Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Former CDC Officials Take Aim at RFK Jr. During Senate Hearing

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 17, 2025

The U.S. Senate hearing that began today as an investigation into the firing of the CDC director and the resignations of other key agency officials morphed quickly into a forum for accusing U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of posing a threat to public health.

“Today should not be about me,” former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Susan Monarez, Ph.D., told senators. “Today should be about the future of trust in public health.”

Monarez testified that she was fired for “holding the line of scientific integrity.” Dr. Debra Houry, former chief medical officer of the CDC who resigned after Monarez’s firing, also testified.

“Trust and transparency have been broken” under Kennedy’s leadership, Houry told members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), which held the hearing.

She criticized Kennedy’s handling of the recent measles outbreak and the changes to COVID-19 vaccine recommendations.

The committee will hold another hearing in the future to allow Kennedy and current CDC officials to refute allegations made by Monarez and Houry, said Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), the committee chair. “I want President Trump to have the best CDC in our nation’s history,” he said.

According to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), minority chair, the hearing was really about Kennedy’s “dangerous war on science, public health and the truth itself.”

Sanders praised Monarez for standing up for the “scientific method” and refusing to “rubber-stamp” Kennedy’s “dangerous agenda.”

Monarez testified that “vaccines are not controversial because they work.”

She also recounted how the CDC was attacked by a gunman who, in her words, was “driven by vaccine distrust.”

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) called out the agency for creating public distrust during the COVID-19 pandemic. “The CDC is the cause of vaccine hesitancy,” he said.

Sanders refuses to have Monarez, Houry sworn in

The hearing came as no surprise. The day Monarez was fired, Cassidy posted on X that the sudden departure of top CDC officials “will require oversight” by the committee.

Cassidy wanted Monarez and Houry to be sworn in before their testimony. However, Sanders — whose approval was needed as minority leader — refused, saying Kennedy wasn’t sworn in at a prior hearing.

When another senator challenged Sanders’ refusal, Cassidy pointed out that Kennedy would be sworn in for future hearings related to today’s testimony.

Sanders still refused.

Cassidy reminded the witnesses that it’s illegal to lie to senators, even without explicitly vowing to tell the truth. Yet throughout the hearing, several senators questioned whether Monarez and Houry were being honest.

A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) spokesperson told The Defender that Monarez’s prepared remarks contain “factual inaccuracies and leave out important details,” adding:

“Here’s the reality: Susan Monarez was tasked with returning the CDC to its core mission after decades of bureaucratic inertia, politicized science and mission creep corroded its purpose and squandered public trust.

“Instead, she acted maliciously to undermine the President’s agenda and was fired as a result. Some of her biggest offenses include neglecting to implement President Trump’s executive orders, making policy decisions without the knowledge or consent of Secretary Kennedy or the White House, limiting badge access for Trump’s political appointees, and removing a Secretarial appointee without consulting anyone. When she refused to acknowledge her insubordination, President Trump fired her.”

Children’s Health Defense CEO Mary Holland said Monarez represented the CDC’s “old guard” and that her termination was “necessary and proper.” She said:

“Monarez is assiduously following the pharma-funded script to attempt to oust Kennedy as HHS Secretary. Yet the obvious reality is that the CDC has lost the trust of the nation and the world, and radical reform is absolutely required if the agency is to continue at all.”

Senators, Monarez dispute details surrounding her firing

Senators at the hearing attempted to clarify disputed details surrounding Monarez’s firing.

The White House confirmed on Aug. 27 that she was fired after Kennedy tried to force her resignation and she refused to leave. Shortly after, Monarez wrote in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal that she was fired because she “held the line and insisted on rigorous scientific review.”

She reiterated the claim in today’s hearing, saying Kennedy had given her a choice: accept the recommendations of the new Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and fire top CDC officials responsible for vaccine policy, or resign.

According to Kennedy, he fired her because she responded “no” when he asked her, “Are you a trustworthy person?”

