Manufacture Dissent

Israel has maintained for months that its bombing raids on Gaza were “precise,” that “half the dead were combatants,” and that civilian casualties were “unavoidable.” Evidence from the Bearing Witness Project, independent casualty audits, and epidemiological modeling show that Israel has lied about all three. Israel has always known exactly who it was killing.

Internal audits of Gaza’s public health data revealed the scale of Israel’s murderous campaign of annihilation. When the Israeli Defense Forces quietly investigated the fatality list published by the Gaza Ministry of Health in January, their findings demonstrated that ‘most names on the list were in fact real people.’ Their very existence disproves claims that Gaza’s figures are inflated.

Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) has independently audited the 40,717 names on that list and found that ‘at least 74% are civilians,’ a figure that almost certainly understates the actual number.

A breakdown of these casualties reveals why this does not support the claim that ‘half the dead were combatants.’

Since more than half the dead were women, girls, young boys, and elderly men, who are officially categorized as non-combatants, there can be no justification for Israel’s bombardment of Gaza

Independent epidemiological modeling of the war’s death toll also challenges Israel’s central claim. According to a study published in late 2024 in Frontiers in Public Health, ‘only 12.7% of the deaths… would be combatants… during the 2023 conflict.’ In other words, nearly 9 out of every 10 casualties in Gaza were civilians, including a frightening number of children. ‘The index of killing civilians,’ the study noted, ‘peaked at 7.01,’ meaning that, for every combatant killed in the war, 7.1 civilians died, most of them at the hands of the Israeli military. These figures reveal that Israel was not simply committing “collateral damage” in its war on Hamas; it was deliberately targeting civilians with its bombing raids, seeking to kill as many Palestinians in Gaza as possible.

This conclusion is supported by the Bearing Witness Project’s meticulous review of Israel’s documentation of the war, much of which will almost certainly be presented as evidence before any war crimes tribunal. In its research for this project, Bearing Witness found that ‘Israel greatly exaggerated the number of Hamas militants killed in attacks in order to improve the ratio of combatants to civilians killed’ in its bombing raids. It also found that ‘Israel dismissed the Gaza Ministry of Health’s official list of deaths as misleading’ because Israeli planners used this very list to determine the number of civilians and combatants who had been killed in airstrikes.

Israel’s desire to portray its war on Hamas as “precise” was a reaction to its overwhelming use of mass bombardment to end the Hamas-led attack on Israeli civilians. By inflating the number of “combatants” in its cross-border strikes, Israel attempted to disguise its policy of annihilating entire neighborhoods as “humane”—to hide from the world the true scale of its massacre of innocents and defend itself from scrutiny at home and abroad.

According to Bearing Witness research, as of mid-2025, Israeli strikes on Gaza have killed at least 57,012 Palestinians, including 17,121 children.

The number of Palestinians killed in Israel’s “precise” airstrikes is far higher than the number of combatants actually present in Gaza, which means that Israel committed one of the most horrific massacres in modern memory. Even more concerning is the fact that these numbers—documented by Israel itself and accessible to its policymakers—are only part of the tragedy. According to the Bearing Witness data, 1,206 Palestinian families were killed, with children among the victims. This stream of death and destruction, which has devastated thousands of families, would have been known to Israel’s military planners, who persist in their claims that “half the dead were combatants.” Israel violated not only the humanitarian principles but also the international laws of war by committing this massacre. And now it must answer for its crimes. Not only did Israel commit one of the largest massacres in modern history, it has shown the world its true, calculating nature. Israel deliberately committed tens of thousands of civilian casualties in its bombing raids on Gaza, including a frightening number of children, in an effort to obscure its crimes by claiming that half the dead were combatants.

