Neoconservatism began to take root in the 1970s as strength through militarism and an interventionist foreign policy were increasingly seen as the path to peace. Ideological Manicheanism and narratives of peace through strength challenged more traditional concepts of security that focused on mitigating the security dilemma. Human rights, rather than restraining the use of force, were discovered as a weapon that would legitimize the removal of restraints on the use of force.
I had a conversation with Alastair Crooke and Alexander Mercouris about the geoeconomic confusion in Europe. The US is repositioning itself as the unipolar world order has ended, and multipolarity is already here. The Europeans have no strategy and the policies subsequent lack direction and reason. In Isreal, society has polarised to the extent that political and societal instability will become a challenge to national security.
U.S. taxpayers picked up the tab for about $6.2 billion worth of research, development and distribution of GLP-1s, the new class of blockbuster weight-loss drugs, according to an investigation by The Lever.
Taxpayers fund the research. Pharma reaps massive profits. And Americans pay up to 11 times more for the drugs than people in other countries. The marked-up prices are inflating insurance premiums and risk bankrupting the country’s healthcare system, according to The Lever.
Researchers at Bentley University shared data with The Lever showing that between 1980 and 2024, the federal government spent $6.2 billion on the discovery and development of GLP-1 molecules, plus research on how to use those molecules to treat diabetes, obesity and other health conditions.
“You have to know a lot to develop a drug and to apply it in people,” Dr. Fred Ledley, professor of Natural and Applied Sciences at Bentley University in Waltham, Massachusetts, told The Lever. “What we call a ‘mature body of knowledge’ is not cheap.” Ledley provided the spending data to The Lever.
That research laid the foundation for the development of Ozempic and triggered a wave of similar drugs that spawned a massive market.
Media tout ‘miracle cures’ but weight-loss drugs linked to serious side effects
The media has focused less attention on the serious side effects of these drugs, which range from vomiting, diarrhea, and nausea to pancreatitis, stomach paralysis, kidney disease, thyroid cancer and sudden vision loss.
As of May 2024, more than 15 million people — 1 in 8 adults — were taking GLP-1 drugs, which generated more than $50 billion for the drugmakers in 2024 alone, reportedly leading to drug shortages.
At the time, Novo Nordisk said that at least 25,000 people in the U.S. were starting its drug Wegovy each week, according to CNN.
“In 2022 alone, the federal health insurance plan Medicare spent $5.7 billion on this class of drugs, 10 times what it spent in 2018.”
Big price tags spawn market for alternatives
A month’s supply of GLP-1 drugs in the U.S costs over $1,000, leading many people to seek alternative versions of the drugs made by compounding pharmacies, which mix the drugs themselves.
Drug compounding companies, like the direct-to-consumer telehealth companies Hims & Hers, Noom, Ro, 23andMe, and WeightWatchers, are also raking in major profits from selling compounded versions of the drugs.
Last year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned against compounded versions, even though it allows compounding companies to make the drugs during shortages of the brand-name versions.
The agency doesn’t monitor the compounded drugs for safety, efficacy or quality, according to CNN.
Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk are pushing the compounding pharmacies to stop making the drugs, according to NPR.
Last year’s shortage of the GLP-1s ended in February, so compounding is no longer permitted, but The Lever said it is uncertain whether the secondary market will be shut down.
Price of GLP-1s driving up healthcare costs and more
Last year, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) launched an investigation into the “outrageously high prices” GLP-1 drug manufacturers charge.
Dr. Mehmet Oz, nominated by President Donald Trump to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid — which pays for the drugs when used for indications other than weight loss by people in those programs — has spent years promoting weight-loss drugs.
A 2023 study by Ledley and colleagues highlighted the crucial role of U.S. government funding in drug development, showing that the National Institutes of Health contributed $187 billion to research that led to almost all drugs approved in the U.S. between 2010 and 2019.