Monarez said the conversation went differently. “He told me he couldn’t trust me,” she said. “I told him that if he could not trust me, he could fire me.”

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) pressed Monarez on details of the conversation, saying it had been recorded. However, he reportedly backtracked on the claim. “If HHS has a recording, I ask them to release it,” Cassidy said.

Cassidy also asked for all documentation related to the conversation for the committee to review.

Houry testified that she resigned because Kennedy “censored CDC science, politicized its processes and stripped leaders of independence.”

Andrew G. Nixon, an HHS spokesman, told The New York Times that Kennedy “has insisted that decisions be evidence-based, open to scrutiny and free from the kind of closed-door processes that undermined confidence in the C.D.C. during the pandemic.”

Monarez evasive on COVID and Hep B vaccines

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) asked Monarez if the COVID-19 vaccine prevented transmission or reduced children’s risk of hospitalization or death.

She replied, “It can.”

Paul cited research contradicting Monarez’s answer. He pointed out that children who get the COVID-19 shot face a heightened risk of myocarditis, and the shot fails to lower their risk of hospitalization or death.

James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., criticized Monarez in a Substack post, saying she was unable to provide substantive answers to Paul’s questions.

Lyons-Weiler also noted that Monarez offered “no credible defense” when Paul asked why it was important for newborns to get the hepatitis B vaccine if their mother was hepatitis B negative.

The CDC’s vaccine advisory panel is expected to vote Thursday on certain childhood vaccine recommendations, including the hepatitis B (Hep B) vaccine.

Critics have long raised concerns about the safety and necessity of giving the vaccine to newborns, particularly those not at risk for the disease. Today, the Hep B vaccine contains at least 250 micrograms of aluminum, and aluminum exposure has been linked to autism.

Paul asked Monarez, “What is the medical, scientific reason and proof for giving a newborn a hepatitis B vaccine if the mom is Hep B negative?”

Monarez refused to answer the question.

Paul called out Monarez for evading questions about specific vaccines and hiding behind vague assertions that all vaccines are “safe and effective.”

He said the burden should be on the CDC and its staff to prove that the benefits of giving babies COVID-19 and Hep B vaccines outweigh the risks. “That’s what the debate ought to be about,” he said. “Not on whether all vaccines are good.”

Monarez repeatedly said that the CDC doesn’t “mandate” vaccines; the agency only makes “recommendations.”

While technically correct, her answer overlooks the reality that many states use the agency’s recommendations when mandating vaccines for school entry.

Monarez was first CDC director in 70 years without medical degree

In March, Trump nominated Monarez for director of the CDC, where she had served as acting director until her nomination.

She was the first CDC director confirmed under a law passed in 2023 that requires Senate confirmation for the position. She was also the first person, in more than 70 years, without a medical degree to serve in the role. She has a doctorate in microbiology and immunology.

Trump nominated Monarez after withdrawing the nomination of Dr. Dave Weldon, who reportedly failed to secure enough votes because of comments he made suggesting a possible link between autism and vaccines.

Monarez, a biosecurity veteran, was previously deputy director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), an agency within HHS created by the Biden administration to accelerate “high-risk, high-reward” biomedical research.

ARPA-H is modeled after the U.S. military’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or DARPA. Monarez also previously held positions with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

During her confirmation hearing before the Senate committee, Monarez affirmed her belief that “vaccines save lives,” and pledged to prioritize vaccine availability. She said mRNA vaccines are “safe and with demonstrated efficacy,” and she said she was unaware of any confirmed scientific link between vaccines and autism.

In her WSJ op-ed about why she was fired, Monarez said:

“Those seeking to undermine vaccines use a familiar playbook: discredit research, weaken advisory committees, and use manipulated outcomes to unravel protections that generations of families have relied on to keep deadly diseases at bay.”

