CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Authored by Thomas Karat via The Libertarian Institute

On the evening of August 4, an airport employee at Leipzig/Halle noticed a small drone resting on the apron near a parked Ukrainian Antonov freighter. It carried an explosive charge and a detonator. The charge did not go off. A bomb-disposal robot rolled out across the tarmac, and by the account German officials would later give, the device had gone unnoticed for roughly four hours before anyone found it. Then the airport reopened and the country moved on.

Twenty-eight days later, on September 1, the German government told its citizens who had done it. Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt and Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul stood together in Berlin and named Russia. The consulate in Bonn would close on September 18; the lease on Berlin’s Russian House cultural centre would be torn up; more Russians would be proposed for European Union sanctions lists. The attribution was delivered as settled fact. The evidence behind it was not.

Five days after that, on September 6, the voters of Saxony-Anhalt went to the polls with the Alternative für Deutschland polling around 41-43%, within reach of an absolute majority in a state the entire German establishment had spent months trying to deny it. The sequence is worth holding in the mind as a single object. A device found in early August, a public silence lasting four weeks, and then an official enemy announced in the final days of a campaign. Nothing about that ordering is illegal, but nothing about it is accidental either.

Dobrindt’s case, as he laid it out, does not rest on a single piece of proof. It rests on three strands said to point the same way: police forensics, the resemblance of the device to earlier operations, and intelligence reporting. “Taken together,” he said, the investigations, the pattern and the intelligence findings established Russian responsibility. He named no GRU officer. He named no unit. He said the people who carried out the plan appeared to be “low-level” agents acting on behalf of unspecified “Russian state entities.”

What the public was given, then, was a conclusion and a description of the kinds of evidence that produced it—not the evidence. An independent observer cannot test the chain. Even sympathetic accounts noted the gap: the ministers named the state but kept most of the underlying material out of view. NATO’s Secretary-General Mark Rutte pronounced the evidence “clear” without any of it being made public, and welcomed the German measures. The European Union’s foreign-policy chief Kaja Kallas went further still, telling reporters in Ireland that the incident bore “all the hallmarks of state-sponsored terrorism.”

This is the ordinary grammar of attribution in the sabotage era. A government states that its services and their partners have reached a judgement, allied governments affirm the judgement, the proof stays classified; and the citizen is invited to supply the trust that the missing evidence would otherwise earn. It may be that the classified material is overwhelming. It may be that it is thin. The structure is identical either way, which is precisely the problem. A public asked to accept an attribution on faith has no way to tell a strong case from a convenient one.

The load-bearing sentence in the German case is not about forensics at all. It is about familiarity. Wadephul said the drone’s configuration, its components, its explosives, and its ignition technology were “familiar to us from other Russian hybrid operations and from Russia’s war against Ukraine.” Dobrindt used almost the same words: elements “known to us,” a device of “high technical expertise” assembled with care. Recognition, in other words, is doing the work that a signature would normally do.

Set that claim against the way Russian military intelligence is documented to actually operate in Europe, and the argument begins to strain. The GRU’s European sabotage model, as reconstructed by investigators across several countries, is built entirely on deniability. It runs on “disposable agents”—petty criminals and drifters recruited over Telegram, paid in cryptocurrency, handed a task they barely understand and then discarded. The devices are disguised as consumer goods. When four incendiary parcels shipped from Vilnius caught fire in the summer of 2024, one of them ignited at a DHL depot at Leipzig-Halle itself—the same airport, a plot European prosecutors traced to Russian military intelligence through a chain of expendable cut-outs. The entire point of that architecture is that nothing recognizable survives to be traced back to Moscow.

So the official account asks the reader to believe one of two things. Either a service whose whole tradecraft is the erasure of its own signature built a device bearing its recognizable signature and parked it beside the single most obvious Russian target in Germany—a Ukrainian cargo plane on a NATO logistics hub. Or the word “familiar” is doing exactly the work a manufactured attribution would need it to do. If a device merely looks like what everyone already expects Russia to build, then “we recognize it” becomes a claim that can be made about almost any drone, by almost any authority, at almost any politically useful moment. Neither reading requires anyone to have planted anything. Both should make a careful citizen slower, not faster, to accept the conclusion on offer.