The research focuses on “basic science,” according to The Lever, such as identifying proteins or genes linked to a disease or studying how GLP-1s might work.
Despite U.S. taxpayers’ funding for the research, Ozempic costs about $1,000 per month in the U.S., compared to $147 in Canada, $103 in Germany, $93 in the U.K. and $83 in France.
Wegovy is listed in the U.S. for more than $1,300 per month, compared to $186 in Denmark, $137 in Germany and $92 in the U.K.
The high cost of the drugs in the U.S. is driving up healthcare costs overall.
The Lever reported:
“This year, private health plan costs are expected to rise by 8 percent — the highest increase in 15 years apart from 2021, during the global COVID-19 pandemic — thanks in part to the rising cost of prescription medications. GLP-1 drugs are ‘a major driver of higher prescription drug costs,’ according to recent reports by the benefits consulting firm Segal.
“A Senate report from last May also found that if half of all Medicare and Medicaid patients with obesity took Wegovy and other GLP-1 weight-loss drugs, it could cost the federal health care system $166 billion per year — nearly as much as what Medicare and Medicaid spent on all retail prescription drugs in 2022.”
Those higher costs affect the broader economy. Con Edison, the largest electricity provider in New York City, announced a likely rate hike, citing a 12% increase in employee benefit costs due to the rising costs and use of GLP-1 drugs.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) will no longer fund research on “vaccine hesitancy” and strategies for increasing vaccine uptake, The Washington Post reported Monday.
According to Science, the NIH sent notices canceling or reducing grants to the affected researchers, stating:
“It is the policy of NIH not to prioritize research activities that focus on gaining scientific knowledge on why individuals are hesitant to be vaccinated and/or explore ways to improve vaccine interest and commitment.”
NIH will terminate at least 33 vaccine hesitancy grants, Science reported. Nine other grants will be modified or reduced.
The terminations came after NIH, on behalf of interim director Matthew Memoli, asked each of its institutes to develop a list of ongoing and future vaccine hesitancy grants.
Science reported that the agency is considering taking similar action for research related to mRNA products.
Of the terminated grants, 14 were funded by the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases — the agency formerly led by Dr. Anthony Fauci — and focused on vaccines for COVID-19, chickenpox, mpox (formerly monkeypox), HPV and a hypothetical gonorrhea vaccine.
“The project appeared on the list because one of its aims ‘is to evaluate health care worker’s [sic] and potential patient’s attitudes towards acceptance of a gonorrhea vaccine if one is developed,’” Science reported.
Other canceled grants targeted modeling of disease outbreaks or “promoting vaccine uptake among racial minority groups or understanding why some parents are reluctant to accept childhood and adolescent vaccines.”
NIH did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
Grants targeted ‘vaccine-hesitant’ minority and conservative communities
The Defender previously reported on multiple taxpayer-funded grants, including some awarded by the NIH, that funded research on decreasing vaccine hesitancy and increasing HPV vaccine uptake.
The Defender obtained the grant information through a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests in 2023 and 2024
One set of documents, obtained in 2023, revealed that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a $4.7 million grant to a scientist — and paid consultant for Merck — to conduct research on how to increase teen uptake of the HPV vaccine. Merck manufactures Gardasil, the only HPV vaccine available in the U.S.
In 2024, the grant’s principal investigator, Noel Brewer, Ph.D., a psychologist and professor in the Department of Health Behavior at the University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, was appointed to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on vaccine recommendations.
FOIA documents Children’s Health Defense (CHD) received in 2024 revealed that HHS issued $4 million to fund the development of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool designed to “inoculate” social media users against HPV vaccine “misinformation” posted on social media.
Other documents CHD received in 2023 revealed that HHS granted $600,000 for research on how to increase HPV vaccine uptake among Black teens, and that NIH granted $519,399 for a four-year study on a smartphone tool to increase HPV vaccine uptake among adolescents whose parents are “vaccine-hesitant.”