Mark Crispin Miller, Ph.D., professor of media studies at New York University, told The Defender that Monarez is playing an old trick called “accusation in the mirror,” in which a person accuses their enemy of doing what the person has been doing.

He said:

“The trick usually works because it’s so disorienting, and most people have a hard time believing that anybody as ‘respectable’ as Susan Monarez — a woman with a Ph.D., who worked at CDC — could be so utterly dishonest. The only way to fight it is to call it out immediately, loud and clear.”

Watch the hearing here.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

September 18, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Court Rejects Former Disinformation Board Chief Nina Jankowicz’s Defamation Suit Against Fox News

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | September 17, 2025

A federal appeals court has ruled against Nina Jankowicz in her defamation lawsuit against Fox News, finding that the network’s coverage, while harsh and frequently personal, was protected under the First Amendment as opinion or substantially true.

The Third Circuit issued its decision on Friday, affirming a lower court’s dismissal of the case.

Jankowicz, who served briefly as Executive Director of the Department of Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board in 2022, argued that Fox News had targeted her with a smear campaign that misrepresented her role as being pro-censorship.

The court concluded that Fox’s statements did not meet the legal standard for defamation.

Jankowicz held the DHS position for less than three months. Her role was confined to coordinating and recommending best practices regarding disinformation threats to national security.

After the Board’s public announcement in April 2022, Fox News repeatedly criticized both the Board and Jankowicz.

Network hosts and guests aired segments calling the Board a “Ministry of Truth” and warned that it posed a danger to free expression.

Jankowicz claimed her photo was frequently shown during these broadcasts and that she was personally attacked, described as someone intent on censoring Americans.

DHS, along with other officials and even the White House Press Secretary, said that the Board had no enforcement authority.

Fox News continued to run segments making the same accusations. One point of focus for Fox was an interview in which Jankowicz discussed Twitter’s Birdwatch initiative.

On May 18, 2022, DHS announced that the Board would be paused. Jankowicz was offered a position as a policy advisor but chose to resign.

Fox personalities celebrated her departure, claiming she was “booted” or “yanked,” and suggested that her presence had embarrassed the administration.

Jankowicz brought a defamation suit against Fox, citing three primary claims.

According to the opinion by Judge Restrepo, the court found that the statements highlighted by Jankowicz fell into three categories: that she intended to censor speech, that she was fired from DHS, and that she supported verified Twitter users being able to edit others’ tweets.

The judges agreed with the lower court that none of these statements constituted defamation per se under the law.

The ruling emphasized that statements must be clearly “of and concerning” the plaintiff to be considered defamatory.

Despite Jankowicz’s argument that her image and name were frequently used during Fox’s segments on the Disinformation Governance Board, the court held that this was insufficient.

Referencing Rosenblatt v. Baer and New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the court reiterated that criticism of government entities cannot be automatically equated with personal attacks on individuals within those entities. The panel wrote:

“Nor does merely referencing an official in the same segment that a critique of government is made—nor using an official’s photo as ‘a visual placeholder’… show that an ‘attack was read as specifically directed at the plaintiff.’”

On the claim that Fox had falsely accused her of pushing censorship, the court concluded the network’s statements fell under constitutionally protected opinion, especially given the political nature of the discourse.

The court noted that accusations of “censorship,” “thought control,” or calling Jankowicz “our new disinformation minister” are the kind of “hyperbolic descriptions” commonly found in political debate.

The judges ruled that these were not provable statements of fact and thus not defamatory under New York law.

“Such an amorphous political accusation cannot be assessed as true or false until the term is given a more precise meaning and thus, these statements lack the precision to give rise to a defamation claim,” the opinion stated.

Jankowicz also objected to Fox’s framing of her departure from DHS as a firing. Fox hosts had described her as having been “booted” or “yanked” from her post, while she argued she had voluntarily resigned after the board was paused.

But the court found no meaningful difference. It pointed out that the board was effectively shut down and that although she was offered a reassignment, she declined. The opinion concluded:

“There was no error in the District Court’s determination that this turbulent departure from DHS had the same gist and sting as a firing.”