There was, to be clear, more than one drone. On the same night a second craft struck a cargo Boeing 757 in mid-air at around four hundred meters as the aircraft aborted its landing, and a third was reportedly recovered from airport grounds days later. Whatever this was, it was not nothing, and this piece does not pretend otherwise. None of it, though, establishes who was behind it. Russia may well have been. The point is narrower and harder to wave away. The specific reason the state has given for certainty—that the device was recognizable—is the weakest possible ground for certainty about an actor defined by not being recognizable. When the evidence for a proposition is also, on inspection, evidence against it, the logical response is doubt, and doubt is the one response the announcement was engineered to foreclose.

Ask the old question. In the four weeks between the drone and the announcement, nothing about the device changed. What changed was the calendar. The attribution landed in the last stretch of the Saxony-Anhalt campaign, and the writer Thomas Fazi noted what was hard to miss. Here was an official enemy announced on the eve of a vote the establishment feared it would lose, in a contest where the insurgent party is routinely cast as Moscow’s instrument. And the casting is not idle: the AfD is the one significant party that opposes the arming of Ukraine and the rearmament drive, that wants the sanctions lifted and relations with Moscow restored. A fresh Russian outrage, timed to the final days, was calculated to make exactly that party look like the Kremlin’s wittingly useful friend, and to herd frightened voters back toward the parties promising protection. The drone did not need to change the result. It needed only to fill the closing days of the campaign with the word “Russia.”

It did not work. On September 6 the AfD took 43.8%, more than double its 2021 showing, winning 39 of the 83 seats—three short of a governing majority, and so still walled out of power by the other parties, but a rout of the governing CDU all the same. Whatever the naming of Russia was meant to accomplish at the ballot box, the voters of Saxony-Anhalt were not moved by it. And the endorsements that arrived from abroad only underscored how crude the intended frame had been. U.S. President Donald Trump hailed the result as “a really big night”—and wrote not a word about drones or the Kremlin, casting the vote entirely as a revolt against immigration. Elon Musk, who has called the party “the only hope for Germany,” simply posted “Gut gemacht”—well done—and drew from the AfD’s lead candidate an open offer of “strong and constructive cooperation.” The scare had promised the electorate a party in Moscow’s pocket; what the electorate could see was a party being courted over immigration and investment by an American president and the richest man alive. The enemy-image did not match the thing itself, and the gap was visible to anyone looking.

Widen the lens and the incident slots into a program that predates it by years and does not depend on any single election. Germany is remilitarizing on a scale unseen since reunification. Defence Minister Boris Pistorius has told the Bundestag the country must be “ready for war by 2029.” From January 1, 2026, every young German man is required to register for potential military service, with conscription to follow automatically if volunteer numbers fall short. The 2026 federal budget lifts defense spending by around a third, toward roughly €108 billion. And the market has read the direction of travel unambiguously. Shares in Rheinmetall, the country’s largest arms maker, have risen more than tenfold since Russia’s 2022 invasion, the company posting record orders as European rearmament converts fear into backlog.

Into that current, Leipzig arrives as confirmation. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described the incident as a Russian escalation “on European Union soil” and told Europeans they now faced a “new normal” and a “new era of European security,” pledging that the pressure on Moscow would only rise and that a fresh sanctions package was already in preparation. Chancellor Friedrich Merz had already told a French broadcaster, a year earlier, that Germany was “already in conflict with Russia”—the framing was in place long before the drone arrived to illustrate it. The beneficiaries of that framing are not hidden. They are the arms manufacturers with record backlogs, the security bureaucracies whose budgets and mandates expand with every declared threat, the sanctions apparatus that grows by accretion, and the governing parties for whom the enemy is at the gate is the one message that might yet drown out a domestic opposition that just took nearly forty-four percent of the vote.

There is a history here that German officials, of all people, have reason to know, and it is not being spoken. States manufacture the provocations that justify what they had already decided to do. This is not a fringe proposition, it is documented fact, entered into the record by the states themselves.

On the night of August 31, 1939—eighty-seven years, almost to the day, before the Leipzig announcement—SS operatives in Polish uniforms seized a German radio transmitter at Gleiwitz and broadcast an anti-German message, leaving a murdered prisoner dressed as a Polish attacker on the floor as evidence. It was one of a series of staged border incidents. The next morning Adolf Hitler cited Polish aggression as he sent his armies east. The pretext was found on the eve of the war it was built to license.