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Sources:

📽️: https://x.com/academic_la/status/2105756716235456848

AOAV casualty analysis (Gaza fatalities, civilian %)

Frontiers in Public Health epidemiological study (combatant % and civilian index)

Bearing Witness Project (casualty documentation, family wipeouts, ratios)

UN OCHA Gaza casualty data (verification of MoH reliability)

Gaza Ministry of Health fatality lists (names, ages, demographics)

Action on Armed Violence Gaza explosive violence reports

Euro-Med Monitor casualty verification reports

Physicians for Human Rights–Israel (PHRI) assessments of MoH data reliability

📽️: Middle East Eye

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

The actual situation with mosques in the United States is dull, ordinary, and entirely without merit for the hysterical fears that people continually create. They function as community centers, have places where prayers are held, serve as food banks, offer language courses, see children playing around after their Quran lessons, have women who arrange charity campaigns, and have men who repair the leaking taps in the wudu area. This is the same kind of atmosphere you find in churches and synagogues — people striving to lead their lives and keep their communities going.

America's fear of mosques wasn't caused by anything that took place inside a mosque; rather, it was created by trauma, propaganda, and political opportunism. Following 9/11, Muslims were made into a permanent suspect group and the country never got over this. Politicians came to see that Islamophobia was a cheap and renewable source of votes. The media realised that stories about the 'Muslim threat' kept people's attention fixed on their screens. And the public, who were already frightened, accepted this entirely.

You are now in a ridiculous position where mosques are treated as if they are about to explode, even though the evidence shows the exact opposite. Hate crimes directed at Muslims rose from 28 cases in the year 2000 to 481 in 2001 and have remained at a high level since then. In 2023 alone, CAIR recorded more than 600 incidents of anti-Muslim hate. Mosques are vandalized, threatened, prevented from being constructed, subjected to surveillance, and harassed—all simply because people have been made to fear a building in which families come together to pray.

In mosques you can find tutoring schemes, interfaith activities, voter registration desks, marriage counselling, help during funerals, and youth mentoring. There you will see people who are trying to overcome discrimination rather than cause it, and you will notice that communities are installing security cameras because they fear being attacked—not because they are planning anything.

The fear campaign is effective since most Americans do not know any Muslims personally. Islam is portrayed as a "brown foreign threat". The media continues to repeat the same old terrorism story, politicians keep exploiting it, and the public keeps responding to shadows rather than to reality.

On the other hand, the actual figures tell the true story: the number of mosques has increased from under a thousand in the 1990s to nearly 2,800 at present. Muslims are politically diverse, actively involved in civic life, and becoming more integrated. They are part of the American society whether or not people like it.

The fear is not originating in the mosques; rather, it is directed at them, and it has been profitable for the people who are encouraging it…mostly Israel.

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Sources:

📽️: https://x.com/JMNewsNetwork_/status/2105011798240067799

https://www.hartfordinstitute.org/research/US-Mosque-Survey-2020.pdf

https://www.ispu.org/public-policy/us-mosque-survey-2020/

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2021/09/01/americans-views-of-muslims-and-islam/

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/07/26/findings-from-pew-research-centers-2017-survey-of-us-muslims/

https://www.cair.com/press_releases/cair-releases-2023-annual-report-on-anti-muslim-bias-incidents/

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u-s/2016/crime-in-the-u-s-2016/topic-pages/hate-crime

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-files-lawsuit-against-town-religious-discrimination-mosque

https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/discriminatory-profiling/islamophobia-101

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/islamophobia-in-america/

https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2017/09/islamophobia-report.pdf

The RAF Fairford episode is a direct result of an ongoing debate about Britain's alleged sovereign control over its military operations and how much Britain is willing to sacrifice its military independence for the perceived geostrategic and diplomatic benefits of being an unwavering ally of the United States and Israel. The Fairford affair is thus just one symptom of a much broader strategic and political challenge to Britain's military sovereignty as a nation.

The Fairford Moment

The Royal Air Force Fairford, a British establishment, has served as a forward American air base for the duration of the US military presence there. In other words, whenever American aircraft have been deployed from RAF Fairford, they have been operating under US command, direction, and control, not Britain's. The Fairford affair is yet another reminder that Britain is at best a subcontractor for the United States and Israel in military matters.

