As the 1992 campaign approached, the incumbent president, George H.W. Bush, was seen as a shoo-in for reelection. The First Gulf War ended in 1991 with a spectacular American victory at the head of a…

BY EMMANUEL OGBONNA A Paris court is expected to deliver its verdict on Monday in a closely watched cyberbullying case involving 10 defendants accused of orchestrating and amplifying a sustained…

BY EMMANUEL OGBONNA The transformation of Bac Ninh is visible at street level, in the Chinese- and Korean-language signs above neighborhood shops and in the spicy dishes served at once-sleepy eateries.…

By Blessing NwekeNorth Korea said on  Monday that leader Kim Jong Un observed test-flights of hypersonic missiles and stressed the need to further strengthen the country’s nuclear war deterrent,…

Department of Justice federal officers stand guard outside the Metropolitan Detention Center, where deposed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro is being held, in the Brooklyn borough of New York City, on…

The U.S. Capitol building in Washington on Dec. 21, 2025. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch TimesWASHINGTON—Following the holiday break, Congress returns this week with a lot to do.At the top of the agenda…

Sometimes life imitates fiction.

Israel is preparing for a war with Iran due to protests that have erupted inside Iran. Which raises an obvious question: why would domestic protests in Iran have anything to do with Israel? Mass demonstrations have spread across Iran since mid-December, driven by an economic crisis and volatility in the national currency. Israel has openly supported these protests, which it now cites as the reason Iran may retaliate by attacking Israeli targets. There are reports that protesters have been killed, though those claims remain uncorroborated. Still, President Trump has warned that the U.S. would intervene if “peaceful protesters” are killed. Only in Iran though. Protesters in Israel against the Netanyahu government should not look to the U.S. President for this kind of support. Now Israel is warning that Iran is poised to strike “targets across the Middle East.” But is that plausible? The New York Times reports that Iranian officials have described the Islamic Republic as being in “survival mode.” Would they attack abroad if they were in “survival mode”? Iran, in particular, has almost never initiated direct military attacks, and when it has acted militarily, those actions have been limited and retaliatory. So stop me if you’ve heard this one before. Israel: Iran is about to attack us. Israel: Launches a “preemptive” strike. The United States: This is fine. How can we help? When did this last happen? Last summer. Israel warned of Iranian aggression, escalated first, then portrayed Iran’s retaliation as proof of its warning. The post Iran: Domestic Protests, Foreign War appeared first on Redacted.

Is your algorithm telling you that Venezuelans are happy the U.S. invaded their country and kidnapped their president? Then you, my friend, may be the target of a CIA psy-op designed to justify an international crime. Sources tell Redacted that the CIA is using AI-driven campaigns to portray the U.S. operation as something Venezuelans welcome. “They’re happy about it,” the message goes. Only they’re not, demonstrated by the widespread condemnation across Latin America and Spain. It would make no sense if they were. How, I ask you, can the United States — the country that sanctioned Venezuela’s economy into poverty and flooded the region with CIA-run drug routes — suddenly be its savior? That’s like turning to cigarettes to cure lung cancer. The U.S. has never carried out a regime-change operation that didn’t end in chaos and destruction for the country involved. And virtually no nation welcomes U.S. intervention, with the notable exceptions of Israel and Ukraine. Let’s look at how this went the last time the U.S. kidnapped a leader in Latin America. In 1989, the United States invaded Panama and seized Manuel Noriega, a former CIA asset who developed the inconvenient habit of asserting national independence. The invasion killed hundreds of civilians, flattened entire neighborhoods, and violated Panama’s sovereignty, all so Washington could haul Noriega back to the U.S. The result wasn’t democracy or stability. It was destruction, dependency, and a precedent that the U.S. can abduct foreign leaders when it decides the law no longer applies. Oh, and the drugs didn’t dry up. Drug supply in Panama has only doubled. Given this truth, would it really be surprising if the U.S. government ran a psychological operation on its own people to justify an act of aggression? In 2022, a Stanford Internet Observatory report revealed that the Pentagon has repeatedly conducted covert online influence campaigns. These were psychological operations designed to shape public opinion and manufacture consent for war. So should you believe that the U.S. was justified in invading a sovereign state and kidnapping its leader? Not if you value national sovereignty and truth. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter states that all member nations must refrain from “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” Both the United States and Venezuela are parties to the Charter. The law applies, whether Washington likes it or not. The post Manufacturing Consent for Venezuela appeared first on Redacted.