The NIH also funded such studies overseas. FOIA documents CHD received in 2024 showed that NIH awarded $340,000 to test psychological tactics aimed at persuading South African fifth-graders and parents to accept the HPV vaccine.
In 2023, documents showed that the CDC had issued hundreds of millions of dollars in grants since 2021 for the development of “culturally tailored” pro-vaccine materials and for the training of “influential messengers” to promote COVID-19 and flu vaccines to communities of color in each U.S. state.
The CDC also funded “Chair Care,” a New Mexico program that trained and paid hairstylists as “trusted messengers” that would target the state’s Hispanic, Black, Native American and conservative populations, who were shown to have the lowest vaccine uptake and highest “vaccine hesitancy.”
‘Vaccine hesitancy’ research targeted personal choice not to vaccinate
“There’s no such thing as ‘vaccine hesitancy,’” Rogers said. “The term itself is completely Orwellian. It was likely coined by an expensive Big Pharma PR firm. The purpose of the term is to cast aspersions on parents who do proper research on the risks of medical interventions,” Rogers said.
According to Rogers, studies like those being discontinued were likely backed by pharmaceutical companies to ascertain how to increase vaccine demand.
“Studies on so-called ‘vaccine hesitancy’ and ‘overcoming vaccine hesitancy’ are thinly disguised marketing studies on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry,” Rogers said. “Big Pharma makes plenty of money. American taxpayers should not be paying for marketing studies on behalf of one of the most vile industries on Earth.”
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher said it is inappropriate for the NIH to allocate resources to study people’s personal health choices.
“The purpose of studying vaccine hesitancy is to find ways to increase vaccine uptake in individuals that have made the personal choice to not vaccinate with a particular product,” Hulscher said. “The federal government should simply respect their choice and not waste valuable resources and taxpayer money on trying to change their minds.”
Internal medicine physician Dr. Clayton J. Baker said that during the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts to address “vaccine hesitancy” resulted in gimmicks intended to increase uptake of the COVID-19 shots — and punish those who declined vaccination.
“During COVID, we had health officials combating ‘vaccine hesitancy’ with bribes of lottery tickets, donuts, even free beer, and meting out punishments such as being fired from one’s job. Medical practice surrounding vaccines descended to a disgracefully unethical state during COVID,” Baker said.
mRNA research grants next on NIH’s chopping block?
Citing an internal NIH memo sent March 6, Science reported that Memoli “has requested information on NIH’s investment in mRNA vaccines research,” including ongoing or planned grants and contracts, and collaborations with outside partners.
NIH institutes and programs were asked to respond by this week.
Hulscher drew parallels between mRNA research and “vaccine hesitancy” research.
“Vaccine hesitancy will remain high as a result of the federal government authorizing and mandating experimental modified mRNA injections that are suspected to have killed, injured or permanently disabled over a million Americans. The longer this disaster remains unacknowledged, the harder it will be to regain the trust of Americans,” Hulscher said.
According to the Post, it is “unclear” whether HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “had a role, directly or indirectly, in the move to cancel these grants.”
HHS oversees federal health agencies, including NIH and the CDC.
Scientists and doctors quoted by the Post expressed concern over the NIH’s planned cuts of “vaccine hesitancy” research.
Manoj Sharma, Ph.D., a professor of social and behavioral health at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, who received a previous CDC grant for vaccine hesitancy research, told the Post, “There is an urgent need to enhance vaccine acceptance behavior, especially due to the potential resurgence of measles and COVID-19 still looming.”
But for Baker, “This statement exemplifies the real goal of these studies, which is not to study behaviors, but to drive behaviors in a predetermined direction.” He added:
“‘Vaccine hesitancy’ grants do not fund scientific inquiry so much as psychological manipulation programs. They reject freedom of choice in favor of a predetermined behavior. It is a form of coercion. Coercion, be it subtle or obvious, is the opposite of informed consent.