Closer to home, and closer to the present alliance, there is Operation Gladio. After the Second World War, NATO and the CIA built clandestine “stay-behind” networks not in one country but across Western Europe—armed, hidden cells nominally intended to resist a Soviet invasion that never came. When the Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti acknowledged the structure to parliament in October 1990, he made a point of insisting Italy was not alone. Identical networks had operated in Belgium, the Netherlands, France, West Germany, Greece, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, and beyond, with counterparts in neutral Switzerland and Austria. The scandal was continent-wide, and so was the response. On November 22, 1990 the European Parliament passed a resolution condemning the existence for forty years of “a clandestine parallel intelligence and armed operations organization in several Member States,” which had “escaped all democratic controls” and been “run by the secret services of the states concerned in collaboration with NATO.” The Parliament recorded that in certain member states military secret services had been “involved in serious cases of terrorism and crime.” Parliamentary inquiries followed in Italy, Belgium, Switzerland, and Germany. In Italy those inquiries reached the sharpest conclusion. A decade later a Senate commission found that a “strategy of tension”—bombings of civilians in public places, blamed on the left to frighten the electorate toward the anti-communist right—had been “organised or promoted or supported by men inside Italian state institutions and, as has been discovered more recently, by men linked to the structures of United States intelligence.” This is not a rumor a foreign broadcaster invented. It is the finding of the European Parliament and of national legislatures about their own recent past—a decades-long campaign, run across the continent by Western services in concert with the very alliance now delivering the verdict on Leipzig.

Nor is the pattern only European. In March 1962 the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff, over the signature of their chairman, sent the Secretary of Defense a formally approved proposal titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba.” Operation Northwoods, declassified in 1997, laid out a menu of manufactured provocations—staged terror in American cities, a faked shoot-down, a sunk ship—all to be blamed on Havana to build public support for a war the planners already wanted. President John F. Kennedy rejected it. The significance is not that it was carried out; it wasn’t. The significance is that the most senior uniformed officers of a democracy considered the deliberate deception of their own public a usable instrument of policy, and put it in writing.

Raise these precedents and you are told, correctly, that they prove nothing about Leipzig. They don’t. What they establish is smaller and more unsettling, that the manufactured pretext is a real and recurring tool of statecraft, used by the strong when a public needs moving toward a war it has not yet chosen. A citizenry that cannot even hold that possibility in mind—that treats the very question as the enemy’s talking point—has been relieved of a defense it did not know it needed. The disinformation monitors now classify the word “false flag” itself as a hostile signal, to be flagged and debunked. It is a strange kind of security that makes the historical memory of one’s own governments into a category of foreign interference.

Whatever sat on that tarmac in August, the crucial fact about it is that the response was ready before the cause arrived. The conscription letters were already printed. The sanctions package was already drafted. The rearmament budget was already voted, the war-readiness date already set for 2029, the arms-maker’s order book already at record height. Merz had already declared the country in conflict. And on the very day it named Russia, the government raised the national threat level from “general” to “high”—Dobrindt telling reporters, “we are not at war, but we are the daily target of hybrid attacks.” The drone did not begin any of this. It was fitted into it—a piece of confirmation slotted, at the optimal moment, into a machine assembled in advance, and the machine responded by advancing itself another notch.

That is the part worth watching, and it holds regardless of who built the device, and regardless of how Saxony-Anhalt voted. A population is being readied—methodically, through its budgets, its conscription rolls, its threat levels, its ministers’ vocabulary and its evening news—for a war with Russia that its leaders increasingly describe as already under way. The electorate that just returned a resounding verdict against that project will find the project unaltered by its vote. In such a climate the origin of any single incident matters less than the use to which it is instantly put, and the speed with which doubt about it is reclassified as betrayal. The Germans of an earlier century learned, too late, what it costs to accept the enemy their government hands them without asking to see the proof. The proof, this time, is still classified. The certainty was on the news within the day.

Via Remix News,

A new poll in Germany has delivered yet another shocking blow to the political establishment. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) has reached 30 percent for the first time while stretching its lead over the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) to 10 points, with the Union reaching a historic low of just 20 percent. In addition, another poll has also put the CDU even lower, at 18 percent.

