies could still face restrictions, and some nations may trade with sanctioned countries.

A Pivotal Era

This period is critical, as the U.S. faces a choice: defeat rivals or risk self-destruction through the use of coercive power. The growth of alternative settlement methods, fueled by U.S. sanctions and the dollar's dominance, is driving the development of digital solutions in Russia and China, including parallel institutions outside traditional banking. This indicates a likely shift towards non-dollar transactions within a decade. Overdependence on the dollar could diminish its influence, transforming global finance with new systems and currencies reshaping trade.

O'Rourke's book offers a one-stop shop for understanding foreign-imposed regime change. Covert Regime Change is an impressive book and required reading for anyone interested in understanding hidden power in world politics.

― Political Science Quarterly

States rarely wage war directly; instead, they use covert tactics like assassinations, backing coups, meddling in elections, or supporting dissidents overseas.

In *Covert Regime Change*, Lindsey A. O'Rourke explains how states act when overthrowing governments, emphasizing that focus on overt actions overlooks core reasons for regime change.

O'Rourke offers substantial evidence of the security interests that motivate state interventions.

Offensive operations aim to overthrow a current military rival or break up a rival alliance.
Preventive operations seek to stop a state from taking certain actions, such as joining a rival alliance, that may make it a future security threat.
Hegemonic operations try to maintain a hierarchical relationship between the intervening state and the target government.

Although covert regime change efforts are common, most reveal themselves and cause blowback.

LARRY JOHNSON: A DECISION HAS BEEN MADE TO ATTACK IRAN.

Larry Johnson, a former CIA intelligence analyst and former employee of the US State Department's Office of Counterterrorism, explains how Washington's actions suggest that a decision has already been made to attack Iran.

Watch the Video Here (48 minutes, 25 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
10 February 2025

Analyzing the U.S. Military Buildup in the Middle East: War Preparation or Negotiation Tactic? – The Complex Dynamics of U.S.-Iran Tensions

Let's consider the main question: Is the recent U.S. military expansion in the Middle East a warning of potential conflict with Iran, or mainly a strategic display to influence negotiations?

Opinions among security sources are split. Some see the deployment of carrier strike groups, air defense, and troops as signs of escalation readiness. Others view these as deterrence to strengthen the U.S. position during ongoing talks.

Current deployments reveal the U.S. has extensive air and naval forces, like Patriot and THAAD missile systems, stealth aircraft, and assault ships, for quick response and signaling. However, their effectiveness is limited by tough terrain and asymmetric threats.

Political narratives in Washington significantly influence military decisions through lobbying, media, and partisan debates, shaping perceptions and timing. Public opinion among allies also impacts these actions, emphasizing the importance of perception and communication over just military equipment.

The threat of escalation remains high, with many participants and advanced technologies involved. A small error, intentional or not, could lead to a regional war involving global powers. This underscores the need for clear communication and robust crisis management.

Viewing the U.S. military buildup just as a prelude to war or a negotiation tactic oversimplifies reality. Motives likely include strategic, historical, regional, and domestic factors. Policymakers and analysts should adopt a nuanced view that considers escalation risks and diplomatic options.

THE RISK OF WAR WITH IRAN IS GROWING DESPITE TALKS

Current negotiations between Tehran and Washington are an opportunity – but a narrow one, surrounded by sharp edges

Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi and his accompanying delegation depart for the site of the bilateral talks in Muscat, Oman, on February 6, 2026. © Global Look Press / Xinhua

By Murad Sadygzade, President of the Middle East Studies Center, Visiting Lecturer, HSE University (Moscow).

HomeWorld News
10 February 2026

Annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

The restart of communication between Washington and Tehran in February 2026 reopened a fragile diplomatic channel that had been considered closed. An indirect meeting in Muscat, facilitated by Oman, used cautious language, indicating room for dialogue rather than a breakthrough. Both aim to keep negotiations open. For a region familiar with sudden escalation threats, even this modest progress is significant.

The renewed dialogue suggests a possible practical compromise, with reasons for optimism. Iran has proposed reducing its highly enriched uranium stock if sanctions are lifted, a key technical point. Moreover, the US shows willingness to engage in indirect negotiations through an intermediary, which may be more acceptable to Tehran and less politically difficult for Iran’s leadership.

Hope isn't about probability. The core issue is that parties start from distant positions, with the gap extending beyond numbers and timelines. It hinges on each side's view of negotiation goals. Washington wants a broader agenda, including Iran’s missile program, regional alliances, and internal governance. Tehran insists discussions remain on the nuclear file, seeing expansion as an attempt to turn diplomacy into a strategic rollback and to exert domestic pressure. These are incompatible frameworks; when they clash, even technical progress can vanish overnight.

The past year shows how quickly stability can break down, with Summer 2025 exposing diplomacy’s fragility amid changing military dynamics. After Israel’s June 2025 preemptive strike, the escalation limited diplomatic options despite mediation. Iran, through intermediaries, refused to negotiate while under attack, willing to talk only after retaliation. This highlights the importance of deterrence over negotiation, letting conflict dominate diplomatic efforts when such a mindset takes hold.

Read more
Iran floats nuclear enrichment compromise

This precedent is important because current negotiations are taking place amid renewed military tension. Reuters reported that in February 2026, tensions rose as the US increased its regional presence and issued warnings. Iran’s foreign minister warned that if the US attacked, Iran would target American bases in the Middle East. These statements form part of a deterrence dialogue that could heighten perceptions of hostility and discourage leaders from compromising out of fear of weakness.