“Informed consent is absolutely central to the ethical practice of medicine. NIH should not fund research that undermines the ethical practice of medicine.”
Hulscher suggested that NIH resources previously earmarked for “vaccine hesitancy” studies “should be allocated to proper safety testing of the entire childhood vaccine schedule, where there are currently no products licensed based on long-term placebo-controlled trials.”
Other experts suggested that these resources could be used to rectify harms related to the promotion — or mandate — of COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic.
“The money saved from cancelling these studies should instead be paid to independent researchers who are documenting the experiences of the millions of Americans injured by vaccines,” Rogers said.
“The grant money would be better used to produce a historical document of the abuses of informed consent during COVID, than to continue these psychological manipulation programs disguised as scientific inquiry,” Baker said.
A child has been killed and four other civilians injured as militants aligned with Syria’s ruling Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) regime launched a volley of rockets at a residential neighborhood in Lebanon’s eastern province of Baalbek-Hermel.
Lebanon’s official National News Agency reported that rockets fired from Syrian territory had landed in the Lebanese village of Qasr near the border.
The Lebanese al-Mayadeen television news channel said a rocket launched by HTS militants struck a house in Hawdh al-Assi district.
A child was killed and four other individuals were wounded in the shelling.
This was followed by a Lebanese Army reconnaissance drone patrolling the skies over the Hermel district and border areas near Syria.
A Lebanese security source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said tensions began after three Syrian militants crossed into Lebanese territory at the village of Qasr, where they were shot at by local gunmen.
The source said the reason why they entered was unknown.
Syria’s HTS administration on Sunday accused Lebanon’s Hezbollah of abducting three soldiers to Lebanon and killing them there. The resistance movement roundly dismissed the allegation.
Hezbollah denies involvement in border clashes
Hezbollah in a statement denied any involvement in clashes with HTS forces or in Syrian territory.
The group said it “categorically denies any connection to the events taking place today on the Lebanese-Syrian border.”
It added that it “reaffirms its previous announcements that Hezbollah has no relation to any events within Syrian territory.”
The Lebanese National News Agency later reported that the bodies of three Syrian militants had been handed over to Syria via the Lebanese Red Cross.
Last month, more than 10 people were injured after shelling from Syria’s Qusayr countryside targeted border towns in Lebanon’s Hermel region.
Amid rising tensions, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Syria’s de facto leader Abu Mohammed al-Jolani agreed in a phone call on Friday to coordinate efforts to stabilize the border and prevent attacks on civilians.
JENIN – The Jenin City municipality said that the Israeli occupation forces destroyed all the streets of Jenin refugee camp and 85 percent of the city’s streets and displaced the residents of entire neighborhoods in the camp.
In press remarks on Monday, Jenin municipality director Mamdouh Assaf said that about 8,000 commercial facilities had been completely shut down in Jenin as a result of the Israeli military operation. However, he did not specify whether these closures occurred within the city itself or in the refugee camp.
For his part, Jenin mayor Mohamed Jarrar said that 25 percent of Jenin’s residents had been displaced by the Israeli army, adding that the number of displaced citizens from Jenin camp surged to 21,000 people.
Jarrar described the scale of destruction caused by Israeli bulldozers in Jenin as “immense,” pointing to a sharp rise in the poverty rate as a result of the Israeli military operation that has severe economic repercussions for the residents.
In a related context, the Palestinian health ministry said that since the beginning of the second academic semester in early February, 72 schools in the cities of Jenin and Tulkarem have stopped providing direct education as a result of the ongoing Israeli aggression.
The Israeli occupation army launched a large-scale military operation in the northern West Bank 56 days ago, unleashing a violent campaign in Jenin that resulted in the death and injury of dozens of civilians, widespread destruction of homes and public and private property, and the displacement of thousands.
The operation later expanded to Tulkarem and Tubas, targeting mainly the refugee camps of Tulkarem, Nur Shams, and al-Fari’ah.