According to the GMS poll, the governing black-red coalition of Chancellor Friedrich Merz's conservatives and the far-left SPD would no longer command a majority. Compared with GMS's mid-July survey, the Union lost three points and the AfD gained two.

"Important milestone cracked: With 30%, our AfD is now already 10 percentage points ahead of the Union! The citizens want the political change - and they will get it. Time for the AfD!" wrote AfD co-leader Alice Weidel on X.

Wichtige Marke geknackt: Mit 30% liegt unsere AfD nun bereits 10 Prozentpunkte vor der Union! Die Bürger wollen den politischen Wechsel – und sie werden ihn bekommen. Zeit für die AfD! pic.twitter.com/I2MHeUMCZr

— Alice Weidel (@Alice_Weidel) September 14, 2026

A new YouGov poll released today has the AfD at 29 percent but the CDU is even lower, at 18 percent, an absolutely abysmal result for the paryt.

The numbers arrive days after the CDU's heavy defeat in Saxony-Anhalt, where the AfD won 43.8 percent. Merz himself described the result as a shock for his party. "We are all deeply shocked; we did not expect such a result," he said.

Personal ratings for the chancellor are equally grim. In a recent Insa survey, 78 percent of respondents answered "no" when asked, "Is Friedrich Merz (still) the right chancellor?" Only 14 percent said yes; 8 percent offered no opinion. Even among CDU voters, the picture is bleak for Merz: 58 percent opposed him and just 36 percent supported him.

Pressure inside the CDU is growing. Speculation about a possible change at the top has circulated for weeks, with North Rhine-Westphalia Minister-President Hendrik Wüst and Bavaria's Markus Söder frequently named as potential successors. Söder, for his part, said the long-standing "firewall" against the AfD is not working.

?????? After AfD's victory in Saxony-Anhalt, Alice Weidel takes Chancellor Merz to task during a raucous debate.

"Because [Germans] have to deal daily with the consequences of mass migration, with the hatred of foreign groups toward their own, with hatred of Christians, with… pic.twitter.com/lBjLNPt9hM

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) September 9, 2026

"This 'firewall model' has failed," he said.

Instead, he offered a different image:

"We in Bavaria see ourselves as a protective wall."

He argued that simply isolating the AfD without confronting its arguments no longer works. Instead, he wants to confront the AfD on issues such as immigration.It remains to be seen how that is possible if the CDU keeps allying with left-wing parties.

However, it is important to note that Söder continues to rule out a cooperation or coalition with the AfD.

"Not talking about the content at all, putting them in a corner and cobbling together some majorities around them without addressing the issues. That is the wrong path," he said.

AfD co-leader Alice Weidel, speaking after the Saxony-Anhalt vote, engaged in an intense debate with Merz in the Bundestag, saying, "The voters in Saxony-Anhalt have told you in the language of the democratic sovereign with all clarity: black-red is over."

Merz has countered by calling the AfD a "destructive force" that "wants to destabilize our country."

State elections in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin on Sept. 20 will put Merz's CDU further to the test. Speculation is growing that if the CDU falters during those elections, enormous pressure will be placed on Merz and his role as chancellor could become untenable.

Read more here...

Via The Cradle

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

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

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

An availability zone refers to a cluster of one or more data centers sitting inside the same geographic region, the structure AWS relies on to keep services running when a single site goes down.

The outages trace back to March, when the US and Israel attacked Iran, and Tehran responded with missile and drone salvos against Israel and Gulf states hosting US military bases. 

AWS confirmed at the time that two of its UAE facilities took direct hits, while a drone strike near one of its Bahraini sites left the infrastructure there destroyed.

Most Bahrain-based customers shifted their workloads elsewhere on AWS advice before the region went dark in April, but the company says it has now exhausted every option for recovering whatever was left behind.

The losses have called into question the resilience of the Gulf's fast-expanding cloud and AI infrastructure. The UAE is already redrawing plans to war-proof a major AI data center project, weighing decentralized site building alongside underground and blast-resistant construction, and even equipping the data center itself with anti-air defenses.

Israel and the US have long ago transformed AI infrastructure into a weapon of war deployed extensively across West Asian theaters. 