A Larger Pattern

Britain's intelligence, nuclear deterrent, and global military operations are all subject to the whims of the United States and Israel.

Israel's strategic primacy over Britain is primarily political, not military, but that does not make it any less dangerous to Britain's foreign policy and military decision-making independence. The US and Israeli governments have considerable leverage over their British counterparts, and both have used it to advance their strategic interests.

The Israeli Factor

Britain's foreign policy and military posture are substantially influenced by Washington's preferences, which are in turn substantially shaped by official Israeli diplomatic and intelligence positions.

So, whenever official Washington takes action or responds to a crisis in the Middle East or anywhere else in the world, it tends to do so in concert with Israel. And when it acts in concert with Israel, it tends to act against the interests of Britain as a sovereign state. This was dramatically highlighted by the Fairford affair, in which sensitive military decisions were made on American soil by American officials with little or no regard for Britain's military and strategic interests.

Britain's Sovereignty Revisited

It is a matter of public record that when it comes to military matters, Britain is at best a subcontractor for the United States and Israel.

The real lesson of the Fairford affair is that Britain is unable to undertake truly independent military actions, not least when it comes to protecting its military installations. Whenever US or Israeli strategic interests are at stake, Washington and Tel Aviv will act unilaterally, with little or no regard for Britain's military and strategic interests.

Military sovereignty is not a matter of opinion; it is a matter of control. Britain may have had a sovereign choice to allow US and Israeli aircraft to operate from its military base at Fairford, but Britain did not have an entirely sovereign choice to accept the risks to its own military assets and personnel in the service of Washington's and Tel Aviv's foreign policy and military objectives. The Fairford affair is not an exception; it is the rule. But the exception always comes first.

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

📽️ Credit: DoubleDown News

Sources:

RAF Fairford – US Operational Control

https://www.forces.net/news/us-air-force-confirms-return-b-52-bombers-raf-fairford

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2024-03-25/b52-bombers-raf-fairford-uk-13662482.html

https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3660200/us-bombers-arrive-at-raf-fairford-for-european-mission/

US–UK Nuclear Dependency

https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/united-kingdom-nuclear-weapons/

https://www.basicint.org/publications/briefings/uk-nuclear-deterrent-dependence-us/

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/uk-nuclear-deterrent-and-its-dependence-us

US–UK Intelligence Structure (Five Eyes)

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/five-eyes-intelligence-alliance-explained

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/five-eyes-and-future-intelligence-sharing/

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2020/7/14/five-eyes-what-is-it-and-what-does-it-do

UK–Israel Political Alignment

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-israel-relations-how-deep-ties

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/3/why-is-the-uk-so-aligned-with-israel

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240115-uk-policy-towards-israel-shaped-by-us-pressure/

US Pressure on UK Middle East Policy

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-uk-middle-east-policy-alignment-explained

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/12/how-us-strategy-shapes-uk-actions-in-middle-east

General UK Sovereignty & Dependency Analysis

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2023/09/britains-strategic-dependency-us

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/uk-strategic-autonomy-myth-or-reality

Israel’s clearing of Gaza neighborhoods is no longer just a pattern visible in scattered videos — it’s now documented across multiple independent investigations. CBC’s visual analysis, backed by satellite imagery, shows entire districts flattened by heavy machinery, then repurposed into military bases. What makes this more than a reconstruction effort is the timing: these clearances happened while bodies were still buried under the rubble, and while families say they were never contacted about remains.

Forensic Architecture — a research group known for documenting state violence — has already mapped thousands of similar incidents. Their work shows a systematic cycle: bombardment, ground entry, demolition, and then the rapid establishment of military infrastructure on top of civilian land. They’ve published cases where homes were bulldozed with people still inside, and where rubble was moved into mass piles without any visible recovery process. Their Gaza archive aligns with what CBC found: the clearing isn’t neutral. It’s happening on top of potential crime scenes.

