Electing Liberals for Decades in St Louis Hasn’t Stopped Police from Murdering Blacks: Video Shows a Cop Shoot Emeshyon Wilkins in the Back of the Head as he Fled, Contrary to Cop Self Defense Claims

From [HERE] Body camera video released Monday shows a white St. Louis police officer fatally shooting a Black 17-year-old in the back of the head as he fled, contradicting an earlier police statement that the teen pointed a gun at officers.

Al Watkins, an attorney for the family of Emeshyon Wilkins, obtained the video as part of the discovery process in a federal lawsuit against the police department. Watkins said his office tried and failed to get the video through a records request.

“They fought that video issue for over a year,” Watkins told The Associated Press. “We had to file a federal lawsuit to get it. That’s not transparent. That’s not integrity. Indeed, it’s irresponsible.”

Wilkins was shot and killed in June 2024, just two weeks after he turned 17. He had no prior criminal history, Watkins said. Wilkins was Black.

Police said it all started when detectives attempted to stop an SUV that was reported stolen. Police said there was a brief pursuit; Watkins described it as a slow-speed chase. He said the SUV was only going around 10 mph.

The pursuit ended with Wilkins fleeing the vehicle on foot, with two officers in pursuit. One officer held a taser; another a firearm, the suit says.

The video shows the officer armed with a gun yelling at the teen to get on the ground as he raises the firearm. The officer can be heard telling the teen to drop a gun. The teen keeps running, and then the officer fires.

One of the four bullets struck the teen in the back of the head, killing him, the suit says. In the teen's pocket was a firearm, but it was disassembled, in multiple pieces, and incapable of being fired, the suit says.

The video didn't show the teen holding the firearm in his hand or pointing it at the officer.

“There was no threat to the public, and you look at the video, and there were no furtive movements,” Watkins said.

Police acknowledged Monday, following the release of the video, that “information provided by a third-party to investigators in the immediate aftermath of the incident was not consistent with the actual events or what was initially shared with the community.”

Liberals Have Dominated St. Louis Politics for decades. 2nd class citizenship remains

80% of Americans Find the Justice System Unfair, according to a new survey

From [HERE] Most Americans continue to be deeply skeptical about the fairness of the justice system, according to a recent survey by Equal Justice Works, a nonprofit organization focusing on careers in public service for lawyers.

According to the survey’s results, which were released Tuesday, 79% of Americans think that the justice system is unfair. Only 50% think that they would receive fair treatment from the system themselves, while just 32% think that it is fair to people without legal representation.

Drilling down into certain demographics, the survey’s results also show that more than 60% think that income affects fairness in the justice system. Nearly half think that race affects fairness in the system.

“When most Americans believe securing justice depends on income and race, we have to be concerned that there’s a significant confidence gap about the legal system,” said Verna Williams, the CEO of Equal Justice Works, in an April 14 statement.

Among the survey’s other findings, there is also a significant gap in understanding how the civil justice system works. For instance, 41% of Americans incorrectly think that the courts would provide them an attorney in a discrimination case.

“When people wrongly assume that courts will make legal help available, they end up navigating complex issues alone,” Mia Sussman, the senior vice president of network engagement for Equal Justice Works, also said in a statement.

Equal Justice Works polled more than 1,600 respondents nationwide for its survey, Unequal and Unjust: Public Perceptions of the Legal System.

View the complete results here.

Dr. Gatti: The First COVID/mRNA "Vaccine" was a Swab Test

Ron Paul: The Ceasefire is a Scam

From [RONPAUL] During my most recent appearance on Judge Napolitano’s Judging Freedom on Wednesday I expressed the view that the ongoing ceasefire between Washington and Tehran was a scam designed to support Israeli interests in the region and to give both Tel Aviv and the White House breathing room to prepare for the next major assault on Iran. I based my judgment on several aspects of the story being circulated by the White House and the tame media. First of all, it is being suggested that the US acceptance of the proposal for a ceasefire put forward by Iran through mediators in Pakistan was arrived at without discussions with Israel. In other words, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had no preview of it nor hand in it. [MORE]

JewSA Media Offers Proof Satan [Netanyahu] is Still Alive and Claims DonaldStein is Covering Up the Number of Dead Soldiers in Iran Holy War

Trump's Paper Boat Claims Continue to Conflict w/Reality: Video from 4/11/26 Shows US Destroyers Forced to Retreat, Fail to Cross Hormuz after Iranian Interception

From [HERE] A US naval attempt to transit the Strait of Hormuz ended in withdrawal after Iranian forces issued warnings, according to a report by Iranian State TV.