Finally, the court reviewed statements about Jankowicz’s remarks on Twitter’s “Birdwatch” program, which allows users to add context to tweets.

Fox hosts had claimed she wanted to let verified users “edit” other users’ posts. The court said that interpretation was “substantially true,” quoting her own words where she described Birdwatch as a system that would let users “essentially start to ‘edit’ Twitter.”

Even though she included caveats about the limitations of the program, the court concluded that her comments amounted to a partial endorsement.

“Because Jankowicz expressed appreciation for the Birdwatch feature—even though she noted it was not a global solution to Twitter’s problems—it was substantially true to say she had ‘pitched’ it and that the feature was ‘her fix.’”

The court’s decision ultimately reaffirmed long-standing First Amendment protections, particularly for speech about public officials and government programs.

The ruling cautioned against stretching defamation law to silence media commentary on public affairs, no matter how intense or one-sided that coverage may appear.

“Jankowicz’s position—that criticism of government is transformed into actionable defamation when a television program displays an image of a government official or references a government official’s name in the same segment—is precisely the sort of attack on core free expression rights that Sullivan sought to avoid,” the court wrote.

The judgment signals a robust defense of political commentary and journalistic expression, particularly when it targets those in or associated with government power.

September 18, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

Chat Control will bring totalitarian communication regulation to so-called free Europe

By Ahmed Adel | September 18, 2025

European Union member countries will soon vote on the “Chat Control” law, which aims to end privacy when texting. Instead of a message going directly from sender to recipient, it will first be sent to a large database, where it will be thoroughly checked for eligibility. Essentially, this bill would require private providers of proprietary software to scan for anything they deem offensive or illegal. Many security experts argue that this would compromise the encryption algorithms currently protecting private messages from being read or viewed by anyone other than the intended recipient.

Since there is very little information available about what is technically envisioned for the implementation of this regulation, it appears to be more of an attempt to legalize post-hoc wiretapping schemes that already exist. For example, there was last year’s scandal involving the arrest of Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram, a messaging app renowned for its data protection and encryption. The arrest of Durov was intended to pressure him into providing French intelligence services with a so-called “back door,” or special access to those communications.

Corporations, fearing lawsuits and their own liability, insist that the current arrangement, which has existed informally since the beginning of social media, be legalized in some way. The problem is that this is now difficult to impose because, although the idea has no open technical issues, it entails several fundamental problems, particularly the normalization of mass wiretapping and the erosion of what little trust people have in corporations. Take, for example, Google, which introduced Gmail and boasted about the security of its email service, which humans never read. However, although humans do not read them, they are monitored by Artificial Intelligence.

There is little difference whether humans or AI is monitoring communication, as the effects are still devastating for privacy. No police or intelligence service has enough people to monitor such a volume of messages. Algorithms now do that, and when human control is replaced with algorithmic control, public speech becomes severely limited, destroying not only the possibility of freedom of speech but also that of normal communication. As human communication on social media has become increasingly difficult due to bots and AI, people are now turning to chat apps, such as Viber, Telegram, and WhatsApp.

Corporations recognize that they are losing money due to the decline in interest in public debate, which is precisely a result of totalitarian control. For this reason, the EU now wants to establish the same type of control over the private part of our communication. Many people have adopted a mechanical, robotic logic of thinking because they have been coerced into self-censorship. However, many people who are aware of this situation still consider it unacceptable that the EU wants control over our communication.

The EU is notorious for precisely this unanimity and the ease with which the vast majority of citizens accept any position that is current at that moment, such as accepting increasing electricity prices, vaccinations, illegal immigrants, and sanctions against Russia.

A large portion of humanity uses social media. Therefore, even under ideal circumstances, AI will inevitably make many terrible mistakes. It is impossible for hundreds of millions of people communicating in different languages, making jokes or being ironic, to be constantly flagged and then monitored.