Regional outlets have been reporting the same pattern for months. Al Jazeera Arabic documented families returning to neighborhoods like Shujaiya and Khan Younis only to find the land scraped clean, with no trace of their homes or the people who died inside them. Middle East Eye interviewed residents who said they begged soldiers for information about relatives trapped under collapsed buildings, only to be told the area was “closed for operations.” In Rafah, Palestinian civil defense teams reported that they were blocked from accessing sites for weeks, long enough for decomposition to make identification nearly impossible.

Legal experts outside the region have raised alarms too. An Oxford professor specializing in international humanitarian law told CBC that clearing a battlefield is not inherently illegal — but only if bodies are recovered, identified, and evidence is preserved. None of that appears to be happening. Instead, the clearing is erasing the physical record of how people died, where they died, and what weapons were used. That matters because the International Court of Justice ordered Israel in 2024 to preserve evidence related to alleged violations of the Genocide Convention. The order wasn’t symbolic; it was binding.

The ICJ’s directive came after months of reports from UN agencies describing mass casualty sites, collapsed residential towers, and neighborhoods where entire families were buried together. The UN’s own satellite analysis showed that more than half of Gaza’s buildings were damaged or destroyed. When those sites are bulldozed without forensic recovery, the ability to investigate war‑crimes collapses with them.

Israel’s position is that the clearing is a tactical necessity — removing booby traps, creating maneuver space, and establishing secure positions. The IDF insists it complies with international law. But the visual record contradicts the idea that this is simply battlefield cleanup. Bases are being built on top of civilian neighborhoods, not temporary staging grounds. Roads are being re‑graded. Perimeters are being fortified. In some cases, the new compounds cover entire blocks where dozens of families once lived.

CBC’s visual analysis reveals large areas of Gaza CBC’s visual analysis reveals large areas of Gaza in which neighborhoods have been excavated and reused as military installations. The excavation happened at a time when bodies were still buried in the rubble and families were not contacted.

Forensic Architecture, an organization that studies states and their crimes, has documented thousands of them. The pattern is one of bombardment, occupation, excavation and the re-use of land for military purposes. They have written of homes that have been bulldozed with people inside and the collection of rubble into giant mounds with no attempt at recovering the bodies. The Gaza case fits this pattern; the military is re-using land that has potential crime scenes.

Regional media has been documenting this for months. Al Jazeera Arabic investigated families in Shujaiya and Khan Younis who returned to neighborhoods recently excavated, and found that the land was cleared and no one could see the bodies or even the homes in which their relatives had died. Middle East Eye spoke to people who said they begged soldiers for information about family members trapped in buildings, but were told that the area was “closed for operations.” Palestinian civil defense teams have said they were denied access to the area for weeks in Rafah, long enough for decomposition to make identification nearly impossible.

Outside legal experts have been raising concerns about legality. An Oxford professor of international humanitarian law said that it is not illegal to clear a battlefield, so long as there are bodies and evidence is preserved. That does not appear to be the case. The excavation of a battlefield removes physical evidence of how people died, where they died and the means by which they died. That is a concern because Israel was ordered by the International Court of Justice in 2024 to preserve evidence of alleged violations of the Genocide Convention.

The ICJ ruling followed months in which UN agencies were reporting mass-casualty sites, including collapsed towers and neighborhoods in which families had been buried together. Their satellite imaging has shown that more than half of the buildings in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed. Without excavation, those sites cannot be examined to determine whether war-crimes have occurred.

Israel maintains that the excavation is a tactical necessity. It wants to remove booby traps, create maneuver room and secure its forces. They claim to follow international law. But none of that is supported by the images. The evidence suggests that what the IDF is really doing is constructing permanent installations using neighborhoods as a springboard for attacks. Roads are being graded, perimeters reinforced and, in some cases, compounds built that span blocks in which dozens of families had once lived.

The families who survived insist that the authorities did not contact them, did not try to recover the dead and in many cases, did not even know where their relatives had died.

People are disappearing. So are neighborhoods and, with them, any physical evidence of how people died or where.