The report states that two US destroyers, the USS Michael Murphy (DDG 112) and USS Frank E. Peterson (DDG 121), both Arleigh Burke-class vessels, attempted to pass through the strategic waterway on Saturday. The move coincided with ongoing Iran-US talks in Islamabad.

According to the investigation, the vessels were forced to retreat after being intercepted by Iranian naval forces before completing their passage.

IRGC locks in on US vessel

The investigation indicates that Iranian forces, including the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy, responded swiftly to the presence of the US vessels.

Cruise missile systems reportedly locked onto the destroyers as they approached the entrance to the Persian Gulf, while drones were deployed overhead. The vessels were then issued a warning granting them 30 minutes to change course. [MORE]

Top Iranian Authority says Trump's Claims about a Naval Blockade are Fantastic Rhetoric to Control the Minds of Americans; “He speaks of a fantasy and demands that will never be achieved”

From [HERE] Head of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, Ebrahim Azizi, said in remarks to Iranian television, responding to US President Donald Trump’s claims about a naval blockade against Iran, that “what they are doing is nothing but exaggeration and empty rhetoric.”

Azizi added that the US president “merely voices his wishes and speaks of a fantasy and demands that have never been achieved, and will never be achieved.”

He further described Trump’s remarks made just hours after talks, including claims that he would take certain actions in the Sea of Oman and the Indian Ocean, as “the natural behavior of a defeated president.”

Azizi continued: “The Americans sought to stage a spectacle yesterday and, through deception, attempted to carry out movements in the Strait of Hormuz,” noting that “they have once again failed and were unable to influence the negotiating table.”

He also stressed that Iran remains committed to the rules and conditions of the ceasefire, while expressing doubt that “the Zionists and the Americans will abide by it given the defeats they are suffering.” [MORE]

Is Puppet Trump Provoking WWIII? US Intel Shows China May be Arming Iran, Preparing Secret MANPADS Shipment as Clown President Threatens “Big Problems”

From [HERE] The fragile two-week ceasefire that halted the five-week US-Israel air campaign against Iran is now under renewed pressure after US intelligence concluded that China is preparing to send new air-defence weapons to Tehran.

According to three US officials familiar with recent intelligence assessments, Beijing is preparing to transfer shoulder-fired Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems, or MANPADS, to Iran within weeks, potentially through third countries designed to conceal the weapons’ Chinese origin.

The allegation is strategically explosive because it emerges precisely as US Vice President JD Vance and senior Iranian officials are conducting high-level negotiations in Islamabad, while China simultaneously presents itself publicly as a mediator seeking regional de-escalation.

President Donald Trump reacted with an unusually direct warning, declaring that “if China does that, China is gonna have big problems,” while his administration has already threatened 50 percent tariffs on any country supplying military equipment to Iran.

The Chinese Embassy in Washington rejected the allegations as “untrue” and “baseless,” insisting that Beijing “has never provided weapons to any party to the conflict” and portraying China as a responsible major power committed to stabilising the Gulf.

Yet the timing of the intelligence assessment has intensified fears inside Washington because it suggests Beijing may be using the ceasefire period not merely to preserve diplomacy, but to quietly rebuild Iran’s depleted air-defence capacity before hostilities potentially resume.

The reported transfer would mark the first known instance during the 2026 Iran conflict in which China is suspected of preparing to supply Tehran with complete battlefield-ready weapon systems rather than merely dual-use components or industrial technology. [MORE]

MTG: "Much of Congress is Controlled by AIPAC and Zionists, Not the American People"

YouTube Bans Channel that Mocked Trump with Viral Lego Videos, as Big Tech Censors Speech to Protect Its Puppet and Massa Media from Iran, Israel, Epstein Criticism that is Uncontrollable

YouTube has suspended a channel believed to be linked to Iran, Explosive Media, which gained popularity for its Lego-style animated videos mocking US President Donald Trump and depicting the reality of the US-Israeli war on Iran, Mashable ME reported.