Hamas has demanded entering the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu turned his back on instead of introducing “new and side agreements,” Anadolu reported.
In response to statements by US President Donald Trump’s special Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, Hamas’s spokesperson Hazem Qassem told Anadolu that “implementing the ceasefire’s phases guarantees achieving the agreement’s objectives,” adding that “the language of threats will not yield anything positive, but will complicate matters without serving the agreement’s purposes.”
Qassem’s statements came after Witkoff described Hamas’s demands regarding the ceasefire agreement as “an unacceptable response.”
Hamas’s spokesperson added that achieving the agreement’s objectives in a proper and sustainable way means implementing what has already been agreed on by all parties.
He stressed that the US administration had proposed a framework that went into effect on 19 January, and that mediators, including Witkoff, acted to implement that framework, which guarantees releasing all captives and achieving a lasting calm.
A prominent legal expert says Yemen is being bombed by the United States and the United Kingdom for fulfilling obligations set by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA).
Craig Mokhiber, a US-based human rights lawyer and former United Nations official, took to his X handle, formerly Twitter, on Monday to condemn the latest American-British aggression on Yemen.
He said both the ICJ and the UNGA have found that all countries are “legally obliged” to cease any kind of support for the Israeli occupation regime amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
The obligations, he elaborated, include banning any products from the illegal settlements, to cut off all military, diplomatic, economic, commercial, financial, investment, and trade relations with the Israeli occupation, to respect the provisional orders of the ICJ in the Israel genocide case, and to respect their third-state obligations under the Genocide Convention to act to prevent and stop Genocide.
“Yemen is being bombed for respecting these obligations,” he remarked.
Mokhiber, who previously served as the director of the New York office of the UN high commissioner for human rights, resigned from his position in October 2023 in protest against the UN’s “failure” to prevent the genocide of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
He described the US, the UK and much of Europe as “wholly complicit in the horrific assault.”
American and British warplanes attacked Yemen on Saturday night after US President Donald Trump vowed to use “overwhelming lethal force” against the poorest country in the Arab world that had recently resumed a ban on Israeli ships from crossing key maritime regions after the Tel Aviv regime reimposed crippling blockade on the besieged Palestinian territory.
Yemeni health ministry condemned the targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, describing it as a “full-fledged war crime and a blatant violation of international laws and conventions.”
The US-UK military coalition launched another attack on Sunday night, with Yemeni authorities now putting the death toll at more than 50, including women and children.
According to Yemeni reports, American and British warplanes launched at least 47 airstrikes on several sites in Yemen’s capital, Sana’a as well as areas in the northern province of Sa’ada, the central province of al-Bayda, and the southwestern province of Dhamar.
The leader of the Ansarullah resistance movement in a speech on Sunday night warned the United States that the aggression against the Arab country will be met with escalation.
“The aircraft carrier and American warships will be targets for us, and the navigation ban will include the Americans as long as they persist in their aggression,” Abdul Malik al-Houthi said.
“We will respond to escalation with escalation, and we will strike at the American enemy by targeting its aircraft carrier, warships, and imposing a blockade on its vessels.”
Over the weekend President Trump ordered a massive military operation against the small country of Yemen. Was Yemen in the process of attacking the United States? No. Did the President in that case go to Congress and seek a declaration of war against the country? No. The fact is, Yemen hadn’t even threatened the United States before the bombs started falling.
Last year, candidate Trump strongly criticized the Biden Administration’s obsession with foreign interventionism to the detriment of our problems at home. In an interview at the Libertarian National Convention, he criticized Biden’s warmongering to podcaster Tim Pool, saying, “You can solve problems over a telephone. Instead they start dropping bombs. Recently, they’re dropping bombs all over Yemen. You don’t have to do that.”
Yet once in office, Trump turned to military force as his first option. Since the Israel/Hamas ceasefire plan negotiated by President Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, Yemen has left Red Sea shipping alone. However, after Israel implemented a total blockade of humanitarian relief to citizens of Gaza last week, Houthi leaders threatened to again begin blocking Israel’s Red Sea shipping activities.