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Sources:

📽️: https://x.com/clashreport/status/2104515393331015786

CBC visual investigation (satellite analysis of Gaza clearances)

Forensic Architecture Gaza investigations archive

Al Jazeera Arabic reporting on families returning to cleared neighborhoods

Middle East Eye interviews with displaced Gaza residents

UN satellite damage assessment of Gaza (UNOSAT)

ICJ order requiring Israel to preserve evidence (Genocide Convention case)

Palestinian Civil Defense statements on blocked recovery access

IDF statement on “tactical necessity” and compliance with international law

Dr. Nahreen Ahmed has now become one of the most significant medical witnesses to the situation affecting children in Gaza. She is a pulmonary and critical care physician from Philadelphia, works as a volunteer with MedGlobal, and has already been in Gaza five different times. Each time she comes back from a visit, she has more stories than any doctor ever ought to have to tell. At her speech to the United Nations, she did not include any statistics or use any diplomatic wording; instead, she brought the children she has treated — those who survived, those who did not, and those who are still stuck in a system that has collapsed around them.

Dr. Ahmed talks about the kids she held in her hands. She describes wounds that don’t make sense on a child’s body — shrapnel tearing through limbs, quadcopter bullets entering and exiting in multiple places, crush injuries from buildings pancaked on top of families. She says the infections set in almost immediately because there are no antibiotics left. She says children are dying from wound infections that should never kill anyone in 2026. She says surgeries are being done without anesthesia. She says dialysis machines don’t exist anymore. She says even pain relief is gone.

Dr. Ahmed tells the United Nations that the hospitals are no longer hospitals; instead they have become shelters, food queues, orphanages, and morgues all in the same place. Thousands of displaced families sleep within them. Children lie on the floors, in the stairwells and down the corridors. It is impossible to carry out infection control and disease spreads through the buildings as easily as smoke. She states that she had to treat children who were starving while at the same time dealing with infections, while also attending to wounds caused by bombs, and while also being dehydrated since clean water is hardly available.

Her warnings concerning hunger are some of the most serious. She states that the rate of malnutrition among children under the age of five has surged from less than one per cent before the war to 16 per cent in northern Gaza. She says that children are dying as a result of hunger coupled with disease, and that even if aid were to arrive suddenly the damage would already be too great. She says that she witnessed children whose bodies had already started to shut down. She also says that she saw babies whose growth had completely stopped.

UN officials have quoted her testimony directly. OCHA expressed its appreciation for her "powerful testimony" regarding Palestinian children and cited her words to emphasize that the suffering in question was preventable—rather than accidental or unavoidable, it was the outcome of a system which obstructs humanitarian access and destroys the infrastructure necessary for keeping children alive.

The fact that Dr. Ahmed has experience makes her evidence much more difficult to ignore. She has worked in Yemen, Ukraine, Sudan, Syria and in the Rohingya camps; she set up the Bangladesh Ultrasound Initiative and teaches at the University of Pennsylvania. She is not new to crisis areas and is not easily shocked. However, Gaza has had an effect on her, something which she admits and states that she has never before seen children suffer so much.

Her appearance at the UN was not a speech; it was a warning, a statement of facts, and a request that the world cease pretending it does not know what is going on. She demanded the fundamental conditions necessary for a child to live—such as food, water, medicine, and safety—and she asked the world to stop treating the death of Palestinian children as normal.

The testimony is now held in the UN archives, in the humanitarian briefings, and in the interviews given to Democracy Now!, NPR, and OCHA. It forms part of the increasing amount of evidence provided by doctors who have worked within Gaza's dysfunctional medical system. It is included in the account that will be told long after this genocide is over, and it is also one of the reasons why the world cannot claim it didn't know.