The ban was announced by the group on Friday, with YouTube citing alleged "violent content". The suspension came hours after the group's latest video, a rap animation linking Trump to the Epstein files, went viral, garnering millions of views.

As the US-Israeli war on Iran continues, a parallel battle is being fought on social media platforms. Explosive Media has been one of the most talked-about players in this digital space, using humour and accessible animation to reach Western audiences.

Despite the ban, Explosive Media's videos remain widely available on other platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and X. [MORE]

Barbaric Israeli Authorities Bombed Gaza on 36 of the past 40 days, Murdering People During Its Fake "Cease Fire." Media Uses Mythematics to Claim Only 107 Died (so each bomb only killed 3 people?)

From [HERE] The United States and Iran agreed on Wednesday to a two-week ceasefire following 40 days of war, with talks set to begin on Saturday in Islamabad, Pakistan.

But since February 28, when Israel and the US began bombing Iran, Israel has also, on a near-daily basis, launched attacks on Lebanon, Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

While much of the world’s attention has been on Iran, here are three main things that you may have missed in Gaza.

Israel bombed Gaza on 36 of the past 40 days

Since the declaration of a “ceasefire” in the Gaza Strip six months ago, Israel has violated the agreement thousands of times, with attacks on a nearly daily basis.

Over the past 40 days, Israel has not only continued bombing Gaza, but has also closed the Rafah crossing and withheld life‑saving food and medical supplies.

According to an analysis by Al Jazeera, Israel has attacked Gaza on 36 out of the past 40 days, meaning there were only four days on which no violent attacks, deaths or injuries were reported in the Strip. [MORE]]

Massa media claims “In that short time, Israel killed at least 107 people, permitted only 8 percent of medical evacuations, and admitted just 20 percent of trucks.” Said bullshit death undercount is a form of mind control and perception management or “mythematics” by elites who control authority and the dependent media.

From Tap Dance to the Lap Dance: Decontextualized Harvard Study Demonstrates that Treadmilling Blacks are Not Closing the Income Gap Between them and Whites Over Generations, Unlike Latinos/Asians

For nearly a decade, researchers with Opportunity Insights, a nonprofit think tank based at Harvard University, have studied economic mobility to identify factors that lead to greater outcomes for children and to find potential remedies for obstacles that get in the way.

“The incomes of Hispanic and Asian Americans are approaching those of white Americans over generations; those of Black Americans and American Indians are not,” the group notes on its website. “Differences in family characteristics — parental marriage rates, education, wealth — and differences in ability explain very little of the black-white intergenerational gap.”

The group says universal basic income programs, minimum wage increases and other efforts affecting a single generation “can help narrow racial gaps at a given point in time. However, they are less likely to narrow racial disparities in the long run.” [MORE]

Racial disparities in income and other outcomes are among the most visible and persistent features of American society. The sources of these disparities have been studied and debated for decades, with explanations ranging from segregation and discrimination to differences in family structure and genetics.

Most previous work on racial disparities has studied inequality within a single generation of people. We analyze how racial gaps change across generations, allowing us to identify the factors that lead to disparities between racial groups that persist over time. Using de-identified data from the U.S. Census Bureau covering 20 million children and their parents, we measure the differences in incomes in adulthood between children of different races who grow up in families with similar parental incomes. We show how these intergenerational race gaps vary across areas of the U.S. and discuss implications for pathways to reduce racial disparities. [MORE]

Massa Media Continues to Parrot Trump’s Lies: Iran Denies the US Crossed the Hormuz, says False Claims Promote an Illusory Victory and Manipulate Markets- a Small US Vessel was Forced to Turnaround

From [HERE] A senior Iranian political-security source told Al Mayadeen that the United States failed in its attempt to cross the Strait of Hormuz, dismissing reports of achievements as the fabrication of facts meant to promote an illusory victory in the media. 

The source absolutely denied claims about the US vessel crossing the Strait, telling Al Mayadeen that media outlets close to the White House are reporting on false information amid another field setback. 