That was enough for President Trump to drop bombs and launch missiles for hours, killing several dozen Yemeni civilians – including women and children – in the process.
After the attack, Trump not only threatened much more force to be used against Yemen, but he also threatened Iran. His National Security Advisor Mike Waltz added that the US may start bombing Iranian ships in the area, a move that would certainly lead to a major Middle East war.
Like recent Presidents Bush and Obama, candidate Trump promised peace after four years of Joe Biden’s warmongering and World War III brinkmanship. There is little doubt that with our war-weary population this proved the margin of his victory. Unfortunately, as with Bush and Obama, now that he is President, he appears to be heading down a different path.
The Republican Party is gradually becoming a pro-peace, America first party, but the warmongers and neocons of the old line in the Party are not going to let go so easily. Unfortunately many of these dead-enders have found their way to senior positions in Trump’s Administration, with voices of restraint and non-intervention nearly nowhere in sight among his top tier of advisors.
To solve the Yemen problem we must understand it: Russian and Chinese ships, for example, are not being threatened because they are not enabling the Israeli demolition of Gaza. The slaughter there has been facilitated with US money and US weapons. It is the US doing Israel’s bidding both in Gaza and in the Red Sea that is painting a target on us and unnecessarily putting our troops at risk of retaliation.
The US government, starting with Biden and continuing now with Trump, seems eager to make this our war even though, as Rep. Thomas Massie pointed out over the weekend, Red Sea shipping is of minor importance to the US economy.
In a real “America first” foreign policy we would be following the Russian and Chinese lead and staying out of the conflict. It’s not our war. End US military involvement in the Middle East and our troubles disappear. It really is that simple.
The German government has been coercing Afghan refugees into fighting for Ukraine, an anonymous source has claimed to RT. The scheme allegedly targets refugees who have been detained for various crimes, with the threat of deportation if they refuse to comply.
According to the individual, whose identity cannot be disclosed for security reasons, the “German authorities are forcing Afghan migrants to join the International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine in order to urgently replenish the personnel of the Kiev regime’s armed forces, which is experiencing an acute shortage of people.”
The scheme supposedly involves approximately 2,300 refugees detained by German police for various crimes in cities such as Berlin, Bonn, Cologne, Hamburg, Munich, Frankfurt am Main, and Stuttgart.
“In the event of refusal to sign the relevant contract and go to Ukraine, the migrants are threatened with guaranteed extradition to Afghanistan,” the source claimed.
The source went on to allege that a number of German security experts have sounded the alarm over the potential ramifications for Germany’s own national security, especially with respect to the threat posed by radical Islamists.
“Some of the refugees are likely to return to Germany after the expiration of their imposed contracts, possessing skills in handling weapons and explosives, as well as experience in combat,” the experts have warned, according to the source.
Last month, Bild reported that at least one recruitment center belonging to Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov brigade was operating near Berlin. A recruiter told the media outlet that they were seeking “supporters for our new international battalion.”
Russian authorities have consistently prosecuted foreign nationals caught fighting for Kiev, whom they describe as mercenaries. In January, a Russian court sentenced retired US Army Ranger Patrick Creed to 13 years in prison for serving with the Ukrainian military from 2022 to 2023. In March, British citizen James Scott Rhys Anderson was handed a 19-year sentence for participating in Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region.
Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that foreign mercenaries fighting for Kiev are not entitled to the same legal protections under international law as those granted to regular Ukrainian POWs.
The administration of US President Donald Trump is retreating from initiatives aimed at investigating and prosecuting alleged Russian crimes linked to the Ukraine conflict, the New York Times reported on Monday.
According to sources cited by the newspaper, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) will withdraw from the EU-backed International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine (ICPA), established to investigate Russia, Belarus, North Korea, and Iran for the alleged crime of international aggression.