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Sources:

https://www.democracynow.org/2024/3/22/gaza_children_malnutrition_disease_nahreen_ahmed

https://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/npr/1240000834/a-visiting-icu-doctor-describes-what-she-saw-in-gazas-hospitals

https://www.wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/2025-12-24/an-american-doctor-describes-volunteering-in-gaza

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gaza-hospitals-israel-bombardment-60-minutes-2024-02-25/

https://time.com/6960846/gaza-war-us-doctors-medglobal/

We are a fully subscriber-supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Ai Tools Used

Meta Ai— ThumbnailGemini— SlidesAdobe Premiere Ai— Video Editing

This whole exchange is a perfect snapshot of how U.S. officials justify wars they already decided to fight: retroactively invent the threat, wrap it in emotional anecdotes, and hope nobody notices the timeline doesn’t make sense.

Afshin Rattansi:

“Americans pay $2 billion a day for the Iran war.”

Afshin Rattansi:

“Why did the US launch this war when there wasn’t an Iranian threat to the US before February 28th?”

Robert Harward:

“Your premise was there is no threat from Iran. Sure. If they bomb us and we all leave, I guess there’s no threat.”

Afshin Rattansi:

“You can’t say ‘They were a threat because we bombed them and they retaliated.’ That’s not the way war works, Vice Admiral.

Robert Harward:

“The Trump administration has done an incredible job. They took on this Iranian threat when it had to be addressed…”

Afshin Rattansi:

“What threat?”

Robert Harward:

“Are you kidding me? I watched friends die because of Iranians. I had the intelligence. We had the proof. We knew they were killing our people.”

Afshin Rattansi:

“US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said that Iran wasn’t building a nuclear weapon. Marco Rubio said clearly that the US only got involved because Israel was about to attack and Iran would retaliate… There was no clear and present danger from Iran before February 28th.”

Robert Harward:

“I’ve watched Iran my entire life. I’ve watched them accelerate their capabilities in every lane, be it terrorism, be it nuclear weapons, be it missiles and drones.”

Afshin Rattansi:

“They don’t have nuclear weapons.”

Robert Harward:

“All Iran has done is threaten to go after our people. Sometimes kinetically, and sometimes more asymmetrically.”

Afshin Rattansi:

“The Lancet study says 38 million people have been killed by American sanctions between 1971 and 2021. You don’t believe that all the de facto killing that economic sanctions mean, deserves retaliation?

If the United States were to be sanctioned by another country, would the United States not retaliate?”

Robert Harward:

“You’re talking about the current state of affairs that goes on everywhere in the world. None of it becomes kinetic.”

Afshin Rattansi:

“The US supported Saddam Hussein. They gave them chemical weapons to target Iran. So obviously, Iran may look to the sponsor of Saddam Hussein, which was the US. That’s the history.”

Robert Harward:

“I’ll challenge some of that history, especially the chemical, biological. But again, you’re talking three, four decades ago.”

Afshin Rattansi:

“We have declassified CIA documents. We have Donald Rumsfeld photographed with Saddam Hussein…”

📽️ Credit: Going Underground/Twitter

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Meet the Press – Summary of Interview with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi

On Meet the Press, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi laid out Iran’s position on both diplomacy and war, centering on Tehran’s seven‑day proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. He said Iran has already delivered the plan through mediators and is still waiting for Washington’s official response.

“Why are they rejecting this?”

He explained that Iran is ready to reopen the Strait if the United States ends the war, releases frozen Iranian assets, and allows Iran to sell its oil. He emphasized, “We want to END this war.” Araghchi framed these conditions as obligations Washington previously agreed to respect, not new demands.

He also repeated his criticism of U.S. negotiating behavior, saying Iran has no reason to trust Washington after two rounds of diplomacy that were followed by military strikes. As he put it:

“In 2025 they offered negotiations, we accepted, then in the middle of negotiations they attacked us. Eight months later, again they offered negotiations, again we accepted, and again they attacked us in the middle of negotiations ... there is no reason we should go back to diplomacy.”

Despite this, Araghchi said Iran is still pursuing diplomatic channels because it “shouldn’t miss any chance for peace.”

“We have no reason to come back to diplomacy and engage with this administration once again because of their behavior.”