They added that the alleged vessel was a small boat that made a strenuous attempt to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, adding that it was fully surrounded and given a firm warning by Iranian forces, forcing the US vessel to retreat and change course. 

The source added to Al Mayadeen that these claims by US media stem from a continued “domino effect” of US failures and are being promoted as part of an effort to manufacture consent aimed at influencing global energy market prices.

Hormuz tensions tied to broader US-Iran escalation

Tensions in the Strait of Hormuz are linked to tensions as a result of the US-Israeli war on Iran, particularly amid ongoing ceasefire negotiations. [MORE]

US Military and Weapons in Service of Elite Billionaires [Territorial Gangsters] Not Our Freedoms; Murdering People in Iran, Gaza and Elsewhere (all Non-White) Who Have No Control Over the Government

From [JUDGE Napolitano] Is personal freedom a reality or a myth? Does the government execute the will of the governed or the will of those who finance its officials? Does the Bill of Rights restrain the government? Are the levers of government power pulled by those the governed have elected or those we don’t see? Do elections change anything?

Can the president kill people whom he suspects might commit a crime? Aren’t even those who would cause great harm entitled to due process? Isn’t everyone entitled to a fair trial in front of a neutral judge and jury before any punishment can be administered?

Aren’t all persons legally innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty? Isn’t this presumption of innocence the linchpin of American jurisprudence? At trial and before punishment, isn’t it the government’s obligation to prove every element of the crimes charged? Isn’t there no such thing in American jurisprudence as a presumption of guilt?

Aren’t punishments prescribed by law? Can the president make up a punishment and direct the military to administer it to folks he thinks are probably guilty of criminal behavior? Can federal officials perform unlawful acts with impunity just because they are ordered to do so by the president? Is “probably guilty” a sufficient legal standard for punishment?

In war, can the combatants morally target civilians and their structures? Is war waged against the people of a given country, or against its government and military assets? What happens when there is killing without consequence?

Which is worse, a president who kills whomever he wishes or a Congress that funds the killing and is indifferent to the moral, constitutional and legal consequences?

Can the president morally bomb civilians “into the Stone Age” in a country where the civilian population has little control over the government? Why kill or ruin large numbers of civilians whose liberation you have urged?

What is the purpose of a Constitution if it is not followed? Why take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and then not do so? Why limit war making to the Congress but then ratify the president’s war making as if the Constitution authorized it? If the U.S. bombs other countries to temper their offensive military appetite, who or what will temper America’s offensive military appetite? [MORE]

A Black DA Had the Audacity to Treat a White Police Officer just like any Other Person; Boston Cop Promptly Arrested and Charged w/Manslaughter for Shooting Stephenson King 3X when He Posed No Threat

From [HERE] A white Boston Police officer who fatally shot a Black man last month was arrested and charged with manslaughter on April 1, 2026.

Officer Nicholas O’Malley, 33, of Randolph, pleaded not guilty Thursday afternoon in Roxbury Municipal Court. He was released on personal recognizance but made to surrender his firearms.  

Suffolk County District Attorney Kevin Hayden said they have brought the charge to a grand jury. It’s believed to be the first time in decades that a Boston police officer has been charged with manslaughter for an on-duty shooting.

The prosecutor alleges that during a traffic stop on March 11 for a suspected carjacking O’Malley fatally shot 39-year-old Stephenson King while he was attempting flee police. Although he was unarmed and posed no imminent threat of harm to police, he was Black.

According to the government’s charging documents:

As a result of an on-going investigation by members of the Boston Police Homicide Unit, Squad 2 Nights, the Boston Police Firearm Discharge Team (EDIT), and the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office into the Homicide of Stephenson King (DOB: 01/14/87), through physical evidence and numerous witness interviews, investigators have determined there is probable cause to believe that Nicholas O'Malley committed the crime of Voluntary Manslaughter. G.L. C.265, Sec 13, specifically, that he; 1) committed an act intended or likely to cause death, 2) did cause Stephenson King's death, and 3) was not acting in proper self-defense or defense of another

On March 11. 2026, at approximately 9:43 PM, BPD officers responded to 1590 Tremont Street for a report of a carjacking. Officers received information from the female victim that while she was seated in the passenger's seat of her running vehicle, she was assaulted and ordered her out of the vehicle by an unknown male.