Cloud platforms, data centers, and high-capacity computing systems now help store intelligence, process intercepted communications, analyze surveillance, and support military operations across West Asia, extensively so in Gaza and Iran. 

Iran maintains that data centers operated by US technology companies are not simply civilian facilities, but strategic assets supporting US and Israeli aggression, thereby making them legitimate targets for retaliation.

AI has become a central instrument of US and Israeli warfare across West Asia, embedded in how targets are chosen, tracked, and struck. 

Israel has weaponized AI platforms including automated targeting systems like The Gospel, Lavender, and Where’s Daddy? to harvest mass data, autonomously generate kill lists, and orchestrate systematic airstrikes and assassinations against Palestinians. 

Backed by corporate infrastructure like Microsoft Azure, which stored massive caches of intercepted Palestinian communications, the Israeli military has deployed AI-driven drone surveillance to track and assassinate Palestinians.

The US has run algorithmic warfare systems such as Palantir's Maven to process satellite, drone, and radar intelligence, using machine learning to speed the production of targeting recommendations against Iranian forces.

More than 1,000 targets were designated within the first 24 hours of the war on Iran, one of which resulted in the massacre of at least 150 people, including at least 120 schoolchildren at the Shajareh Tayyebeh elementary school in Minab.

Syria's fuel price hike protests have persisted from Sunday into the heart of this week, and increasingly they are becoming full on anti-Sharaa regime demonstrations. Of course Sharaa - whose al Qaeda/ISIS name is Jolani - was never elected in the first place.

Monday into Tuesday the protests have spread across multiple cities and governates, including Raqqa in the east and Aleppo in the north.

Demonstrators have been burning tires, blocking highways, and confronting security forces after Damascus announced sudden massive increase in fuel prices.

A RESULT OF NEOLIBERAL SHOCK THERAPY in wake of CIA-ORCHESTRATED REGIME CHANGE

Sunday saw authorities raise diesel prices by up to 40% and petrol prices by 28%, after not just years but decades of government regulated price controls and subsidies. 

Already the country was smashed by proxy war and sweeping US-led sanctions, not to mention a decade-long US troop occupation of Syria's oil and gas fields in the northeast, which strangled the population (as part of efforts to overthrow secular Ba'ath leader Bashar al-Assad). 

The West and Gulf powers then gave its backing to Jolani as self-declared president once Assad was ousted in December 2024. He had literally been a member of ISIS and was a founder of Syrian al-Qaeda (Nusra Front, later HTS). Washington, London, Riyadh, and Paris have embraced him - after they and their intelligence services basically put him in power.

Large protests are erupting in Syria, with many people calling for the step down of the Al Qaeda regime leader, Jolani

This video shows protests in Aleppo. pic.twitter.com/39rKf2ictq

— Brian’s Breaking News and Intel (@intelFromBrian) September 14, 2026

When last month Washington finally lifted most sanctions on Damascus, the population hoped this might translate into the common people finally catching a break.

But alas, outrage is spilling into the streets over Jolani regime incompetence. 

Read: Prolific Recruiter Of Teenage Suicide Bombers Earns US Sanctions Relief, Days Before 9/11 Anniversary

Aside from the ISIS pedigree of the US-backed government in Damascus, one Syrian commenter has outlined examples of Jolani/Sharaa regime incompetence:

1) We have no Prime Minister - Al Sharaa is the de facto PM

2) There is no unified 3-5-10 yr strategy that drives how every ministry works.

3) This means each ministry working on its own. Yes ministers are checking with the presidency on the priorities and deliverables, but they are working with or cross referencing with the wider cabinet.

4) I dont think the ministers meet that often with the president (acting PM).

5) These alignment mtgs are integral. Syria must have a national strategy, with clear cut objectives & plans for every ministry, defining how they all work towards a common goal.

Tonight's Syria fuel hike protests are larger and angrier than yesterday's

Currently protests and road blocks are ongoing in several Syrian governorates

If jolani regime fails to appease them by Thursday, then expect major escalation on Friday (after Friday prayers) pic.twitter.com/iQ4mVfijdf

— The'Nimr'Tiger (@Souria4Syrians) September 14, 2026

Some reports say the people are even calling for the return of Assad, echoed in popular street chants heard in some of the protests.