Asked about reports that President Trump expects to resume bombing after the U.S. midterms, Araghchi said Iran is fully prepared and has adjusted its military posture after previous duplicity from the US.

“We stand firm in the face of any new aggression, even if it comes to a Doomsday War.”

Throughout the interview, Araghchi portrayed Iran as ready for both outcomes — diplomacy if Washington accepts the seven‑day plan, and war if the conflict escalates. He said Iran does not care about U.S. domestic politics, insists its leadership is united, and defended Iran’s 60% enrichment level as part of its national strategy.

Simply put: Iran is ready for diplomacy, and Iran is ready for war…as it should be when dealing with the US.

We are a fully subscriber supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Who is Hussam al‑Asiri

Hussam al‑Asiri is a former Saudi official who operated close to the administrative and security orbit surrounding Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. His position placed him inside the machinery that handles sensitive internal matters: personnel vetting, internal discipline, confidential communications, and the informal channels through which the Crown Prince’s directives move.

Al‑Asiri’s background aligns with the profile of mid‑tier officials who serve as intermediaries between senior royal offices and the security apparatus. These officials often witness the operational side of political repression, the handling of internal disputes, and the management of scandals involving high‑ranking figures. His defection is significant because insiders at this level rarely speak publicly; when they do, their accounts often match documented patterns of state behaviour.

After leaving Saudi Arabia, al‑Asiri began releasing testimony through multiple videos. His statements describe sexual exploitation networks, blackmail operations, and targeted killings involving senior Saudi officials. While his claims are personal testimony, they align with patterns documented by human‑rights organisations, UN investigations, and previous leaks from other Saudi insiders.

A Timeline Forms

2015–2017: MBS Consolidates Power

During these years, Mohammed bin Salman rose rapidly within the Saudi hierarchy, becoming Deputy Crown Prince and then Crown Prince. This period saw the centralisation of authority under MBS, with the dismantling of traditional consensus‑based governance. Officials in his orbit, including al‑Asiri, would have observed the shift toward a more aggressive security posture.

2017: The Ritz‑Carlton “Cleanse”

Hundreds of businessmen, princes, and officials were detained in Riyadh’s Ritz‑Carlton hotel. Multiple reports from Middle Eastern outlets and human‑rights groups documented beatings, coercion, and forced asset transfers. Al‑Asiri’s later testimony about internal violence aligns with these accounts of systemic abuse.

2018: Jamal Khashoggi Butchered In Türkiye

The murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul became the most internationally recognised example of extrajudicial violence linked to MBS. Khashoggi was an open supporter of MBS’s uncle to take power and was very critical the young MBS. UN investigators had concluded it was a premeditated state killing. Al‑Asiri’s claims about assassination orders fit into the broader pattern of transnational repression documented after this incident.

2019–2021: Crackdowns on Activists and Dissidents

Saudi Arabia intensified arrests of women’s rights activists, clerics, and online critics while doing PR stunts and international trips promoting the “New Saudi for women” image. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reported torture, sexual harassment, and prolonged solitary confinement. Al‑Asiri’s testimony about sexual exploitation and intimidation mirrors these documented abuses.

2022–2024: Expansion of Surveillance and Foreign Operations

Saudi dissidents abroad reported increased monitoring, hacking attempts, and pressure on family members inside the kingdom. These tactics match al‑Asiri’s descriptions of threats and coercion used to silence insiders. MBS expanded Saudi’s under the table relations with Israel for its spyware like Pegasus for just this purpose.

2025–2026: Al‑Asiri’s Defection and Public Testimony

After fleeing Saudi Arabia, al‑Asiri began releasing videos detailing sexual scandals, blackmail operations, and assassinations involving MBS and other officials. His testimony adds insider detail to patterns already documented by international organisations.

Sexual Exploitation Networks and Blackmail Operations

Al‑Asiri’s testimony describes a system in which sexual exploitation is used as a tool of control.