The aforementioned information was broadcast to Boston Police officers, including the registration of the vehicle.

A short time later, Boston Police Officers Nicholas 0 Malley and Todd Ho observed the victim's vehicle parked at 10 Linwood Square in Roxbury, nose into the sidewalk. They stopped their cruiser behind the vehicle and as they approached the vehicle, captured on both of their Body Worn Cameras (BWC), they observed King, seated in the reclined drivers seat of the running vehicle. 

As captured on their BWC's as well as partial witness statements, both officers, firearms drawn, began to yell commands to King such as; show me your hands, shut off the vehicle and unlock the vehicle. King did show the officers his hands at times, did partially open his driver's window, but did not shut off the vehicle or unlock the doors.

Officer O'Malley, outside the drivers window and while holstering his firearm in favor of a Taser, shouted to King: "aro, I'm gonna fueldng shoot you? Immediately after that statement, King put the car in reverse and backed into the cruiser behind him. King then maneuvered his vehicle forward, reverse, and forward again, in an attempt to escape the police. At the moment King's vehicle began to move forward the last time, PO O'Malley again drew his firearm and fired three shots at King through the drivers window.

After Officer O'Malley discharged his firearm, King accelerated and drove down the street, only to crash into a stone wall at the bottom of the street Officers O'Malley and Ho ran to the vehicle where they located King unresponsive. The officers requested Boston Emergency Medical Services (EMS) respond to the scene. EMS transported King to the hospital where he was pronounced deceased at 10:24 PM.

An autopsy was performed on King on March 13, 2026, where it was determined King had been struck by three (3) projectiles, two of which were recovered from his torso. Investigators found a third projectile in the passengers area of the carjacking victim's vehicle. There were no weapons recovered from that vehicle or King's person.

After his discharge, Officer O'Malley did broadcast that the officers were involved in a discharge, and that the suspect -tried to run us over". Based upon BWC footage and the interviews of the officers, regardless of their perception, that statement was not factually true

During his interview with the FDIT, Officer O'Malley stated that he fired his weapon because he thought Officer Ho was going to be crushed by the suspect's vehicle. Again, although that was his stated perception, 8WC footage revealed that such a belief was unreasonable, and that neither officer was In danger of being struck by the vehicle at the time of Officer O'Malley's discharge An eyewitness who observed the Incident stated that neither officer was in the path of the vehicle as it drove sway.

Although the law allows police officers to use deadly force when reasonably necessary. GI, c. 6E sec 14(d) provides: A law enforcement officer shall not discharge any firearm Into or at a fleeing motor vehicle unless, based on the totality of the circumstances, such discharge is necessary to prevent Imminent harm to a person and the discharge is proportionate to the threat of imminent harm to a person.

Hayden said the body camera footage will not be released to the public because it could influence the grand jury.

Following O’Malley’s arraignment, his defense attorney and the police union accused Hayden of acting politically during an election year. “I just want to say that this is unprecedented,” O’Malley’s attorney, Ken Anderson, told reporters outside of Roxbury District Court. “I think at the end of this case, he’s going to walk away as an innocent man. I’ve been involved in probably a hundred or more police shootings. This is the first one anyone’s ever been arrested. This is not preferential treatment. This is election year tactics.”

Hayden, who is up for reelection, denied that politics played any influence in the decision to arrest O’Malley, and stressed in his own comments to reporters that the case is moving forward within the normal legal process.

“People are arrested and charged in district court prior to the matter going to the grand jury all the time,” Hayden said. “This case was not treated any differently than any of those other cases.”

Several legal experts who spoke with GBH News agreed with that comment in terms of process, even if it is unusual for a police officer to face charges in a case like this.

“I think perhaps because police officers are almost never charged and held accountable for shootings, that’s why we haven’t seen them arrested,” said Shira Diner, a lecturer and clinical instructor in the Defender Clinic at Boston University School of Law. “And that’s where we haven’t seen bail requests being made on their behalf. That’s why we haven’t seen them being brought into court, right? So, if it never happens to police officers, the regular process that happens to other people hasn’t happened for those police officers.”