Israel's strategic position heightens risk. Its policies view any U.S. deal with Iran as risky, especially if residual capabilities remain that Iran could develop. Israeli media warned Washington that Israel might act alone if Iran crosses a red line on ballistic missiles. Leaders closely monitor missile issues, fearing nuclear talks may overlook them. Some of this may be diplomatic messaging, but it adds pressure to an already fragile process, as each step is weighed against the risk of unilateral military action.

Tehran views the Israeli factor as crucial, arguing they can't negotiate missile limits while Israel maintains military freedom and justifies strikes. They point to asymmetry, being asked to reduce deterrence despite threats from a hostile, militarily superior Iran. From Washington’s view, Israel’s concerns align with American interests, driven by alliance politics and missile escalation risks. This complicates negotiations, with each side considering their opponent's security partners and domestic constraints.

We should be cautious about the optimistic outlook on the Muscat round. While indirect talks help gauge intentions, they also raise the risk of parties talking past each other. Each side might claim they offered fair terms, blaming misunderstandings on the intermediary or the other side. Early reports show both governments want to keep dialogue open, but reveal disagreements and a parallel cycle of sanctions and pressure. This often leads to fleeting progress—negotiations advance, then retreat with new measures or threats, pushing the situation to the brink again.

The main risk isn't intentional war, but incentives that favor escalation. Israel may see preemption as rational if time benefits Iran. Iran might resist concessions to increase pressure. Washington may show strength to enforce nuclear limits, risking Tehran viewing it as regime change prep. When these views align, diplomacy seems to progress, but the climate shifts toward conflict.

Read more
Middle East on the brink of war: Why US-Iran talks may be the last chance for peace

The Iran case is a key geopolitical factor for China and Russia, not just a regional US issue. For Beijing, Iran is vital for energy security and China’s connectivity strategy. China mainly buys Iranian crude, and disruptions could threaten its market and Belt and Road projects.

Please continue reading...

WE’VE GOT SOLID INTEL THAT SAUDI ARABIA HAS A NUCLEAR BOMB, AND THE US IS FULLY AWARE OF IT’ – HUSSEIN KANANI

Watch the Video Here (42 minutes, 14 seconds)

HomeShows
Sanchez Effect
9 February 2026

This explosive claim from the general resonates strongly in the latest episode of Sanchez Effect, filmed live from Tehran, where Rick is delivering special reports.

We have contacted Saudi Arabia, a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, for their comment—stay tuned for their response.

As tensions escalate in the region and the threat of war looms, both Tehran and Washington exchange sharp words while preparing their diplomatic and military forces for any situation.

Meanwhile, the general alleges that Mossad and the CIA are responsible for the protests in his country, with plans not only to topple the government but also to divide Iran and take advantage of it. He claims that if the US attacks, Tehran’s initial response might not be directed at American bases but could instead involve missiles aimed directly at Israel.

And remember the Strait of Hormuz—former senior commander Hussein Kanani states it will also be shut down. He emphasizes that, although Tehran aims to avoid harming China's or Russia's economies, it might have to resort to this measure as leverage against Washington’s provocations.

He claims the US is engaging in a game of chicken or the egg with Iran, testing who will back down first. Meanwhile, Tehran isn't just playing checkers; they’re thinking ten moves ahead in a chess match.

What will be the outcome of this confrontation? To find out more, listen to the latest episode, exclusively on RT.

GILBERT DOCTOROW: DIRTY WAR ESCALATES AS ENDGAME IS COMING

Dr. Gilbert Doctorow discusses how Russia retaliates during the diplomatic efforts.

The attempt to assassinate Russian General Vladimir Alekseyev signifies another severe escalation, potentially involving Britain, and pushes Russia further up the escalation ladder.

Watch the Video Here (42 minutes, 00 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
9 February 2025

Attacks on high-ranking military officials, such as the attempt on General Alexeyev, often signal complex strategic moves in ongoing conflicts.

Given his roles in military intelligence and negotiations, this underscores the high stakes of the current talks and the broader geopolitical struggle involving Russia, Ukraine, and Western powers.
These incidents can hinder diplomatic efforts by increasing mistrust and causing both sides to become more cautious and security-focused.
The global reaction to these incidents can influence the course of the conflict.

If credible proof surfaces linking external intelligence agencies to these events, it might heighten tensions between Russia and the West, possibly escalating the conflict further.

This situation demonstrates how a single incident, such as an assassination attempt, can serve as a flashpoint, affecting both military tactics and the wider diplomatic environment.

CAPT. MATT HOH: IS U.S. MILITARY POLICY BEING DRIVEN BY ISRAEL?

Judge Andrew Napolitano welcomes Capt. Matt Hoh, who provides an analysis and preview of what is currently happening in Russia, Ukraine, NATO, Israel, and Iran.

Watch the Video Here (29 minutes, 22 seconds)

Host: Judge Andrew Napolitano
Judging Freedom
11 February 2025

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor
Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep. They THINK. They want to be at the forefront of making a difference. They're seeking the bigger picture to expand their horizons. They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge fosters understanding, dispels prejudice, and sparks a desire to learn more about the subject. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet, its misuse can cause untold harm, leading to misunderstandings, prejudices, and conflicts.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.

• We won’t ask for your credit card number.

• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.

• Please include your First and Last Name.

• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.

_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________