Other pundits have alleged violent tactics by security groups, including firing off live rounds to disperse the protests.

Slogans calling for Assad's return spark alarm in Syria —SOHR

Largest protests since Al-Sharaa took power spread, with roads blocked for days after fuel prices raised

‘Even with the world sanctioning Assad, prices never reached this level’ — protester confronts security forces pic.twitter.com/hrdIuItVFC

— RT Intl (@RT_on_X) September 14, 2026

From Sunday:

DropSite: Residents blocking the Damascus–Aleppo international highway near Maarrat al-Nu’man, south of Idlib, on Sunday, as protests spread following government increases in fuel prices.

?????? Protests erupt across Syria over fuel price hikes and rising cost of living

Footage circulating online shows residents blocking the Damascus–Aleppo international highway near Maarrat al-Nu’man, south of Idlib, on Sunday, as protests spread following government increases in… pic.twitter.com/mVwMUhu5qx

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) September 14, 2026

Protests in the east, nearly formerly US-occupied oil fields...

?????//?? ??? ?? ??? ??? ?????.. ??????? ???//???? ???? ?????? ????? ???????? ??? ??? ?????.#?????#V_News#?????_?????_????????? pic.twitter.com/bReSVKjKP2

— V News (@VAgencyia) September 15, 2026

Where has President Sharaa been this week? He's getting the red carpet treatment in Dubai for the "Arab Media Summit 2026".

The following is deeply ironic as various places in Syria burn amid enraged demonstrations:

Al-Sharaa, who spoke at the summit’s “Syria of the Future” event, also met with Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed bin Rashid Al-Maktoum, Dubai’s crown prince, and Sheikh Ahmed bin Mohammed bin Rashid Al-Maktoum, Dubai’s second deputy ruler, who is also the chairman of the Dubai Media Council, according to the Syrian Arab News Agency.

Over a decade ago, Jolani's al-Nusra Front was introduced to Syria and on the world stage via its squadrons of suicide bombers...

In 2013, Jolani sent 2 suicide bombers belonging to his organisation the Nusra front

They destroyed Al Kindi hospital

Al Kindi hospital was one of the best & modern hospitals in Syria. It provided free treatment to the public

Today the hospital is gone, & Jolani is "president" pic.twitter.com/hh4bJrsGHf

— The'Nimr'Tiger (@Souria4Syrians) September 15, 2026

Should the protests and unrest persist into Friday, which is the Islamic day of prayer and the start of the weekend in the Middle East, the situation could explode. It doesn't seem like Jolani has any answers or strategy at this point. Perhaps he'll hang out in Dubai and with his royal Gulf backers a little longer.

After the US was essentially forced to conduct a major and rapid draw down of forces from the Gulf and Mideast region in the wake of Iran's 'unexpectedly' large retaliation for Operation Epic Fury, it seems all that Washington is left to do is arm regional allies to the teeth and wish them the best.

Early this month the US approved two potential Saudi defense packages valued at a whopping $5.75 billion. The forthcoming deals will reportedly focus on transferring extended-range precision bombs and bolstering Abrams tanks in the kingdom.

Ironically this comes at a moment that Saudi-backed coalition forces in Yemen - with all its military tech - are getting rolled back by Ansar Allah fighters in sandals.

Naturally, next on the list comes Israel.

On Tuesday, over a week since the planned Saudi sale was reported, The Washington Post reveals the following:

President Donald Trump's administration is planning to sell to Israel a munitions package worth $2.8 billion, which will include tens of thousands of highly destructive 2,000-pound bombs, according to a U.S. official familiar with the sale.

The planned sale, which has been informally communicated to relevant congressional committees who weigh in on large arms sales, includes 20,000 MK 84s and 20,000 BLU-117s, the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said.

WaPo calls the package "the largest" planned sale of 2,000 pound bombs to Israel in years.

Just prior to initial reporting of this dropping at around midday Tuesday, Tucker Carlson revealed on X: "According to an informed federal official, in the coming months the Trump administration plans to send a total of 40,000 Mark 84 and Blu-117 bombs to the government of Israel. Each bomb weighs 2,000 pounds. This appears to be the largest transfer of conventional explosive ordnance from the United States in modern history."