The process that’s being followed now is treating O’Malley like any other criminal defendant, Diner said.

“The way our system works in Massachusetts is almost entirely that people are arrested, they’re brought into the district court, or the municipal court in this case,” Diner said. “And then after that, a grand jury would meet and issue an indictment, and then the case would go to superior court.”

If anything is unusual about O’Malley’s treatment, Diner said, it’s that he was released on personal recognizance and wasn’t held in custody while the case is pending.

“I think that someone in another situation, the judge might’ve imposed a really high cash bail, more than the person could make, or there would’ve been a move to hold them as someone who was a danger to the community,” Diner said. “But none of those things happened and the defendant is now released and he’s out and he is able to assist his lawyer in a really meaningful way in preparing his defense.”

Retired Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Jack Lu, who is now teaching at the University of Massachusetts School of Criminology and Justice Studies, sees the case similarly.

“I will applaud the district attorney for treating this individual like anyone else,” Lu said.

In court, prosecutors said O’Malley shot and killed King on March 11 as he was fleeing police in a car he had allegedly stolen in a carjacking. According to investigators, no weapon was found on King or in the vehicle.

“Any person, with or without legal training, can see that this police officer was in a terrible position,” Lu said. “So I have a world of sympathies for this individual, and I wish them all the luck in the legal process.”

Even so, Lu said, that legal process should be the same for all defendants.

“Why should this police officer get different treatment than somebody who shoots somebody on the street in allegedly self-defense?” Lu asked. “Why should there be different treatment for police officers?”

LOL. In addition to anger over the district attorney’s decision to arrest O’Malley, his defense attorney and the police union also criticized how it happened. The officer was arrested at his home, rather than being allowed to turn himself in.

“We’re outraged at the way the arrest took place,” Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association President Larry Calderone told reporters after the arraignment. “You have an individual with an impeccable record, that volunteered to go give testimony … at the homicide division. He could have very easily volunteered to come in here and submit himself to the accusations at hand.”

O’Malley’s attorney, Anderson, asserted that his client is not a flight risk.

“They ask for $25,000 cash bail for someone who’s lived every day of his life in Massachusetts, married … two young kids, not a fight risk. And they grab him off the street, they arrest him, they book him to embarrass him, to put this show on for all of you,” he said to the assembled reporters.

Professor Chris Dearborn of Suffolk University Law School, who directs the Suffolk Defenders Program, said he’s seen plenty of cases in which defendants have been allowed to turn themselves in.

“That courtesy is often given to somebody when they reach out ahead of time,” he said.

Dearborn said it’s not clear, though, if the timing of the decision to bring charges allowed the district attorney to offer that opportunity to the defense lawyer. And he took issue with the suggestion that the Hayden’s tactics were driven by politics.

“I don’t think he was thinking, ‘Gosh, I better arrest this cop instead of allowing him to turn himself in, otherwise I might lose the election.’ I just think that’s silly. I think that’s nonsensical,” he said. “I do agree that there is a credible argument, as with any criminal defendant, that given this circumstance, maybe they could have given him the opportunity to turn himself in. But at the end of the day, [the judge] did the right thing with a guy with no record and released him on personal [recognizance] with conditions.”

Dearborn said the district attorney’s office deserves credit for their decision to charge O’Malley.

“Especially what we’re seeing happen in other jurisdictions with other law enforcement agencies, where investigations are being slid under the carpet or not even happening,” he said, pointing to recent fatal shootings of protestors Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minnesota by federal agents, which the U.S. Department of Justice has declined to investigate.

“And I don’t think this is like an overreaction to that. I think this is just the district attorney’s office recognizing what this is, having viewed the evidence and believing at the very least there’s probable cause to go forward with a charge,” Dearborn said. “But that’s why we have juries. This is a case that I anticipate going to a jury trial and letting a jury decide whether there should be a conviction or not.”