At the same time, people will stop using platforms that deny them freedom of speech and thought. Just as people boycott newspapers and television stations that participated in fake news and disinformation, they will boycott platforms where their privacy is eroded.

These are all processes that are already underway, and the debate over Chat Control is more about legalizing and normalizing surveillance of the public than proposing something important or new to people.

Chat Control was first proposed in 2022 but was voted down in 2023. This latest version, put forward by Denmark, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the EU Council, would require chat services to allow AI-based message screening before encryption in an effort to detect the sharing of child abuse material.

To pass, the Chat Control bill needs at least 65% support of the EU population. Although France, Spain, and Italy support Chat Control, Germany became the key opposition because its population ensures the impossibility of reaching the needed 65%, even if Estonia, Greece, Romania, and Slovenia – the four undecided countries – choose to support the law, as it would only add up to roughly 59% of the total EU population. Although it is evident that EU technocrats and the leading countries of the bloc, with the exception of Germany, are desperate for Chat Control, it appears that this draconian bill will not pass at this stage.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

September 18, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Fugitive Scientist Behind Vaccine and Autism Studies Arrested for Stealing $1 Million From CDC

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender |September 16, 2025

Danish scientist Poul Thorsen, who co-authored influential papers in 2002 and 2003, used to argue against the link between vaccines and autism, was arrested in Germany and may be extradited to the U.S. on charges of stealing nearly $1 million in research money, Breitbart News reported.

Thorsen was listed as a fugitive on the U.S. Office of the Inspector General’s most wanted list for over a decade.

He reportedly was arrested in June following an Interpol Red Notice, a request to international law enforcement to locate and provisionally arrest a wanted person. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is working with German authorities to extradite him to the U.S., an unnamed DOJ official told Breitbart.

Thorsen allegedly absconded with over $1 million from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as part of a scheme to steal grant money awarded to governmental agencies in Denmark for autism research.

A federal grand jury indicted Thorsen in Atlanta in 2011 on 22 counts of wire fraud and money laundering. However, Denmark previously refused to extradite him, so he wasn’t prosecuted, Forbes reported.

‘Number one’ on the HHS most wanted list

Thorsen’s research, allegedly “debunking” the link between autism and the measles-mumps-rubella or MMR vaccine and other thimerosal-containing vaccines, was cited by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) as proof of no link.

His research was also used as evidence in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s (VICP) proceedings to deny the injury claims of more than 5,000 families.

Thorsen’s findings have been widely criticized by safe vaccine advocates as seriously flawed and potentially fraudulent.

“Thorsen has been number one on the Health and Human Services (HHS) most wanted list for the past 10 years,” HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a long-time critic of Thorsen’s studies, told Breitbart following reports of Thorsen’s arrest.

HHS did not respond to The Defender’s request to confirm whether Thorsen had been detained.

Author James Grundvig told The Defender that Thorsen’s arrest has the potential to expose a long history of misconduct within the CDC.

Grundvig wrote “Master Manipulator: The Explosive True Story of Fraud, Embezzlement, and Government Betrayal at the CDC,” which details the story of Thorsen’s alleged role in a broader CDC manipulation of vaccine safety studies.

“It is not just Thorsen,” Grundvig said. “It won’t be just taking down one guy.” If Thorsen is compelled to testify, “he will be pointing fingers and naming names.”

Children’s Health Defense Chief Scientific Officer Brian Hooker said:

“I really want to emphasize that this crime is much bigger than Thorsen. His collaborators need to be brought to justice as well. They partied on the backs of many autistic children. Frankly, jail time is too good for Thorsen and the many other fraudsters at CDC, IOM and the VICP!”

Thorsen used grant money to buy home, motorcycle, cars

Beginning in the 1990s, Thorsen, who worked as a visiting scientist at the CDC when the agency was soliciting grant applications for research about infant disabilities, advocated for grants on behalf of Danish scientists and institutions.