Carlson put it in perspective in the following commentary:

How big is this shipment? It amounts to 40,000 tons of bombs. For perspective, the largest American air raid of World War Two was the Eighth Air Force’s attack on Berlin in March of 1945. Combined, the 2,023 Allied aircraft involved dropped about 3,000 tons of bombs. That’s 7.5 percent of what Trump is sending to Israel. That same month, March of 1945, the US Army Air Forces began the single most destructive bombing raid in human history, Operation Meetinghouse over Tokyo. More than 100,000 Japanese civilians were killed. By the end of that operation, the US had dropped 1,600 tons of bombs. That’s four percent of what Trump is sending to Israel. World War Two ended five months later, when the US dropped an atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima. The shipment Trump is sending to Israel amounts to more than three times the destructive power of that nuclear explosion. There is no precedent for what the Trump administration is doing. Nor is there a justification. The government of Israel is not fighting World War Two, or even a war. It is engaged in periodic skirmishes with a guerrilla force in Lebanon, and it is working to exterminate an unarmed civilian population in Gaza. Neither front requires modern 2,000-pound bombs.

The former Fox host further warned this portends Israel could soon go even more 'gloves off' and unleash further hell on Gaza and Lebanon, or possibly even Iran - at a moment the US seems to be trying to find an exit from the hot phase of the conflict.

More from Carlson:

How did this happen? The request for 40,000 new high-explosive civilian-killing bombs originated at the US Embassy in Jerusalem, which is run by Christian Zionist Ambassador Mike Huckabee and his aide David Milstein, who is the stepson of Fox News host Mark Levin. From there it moved to the State Department, where Marco Rubio enthusiastically approved it. At this point, only four more people need to sign off before the bombs ship to Israel: Senators Jim Risch and Jeanne Shaheen, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; and Congressmen Brian Mast and Gregory Meeks, the top two members of the equivalent House committee. All four are committed neocons. Collectively they’ve taken millions from the Israel lobby. In 2015, Brian Mast traveled to Israel to volunteer for the Israeli military. In 2023, Mast showed up in the House of Representatives wearing an IDF uniform. It’s hard to imagine any of them hesitating before sending more free bombs to Israel. Only public outrage can stop this.

Poll after recent poll has shown that by and large the American public is finally questioning Washington's blank check approach to Israel.

DropSite: Carlson calls the taxpayer-funded, roughly $3 billion package “a gift” to a government “working to exterminate an unarmed civilian population in Gaza.”

?? Tucker Carlson reports, citing a federal official, that President Trump plans to send Israel 40,000 MK-84 and BLU-117 bombs, each weighing 2,000 pounds, in the coming months. The Washington Post’s John Hudson separately also confirmed the proposed transfer.

Carlson calls the… https://t.co/xBDJxO0P3R

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) September 15, 2026

And plenty of MAGA and conservative 'influencers' have called out Trump's Israel policy as opposite America First. This as the Iran war is continuing to prove to be deeply unpopular. This also after over 70,000 people have been killed in Gaza. Israeli officials themselves openly admitted this figure.

As we've been documenting, it is clear that major damage has yet to be communicated to the American public regarding Iran's major retaliation on US bases in the Gulf and Mideast since the start of Trump's Operation Epic Fury. 

During the same week that a long awaited Pentagon/Department of War Inspector General's report was released covering the first four months of the Iran War, new leaked photographs have emerged of never-before-seen base damage.

"New photos obtained exclusively by CBS News reveal for the first time the widespread damage and destruction of buildings and vehicles at multiple U.S. positions across the Middle East, as a result of Iranian missile and drone attacks," according to a bombshell Tuesday CBS report. Below is from Prince Sultan AFB, Saudi Arabia:

The outlet describes that the photos have been submitted by US service members under strict secrecy and anonymity - given the Pentagon has sought to enforce a crackdown on troops sharing the extent of damage, and amid orders aimed at maintaining operational security. But critics say the Pentagon and Trump administration are engaged in a cover-up and propaganda. 

"This is major damage to our bases that hasn't been communicated to the American public," an actively deployed unnamed service member said to CBS News.

The service member added: "We're standing there with our eyes closed getting punched in the face."