The US became the only non-European ICPA member when it joined in 2023. Sources told the NYT that Washington had informed European partners about its imminent exit ahead of a formal announcement.
Administration officials reportedly justified the withdrawal by citing a broader reduction in government expenditures. The DOJ had pledged $1 million to support European investigators when US participation was initially announced.
Additionally, Washington is curtailing operations of a DOJ team known as WarCAT, formed in 2022 to train Ukrainian prosecutors on charging and trying Russians for alleged war crimes, according to NYT sources.
Last week, reports emerged that the US had cut funding for a Yale-based research group searching for Ukrainian children “abducted” by Russia. Moscow has dismissed Kiev’s allegations of state-orchestrated kidnappings of thousands of minors as politically motivated mischaracterizations of its evacuation efforts in war-affected areas.
Trump is aiming to normalize bilateral relations with Russia, viewing a resolution of the Ukraine conflict as a crucial step. He and Russian President Vladimir Putin are expected to have a direct phone conversation this week.
On March 15 local time, Michael Abramowitz, director of Voice of America (VOA), an international broadcaster whose parent agency is the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), confirmed on social media that he and “virtually the entire staff” of 1,300 had been placed on leave. A day earlier, the White House ordered budget cuts for multiple federal agencies. Funding for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, and Middle East Broadcasting Networks, which are also parts of USAGM, has also been frozen. The so-called beacon of freedom, VOA, has now been discarded by its own government like a dirty rag.
Founded in 1942, VOA became a frontline propaganda tool in the ideological confrontation of the Cold War. In recent decades, under the banner of promoting so-called freedom and democracy, it has broadcast in over 40 languages worldwide, attempting to shape the image of the US as a “moral high ground.”
However, its independence and credibility have long been questioned and criticized. Known for stirring up conflicts, inciting social divisions, and even participating in regime change efforts, VOA is widely recognized as Washington’s carefully crafted propaganda machine for peaceful evolution, earning itself a notorious reputation on the global stage. Similar to Radio Free Asia and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, its primary function is to serve Washington’s need to attack other countries based on ideological demands.
When it comes to China-related reporting, VOA has an appalling track record. From smearing human rights in China’s Xinjiang to hyping up disputes in the South China Sea, from supporting “Taiwan independence” forces to backing Hong Kong rioters, from fabricating the so-called China virus narrative to promoting the claim of China’s “overcapacity,” almost every malicious falsehood about China has VOA’s fingerprints all over it.
A former VOA employee said that he didn’t realize until he came to China that the VOA news reports he used to read out every day were completely opposite to the real situation in China. The reporter also said that some people working for VOA were dismissed because they suggested increasing positive coverage of China.
Clearly, VOA has never been a “fair and impartial” media outlet, but rather a thoroughly biased “propaganda poison.” Now, in Washington, against the backdrop of reducing federal agency funding, the decision to stop funding for entities like VOA has immediately prompted some anti-China politicians in the US to label this move as “a massive gift” to China, effectively tearing off the fig leaf of VOA as a propaganda tool themselves.
Last month, Elon Musk criticized VOA on X, stating that “Nobody listens to them anymore” and that “It’s just radical left crazy people talking to themselves while torching $1 billion a year of US taxpayer money.” This may reflect the views of a significant portion of the American public.
Perhaps the US government has also realized that continuing to waste substantial national funds on these outdated and ineffective institutions is neither meaningful nor in the best interest of the country. In fact, the continued existence of these institutions only brings more chaos and creates more trouble for the world.
The Cambodian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation once publicly criticized VOA for lacking “professional ethics” and using dirty tactics to smear normal interactions and cooperation between Cambodia and China. In 2023, Kyrgyzstan ordered the closure of the local branch of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and last year, Russia designated Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty as an “undesirable organization.”