While his specific claims are personal accounts, they align with broader patterns documented by human‑rights groups:

* Procurement networks: Intermediaries allegedly arrange sexual encounters for senior officials. Similar claims have surfaced in other insider leaks.

* Blackmail: Compromising material is reportedly collected and used to control rivals or silence potential critics.

* Silencing victims: Women who attempt to report abuse face arrest, intimidation, or threats to family members. Human rights organisations have documented cases of women’s rights activists subjected to torture and sexual harassment in detention.

* Use of state security: Al‑Asiri claims that security units are deployed to manage scandals involving high‑ranking figures. This matches reports of state involvement in suppressing allegations against officials.

These allegations depict a system where sexual exploitation is not incidental but part of a broader apparatus of coercion.

Assassinations, Disappearances, and Targeted Violence

Al‑Asiri’s testimony includes claims of assassination orders and disappearances involving senior officials. While his statements are personal accounts, they align with documented patterns:

* Extrajudicial killings: The Khashoggi case established that Saudi operatives carried out a state‑directed killing abroad.

* Disappearances: Multiple Saudi princes and businessmen have reportedly been abducted or forcibly returned to the kingdom.

* Deaths in custody: Human‑rights groups have documented cases of detainees dying under suspicious circumstances.

* Threats to families: Dissidents abroad frequently report pressure on relatives inside Saudi Arabia.

Al‑Asiri’s claims suggest that these actions are not isolated incidents but part of a structured system of repression.

Governance Through Fear and Control Grows

Under MBS Saudi’s PR team tried to clean up Saudi’s rigid system into projecting a more modern semi-secular state. However, al‑Asiri’s testimony and existing documentation and independent investigations reveal a brutal regime model built on:

* Centralised authority: Decision‑making concentrated in the Crown Prince’s office.

* Weaponised security apparatus: Intelligence and security units used for personal and political objectives.

* Systematic repression: Arrests, torture, and intimidation to silence critics.

* Information control: Extensive PR campaigns and censorship to manage public perception.

* Impunity: Lack of accountability for abuses committed by senior officials.

This pattern is consistent with findings from UN investigations, human‑rights organisations, and independent journalists.

Conclusion

Hussam al‑Asiri’s testimony is significant because it comes from inside the system. While his claims are personal accounts, they align with a well‑documented pattern of repression, sexual exploitation, and targeted violence under Mohammed bin Salman’s rule. His defection adds insider detail to what external observers have already reported: a governance model built on fear, secrecy, and the systematic use of state power to protect the interests of the Crown Prince and his inner circle.

We are a fully subscriber-supported publication. We feature citizen journalists unapologetically. Help us grow and fuel honest, citizen journalism by becoming a paid member.

Sources:

Video: https://x.com/remaxmorgan/status/2100487884214006221

Human Rights Watch – Saudi Arabia Country Reports

Amnesty International – Saudi Arabia Human Rights Documentation

UN Special Rapporteur Report on the Killing of Jamal Khashoggi (Agnes Callamard)

Middle East Eye – Investigations into Saudi Purges, Torture, and Internal Repression

Al Jazeera – Saudi Crackdowns, Detentions, and Human Rights Abuses

BBC Arabic – Coverage of Saudi detentions, disappearances, and political repression

Reuters Special Reports – Saudi Purges, Ritz-Carlton Detentions, and Coercion

The Guardian – Saudi Arabia Human Rights Coverage

UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention – Saudi Cases

Gulf Centre for Human Rights – Saudi Activist Torture Documentation

Committee to Protect Journalists – Saudi Arabia Press Freedom Violations

Freedom House – Saudi Arabia Political Rights and Civil Liberties

Reporters Without Borders – Saudi Arabia Press Freedom Index

MEE Exclusive: Details on Saud al-Qahtani’s role in torture and blackmail

Background on the Ritz-Carlton purge (NYT summary link, not full article)

UN Documentation on Transnational Repression by Saudi Arabia

Documentation on women’s rights activists tortured in Saudi prisons

Documentation on Saudi surveillance and targeting of dissidents abroad