Between 2000 and 2009, the CDC awarded over $11 million to two Danish government agencies to study the relationship between vaccines and autism, and other infant developmental issues, according to a 2011 press release by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia and Grundvig’s book.

In 2002, Thorsen relocated to Denmark to serve as principal investigator on the grant, overseeing the distribution of research money. The research was done by Aarhus University and Odense University Hospital in Denmark.

Between 2004 and 2008, Thorsen allegedly submitted more than a dozen fraudulent invoices on CDC letterhead to the medical facilities conducting the research for costs incurred for work related to the grant.

The facilities transferred hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to fake CDC accounts at the CDC Federal Credit Union in Atlanta. However, the money actually was deposited into Thorsen’s personal accounts.

Thorsen allegedly used the money to purchase a home in Atlanta, a Harley Davidson motorcycle and cars, among other items. Overall, he withdrew more than $1 million, according to reports.

The indictment charged Thorsen with 13 counts of wire fraud and nine counts of money laundering, each carrying potentially long prison sentences and heavy fines. It also sought forfeiture of all property purchased with the fraudulently obtained funds.

Fabricated results seem ‘all but certain’ in research involving Thorsen

Mainstream media writers have mocked the long-term critiques of Thorsen’s work as “conspiracy theories,” and argued that, as a co-author, his contributions to the papers didn’t skew the results.

In a Substack post detailing Thorsen’s history and the studies he co-authored, scientist James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., said Thorsen’s influence on the research was concerning and the studies themselves were flawed.

He said:

“Although his scientific findings must be evaluated on their own merits, including data sources, design, and replicability, his case may be critical in revealing decision-making and could produce evidence of wrong-doing by Thorsen and others. Defrauding the US Government of research dollars is a crime. (This includes misuse and scientific fraud).

“Results fabrication in the Danish registry results seems all but certain given the clear evidence of those practices in other studies on the topic of vaccines and autism.”

The Danish government, since 1968, has maintained an extensive registry of birth and health records on all of its citizens. This provided a rich database for research on childhood disabilities, Grundvig said.

According to Lyons-Weiler, the Danish registry studies published by Thorsen and others were riddled with methodological flaws, including vulnerability to confounding variables over time, shifting diagnostic categories that distorted the data, misclassification and reporting biases and conflicts of interest.

Lyons-Weiler called for greater transparency in that research, including access to the original datasets, registries, study methods and peer review processes.

He said the studies should be replicated, the policies derived from them should be reexamined, and the public should be provided clarity on which studies Thorsen influenced.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

September 18, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Israel to flood Gaza City with ‘unprecedented’ number of booby-trapped vehicles: Report

The Cradle | September 17, 2025

The Israeli military is set to deploy an “unprecedented” number of remote-controlled armored personnel carriers (APCs) loaded with explosives into Gaza City as part of operation “Gideon’s Chariots 2,” Hebrew news outlet Walla reported on 17 September.

This is part of the first stage of a three-stage plan drafted by Major General Yaniv Asor to “conquer” the largest city in the strip, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians remain trapped or refuse to be displaced.

“The ‘fire phase’ focuses on the massive destruction of terrorist infrastructure — mainly at night — using various methods, including above and below ground robots,” Walla reports, citing military sources that said “Gaza has never been hit like this before. This is only the second night.”

Referred to as “booby-trapped robots” in Gaza, the decommissioned APCs are rigged with explosives and remotely driven deep into urban areas before being detonated, causing massive explosions and widespread destruction.

“The Israeli army sends the robots near our homes, which stay parked there to terrorize us. The army doesn’t detonate them right away, waiting for fear to push us to flee. When people don’t leave, the army detonates the robots, regardless of whether there are civilians in the area,” Abdulwahhab Ismail, a resident of the Saftawi area in northwestern Gaza, told Mondoweiss last month.