The recent suspension of employees at VOA evokes memories of the absurd drama in which a certain anti-China think tank in Australia publicly complained about lacking funds due to cuts in US government funding. This further underscores the awkward reality of the industrial chain behind the “cognitive warfare” narrative concerning China: without financial backers, it is difficult to sustain.
As a tool of “cognitive warfare” that became active during the Cold War and has already shown numerous flaws, the positioning of entities like VOA suggests that they should not exist in today’s multipolar world. Whether it is VOA or anti-China think tanks, budget reductions, layoffs, or even complete closures of these institutions are inevitable outcomes, leading them to be swept into the dustbin of history.
In the information age, the monopoly of information held by some traditional Western media is being shattered. The narrative hegemony maintained by VOA as a “lie factory” can be broken at any moment by a short video from the scene posted by a netizen. The carefully constructed “iron curtain of public opinion” they have built is also on the verge of collapse under the impact of countless media and self-media showcasing authentic content. As more Americans begin to break through their information cocoons and see a real world and a multidimensional China, the demonizing narratives propagated by VOA will ultimately become a laughingstock of the times.
Chinese President Xi Jinping has turned down an invitation to visit Brussels for a summit this year marking the 50th anniversary of his country’s relations with the EU, the Financial Times reported on Sunday.
The Chinese leader’s reported snub comes at a time of growing tensions between Beijing and Brussels. Over the past year, China and the EU have clashed over what the EU believes is Beijing’s dumping of certain key goods and its industrial overproduction. Adding to the tension was a wave of retaliatory tariffs placed by the EU on Chinese goods.
Beijing informed EU officials that Prime Minister Li Qiang would meet the presidents of the European Council and European Commission instead of Xi, the FT said, citing two people familiar with the matter.
The prime minister usually attends the summit when it takes place in Brussels, while the president hosts it in Beijing. However, this time the EU wanted Xi to attend given the significance of the meeting, which marks half a century of diplomatic relations, the sources told the outlet.
“Informal discussions are ongoing, both about setting the date for the EU-China summit this year and the level of representation,” an EU official told the FT, while the Chinese ministry was quoted as saying it did not have any information to provide on the matter.
Tensions between the EU and China intensified following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022 when the EU accused Beijing of supporting Moscow.
China has adhered to a policy of neutrality in the Ukraine conflict, and has firmly rebuffed Western calls to impose sanctions on Russia, opting instead to boost trade with its neighbor. This has led to accusations from the bloc and its NATO allies that Beijing is fueling Russia’s military effort by supplying it with dual-use components that can be utilized in weapons production.
The rift deepened last year after the EU imposed tariffs of up to 35.3% on Chinese electric vehicles, claiming that Chinese manufacturers benefit from unfair government subsidies. The decision sparked strong objections from Beijing, which retaliated by slapping tariffs of between 30.6% and 39% on the bloc’s brandy imports. The move hit major French cognac producers particularly hard, as they rely heavily on sales in the Chinese market.
China has also filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization, arguing that the EU’s “protectionist” actions amount to “an abuse of trade remedies” and violate WTO rules.
In retrospect it can be seen that the 1967 war, the Six Days War, was the turning point in the relationship between the Zionist state of Israel and the Jews of the world (the majority of Jews who prefer to live not in Israel but as citizens of many other nations). Until the 1967 war, and with the exception of a minority of who were politically active, most non-Israeli Jews did not have – how can I put it? – a great empathy with Zionism’s child. Israel was there and, in the sub-consciousness, a refuge of last resort; but the Jewish nationalism it represented had not generated the overtly enthusiastic support of the Jews of the world. The Jews of Israel were in their chosen place and the Jews of the world were in their chosen places. There was not, so to speak, a great feeling of togetherness. At a point David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father and first prime minister, was so disillusioned by the indifference of world Jewry that he went public with his criticism – not enough Jews were coming to live in Israel.
So how and why did the 1967 war transform the relationship between the Jews of the world and Israel? … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News 