But first, the case will be heard by a grand jury, and Dearborn says it could be several months before they decide whether to issue an indictment. [MORE]

Iran Declares “Historic Defeat” of US: Claims Trump Accepted Iranian Control Over the Strait of Hormuz, Nuclear Enrichment, Sanctions Relief and Future Military Withdrawal from the Middle East

Destroyed E-3G Sentry AWACS after Iranian missile and drones attack at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia. and MORE

From [HERE] and [MORE] The two-week suspension of combat announced between Washington and Tehran has immediately evolved into a geopolitical contest over narrative dominance, regional deterrence, and the future American military posture across the Middle East.

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council declared that the United States had suffered an “undeniable, historic, and crushing defeat,” claiming Washington accepted negotiations based upon Tehran’s sweeping 10-point framework.

President Donald Trump simultaneously portrayed the same arrangement as evidence that Iran had finally retreated under American pressure after repeated threats of expanded strikes and harsher military escalation.

The radically different public interpretations matter because the negotiations beginning in Islamabad on April 10 will determine whether the region moves toward de-escalation or another far larger confrontation.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Tehran would suspend defensive operations for exactly two weeks only if every attack against Iranian territory immediately and completely ceased.

Araghchi also announced that safe maritime passage through the Strait of Hormuz would remain possible during the temporary pause, although movement would be coordinated directly through Iranian military authorities.

By thanking Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Pakistan’s military leadership, Araghchi elevated Islamabad from regional intermediary into the central diplomatic channel between Washington and Tehran. [MORE]

Trump's Stupidity Helping to Unravel the Mythologems Used to Justify US Colonial Empire and Conceal Its Thirst for Stealing Territories/Resources and Fascination w/Domination and Genocide of NonWhites

From [HERE] If you listen to Trump's recent speeches, you can once again feel the effect of a "parallel reality". Endless self-aggrandizement and attempts to use rhetoric to change prices in the oil market are mixed with outright, fantastic lies. Almost every day, Trump either announces his imaginary "successes" and "victories" or launches malicious threats. Every week, this verbal escapism becomes more irrational. The American establishment often used verbal manipulation for its own purposes, as it was in the last century and in our time. However, what we are seeing now has an important fundamental difference. Trump's current rhetoric resembles the nervousness of a stock speculator who has made a series of mistakes, lost control of the long-term consequences of his steps, and is now afraid of a total collapse of the myth of his "success". The consequence of this is so many attempts by the White House to hide its own failures and deceive the public.

It seems that the ancient philosopher Plato spoke in some detail about such rhetoric in his dialogue "The Sophist". The creation of verbal illusions, which in their essence are only a distortion of reality, has been known for a long time and is not something new. In the case of the modern American establishment, we can observe an avalanche of such verbal distortions and simulacra designed to create a favorable image for them. Of course, this political sophistry has nothing to do with the real situation. It is a fog of lies, exaggerations, and fabrications.

But what about reality? Obviously, many myths and simulacra created and inflated by the United States have been destroyed. There are many examples of this. For years, American military-industrial corporations and officials have touted the F-35 fighter jet as supposedly "invulnerable". And what is the result? Iranian anti-aircraft missiles have demonstrated a clear and effective refutation of this American myth, proving that the F-35 can be shot down.

If we delve into history, we can understand that the construction of political mythologems is one of the distinguishing features of colonial and neocolonial empires. Driven by its core only, by a thirst for seizing territories, resources, and trade routes, the empire is trying to create its own exaggerated image, thus trying to hide its weaknesses and justify its deep-seated greed with some idea. [MORE]

Prominent scholars, former government legal advisors and military law experts say Trump's Unprovoked Strikes on Iran are War Crimes

Over 100 US-based legal experts and practitioners have signed a letter declaring the war launched by President Donald Trump, jointly with Israel, on Iran a violation of international law, with the strikes potentially constituting war crimes.

The letter emphasised that the war was illegal from its very beginning on 28 February.

“The initiation of the campaign was a clear violation of the United Nations Charter, and the conduct of United States forces since, as well as statements made by senior government officials, raise serious concerns about violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including potential war crimes,” said the letter. 

While the letter is focused on the conduct of the US government, it also denounced the Iranian government’s crackdown on dissent and its “ongoing unlawful strikes on civilian infrastructure using explosive weapons in densely populated areas”. [MORE]