The Israeli military calls this practice “suicide APCs.” According to Walla, Tel Aviv has stationed a large number of these vehicles outside the Gaza separation line.

“Acting on orders from IDF Southern Command chief Maj.-Gen. Yaniv Asor, the deployment of these vehicles has surged, with officers in the field reporting that their usage has tripled. Forces on the ground have testified to the movement of hundreds of these explosive-laden APCs toward the Gaza border,” the Jerusalem Post reported earlier this month.

In August, reports in Hebrew media revealed that Israeli arms companies were planning to expand production of tanks and APCs with a budget exceeding $1.3 billion.

At least 100 booby-trapped robots were used in densely populated areas inside Gaza between 13 August and 3 September alone, according to Gaza’s Government Media Office.

“Before now, the army used to blow up one or two buildings with the robots. Now they destroy dozens of buildings at once. Robots and warplanes are working together to destroy every place in Gaza City,” Ismail described.

Thursday’s report from Walla added that the “second stage” of the southern command’s plan calls for the occupation of Gaza City by the invading troops, while the third stage “is currently classified as high security and combines military capabilities that we have not yet seen in the Israeli war repertoire.”

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

EU plans to seize €170bn of Russia’s frozen funds – FT

RT | September 17, 2025

Brussels is pressing ahead with a plan to use €170 billion of Russia’s frozen sovereign assets to back “reparation loans” for Ukraine, the Financial Times has reported. The EU faces growing pressure to find additional funding for Kiev as US cuts back its support.

Moscow has condemned the asset freeze and warned that any seizure of its money would amount to “theft.”

Western nations froze an estimated $300 billion in Russian funds after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022 – some €200 billion of which is held by Brussels-based clearinghouse Euroclear. The funds have accrued billions in interest, and the West has explored ways to use this revenue to finance Ukraine. While refraining from outright seizure, the G7 last year backed a plan to provide Kiev with $50 billion in loans to be repaid using the profits generated by the funds. The EU pledged $21 billion.

European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has proposed going further by creating a ‘reparation loans’ mechanism, which she described as urgently needed to finance Kiev.

People familiar with discussions said the plan involves channeling cash balances from Russia’s immobilized assets into EU-issued bonds, with the proceeds transferred to Ukraine in tranches. Brussels argues the system would provide Kiev with immediate support while sidestepping a formal seizure.

A second option under consideration would involve creating a special-purpose vehicle to manage the loans, which could also allow non-EU partners to take part.

Of the funds frozen at Euroclear, about €170 billion has already matured and now sits as cash on the clearinghouse’s books, the sources said.

The plans have already drawn objections from member states. Belgium, Germany, and France have warned that dipping into the principal risks breaking the law and undermining confidence in the euro.

Brussels is under pressure to cover a significant portion of Ukraine’s needs as Washington holds back on new aid, the FT wrote. According to a US note circulated among G7 capitals and cited by the outlet, members were urged to consider seizing the sovereign assets principal “innovatively” to fund Ukraine.

Moscow warned that any attempt to use the assets “will not go unanswered.”

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Nepal’s color revolution: US funding under scrutiny amid country’s political upheaval

By Kit Klarenberg | Press TV  | September 17, 2025

In recent weeks, Nepal has been engulfed in chaos. Public and private buildings have been set ablaze, and dozens of civilians have been killed in incidents that many believe bear the imprint of Western involvement.

On September 9, Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli resigned. The Western media has universally framed the upheaval as spontaneous revolutionary fervour on the part of Kathmandu’s “Gen Z”, motivated by anger over official corruption, unemployment, state efforts to censor social media,  and more.

However, there are unambiguous indications that the insurrectionary disarray has been long in the making and assisted by spectral, foreign forces.

The so-called “Gen Z” protests comprise a cluster of local youth activist groups, and are widely dubbed “leaderless”, although Hami Nepal has clearly emerged at the movement’s forefront.