Below is from Camp Arifjan, Kuwait:

Recent Iranian attacks on bases in Jordan have continued intermittently over the past weeks, and some pundits have warned that American personnel that continue to be stationed there are essentially sitting ducks.

The ballistic missile volleys from Iran have only gotten bigger, such as the last major attack on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan during the night of September 8-9.

On Monday the newly released Pentagon Inspector General's report said that "hundreds" of buildings and structures at US bases have been destroyed...

“Iranian strikes damaged and destroyed hundreds of buildings and structures at U.S. bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, and Jordan during the conflict.”

More leaked images via CBS:

It was not just bases that got directly hit, and mainly within merely the opening weeks of Operation Epic Fury - but even consulates, embassies, and intelligence buildings have been targeted and suffered damage.

"U.S. diplomatic facilities in four countries—Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—suffered physical damage from Iranian strikes," the Pentagon has conceded.

American service members in Saudi are leaking photos of bases destroyed by Iranian strikes that the Pentagon is trying to cover up pic.twitter.com/glyqOKBWwA

— The Gulag (@WelcomeTheGulag) September 15, 2026

According to prior analysis from Amerikanets: "After destroying much of the radar network protecting regional US Axis bases in the previous hot phase of the war, Iranian planners have prioritized targeting fuel storage, drone hangers, refueling tankers, and barracks."

The same analysis concluded: "The American response has been to pull assets back ever further from Iran, to bases in Israel and Jordan. We’ll call this process debasification. Iran’s debasification strategy takes advantage of the inherent asymmetry between the vastly different force structure and capabilities of Iranian rocket forces and US Axis air forces."

See the full photo set here.

You know those Flock surveillance cameras everyone hates? Trump just came out in favor of them. 

Speaking with reporters on Sunday on Air Force One en route to Joint Base Andrews, Trump endorsed the AI-powered mass surveillance tool. 

"Speaking of [AI], Flock cameras. You haven’t talked a lot about these Flock cameras. A lot of law enforcement say they really help them. Would you be willing to back that?" a reporter asked Trump. 

"No, I sort of like them because of that, because of law enforcement. But some people don’t. They think it’s an infringement," Trump replied, adding "I like them." 

Trump previously said in August that he would make up his mind regarding Flock cameras "over the next couple of weeks," telling the DCNF "You have pros and cons, right? It’s being studied right now." 

As the Epoch Times notes further, in recent months, multiple cities across the United States have removed their Flock cameras, including Tempe, Arizona; Bellingham, Massachusetts; Cave Creek, Arizona; and multiple counties in Texas.

Earlier this month, the Dallas Police Department said the agency would shut down hundreds of Flock cameras in the coming days in response to a pause in funding.

Florida’s Department of Transportation, meanwhile, said in a memo that it would end its use of license-plate reading cameras, including those made by Flock.

More than 100 jurisdictions have canceled their contracts with Flock and other automated license plate reader providers, according to a database from the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit law firm that says it aims to end government abuse of power.

Flock CEO Garrett Langley has pushed back against the growing concerns about the cameras, saying that people should be worried about their privacy but added that the license plate-reading cameras can be used to promote safety.

“I value my privacy, my family values their privacy, my employees value their privacy, but what we’re talking about is safety as well,” he told Fox News in August. “When people talk about just one of these, privacy or safety, they’re prioritizing the wrong thing.”

“And what we have to prioritize as a country is compromise—when I think about legislation that calls for an outright ban, that’s like banning vehicles,” he said.

The issue has also become a midterm campaign target and has drawn scrutiny in Congress.

In Congress, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said he launched a probe into Flock cameras and demanded that Langley provide his office answers on safeguards to protect Americans’ data.

Earlier this year, Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) introduced a measure in the House of Representatives, the “Protection Against Mass Surveillance Act,” that would bar federal agencies from using automated surveillance systems to track, record, and identify people. That includes automated license plate-reading systems like Flock.

Josh Shapiro, the Democratic Pennsylvania governor seeking reelection and considered a potential contender for the White House in 2028, said in late August that he would support a statewide ban. In early September, his Republican opponent, Pennsylvania Treasurer Stacy Garrity, said in a statement, “Flock cameras are an intrusive invasion of privacy and they should be banned.”

Zachary Stieber and The Associated Press contributed to this report.