English language Nepali Times has reported that the hitherto unknown NGO “played a central role in guiding the demonstrations, using its Instagram and Discord platforms to circulate protest information and share guidelines.”

The group was established to assist victims of earthquakes – a common occurrence in the country – and provide food, medical and other aid to disadvantaged Nepalese communities.

Subsequently, Hami Nepal oversaw the election of Kathmandu’s interim premier Sushila Karki on September 12, via the highly unorthodox and completely unprecedented expedient of an online vote via Discord.

The NGO’s chat group reportedly boasts 145,000 members, although it’s unclear how many people ultimately voted for Karki. The Western media, and local journalist Prayana Rana, a fervent supporter of the unrest who considers the palace coup to be wholly legitimate and organic, has acknowledged choosing a leader in this manner to be deeply problematic:

“It is much more egalitarian than a physical forum that many might not have access to. Since it is virtual and anonymous, people can also say what they want to without fear of retaliation. But there are also challenges, in that anyone could easily manipulate users by infiltration, and using multiple accounts to sway opinions and votes.”

Still, Karki has firmly pledged to only serve six months in the post until elections are held. She herself has an impressive revolutionary history, having participated in the 1990 People’s Movement that successfully overthrew Nepal’s absolute monarchy, for which she was jailed.

In June 1973, her husband hijacked a plane, stealing vast sums of money to fund armed resistance against the country’s brutal regime, which similarly landed him in prison. Karki’s commitment to seriously tackling corruption as Nepal’s Chief Justice led to her politically-motivated impeachment in June 2017, after just one year.

It is entirely uncertain who or what will replace Karki, and by which mechanism they will attain office. Nonetheless, that Hami Nepal, a previously obscure NGO with no history of political activism, has played such an outsized role in ousting the government of a country of 30 million people and installing its new ruler within mere days, should give us pause.

While the organization’s activities appear benevolent, its rollcall of “brands that support us” contains some puzzling entries, if not outright concerning.

Anonymous profiles

It is unclear what forms of “support” Hami Nepal has received from its sponsors, or when it was provided, but they run quite the gamut. For one, the list includes luxury Western hotels in Kathmandu, clothing and shoe brands, local conglomerate Shanker – the country’s biggest private investor – messaging app Viber, and Coca Cola, notorious for its complicity in countless human rights abuses in the Global South. Elsewhere, the Gurkha Welfare Trust appears.

The Gurkhas have for centuries served as an elite, unique force within the British Army, often tasked with sensitive missions. The Trust, which provides financial aid to Gurkha veterans, their widows and families, is financed by the British Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence.

Meanwhile, Students for a Free Tibet is also listed. The NGO receives funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, an avowed CIA front. In a striking coincidence, NED is deeply concerned about the precise issue that triggered Nepal’s recent protests.

In August 2023, Nepal’s government signed off on a National Cyber Security Policy, imitating China’s “Great Firewall”, which limits foreign internet traffic into the country, while allowing for the proliferation of homegrown ecommerce platforms, social networks, and other online resources. The move was harshly condemned by Digital Rights Nepal, which is bankrolled by George Soros’ Open Society Foundations – a repeat sponsor of government overthrows. Digital Rights Nepal claimed the Policy would lead to mass censorship and threaten citizens’ privacy.

Fast forward to February, and NED published a report warning “countries worldwide,” including Cambodia, Nepal and Pakistan, were looking to China’s internet sovereignty as a “potential model” to emulate.

Rather than acknowledge the threat to Washington’s waning global web dominance posed by such ambitions, the Endowment asserted the real risk was Beijing’s “prestige” being enhanced internationally, thus helping “make the world safe” for the Chinese Communist Party. That month, Nepalese lawmakers began voting on a bill supporting the National Cyber Security Policy.

The legislation required foreign social media networks and messaging apps to formally register with Kathmandu’s Ministry of Communication and Information Technology.

This was intended to not only make these platforms more legally accountable but also ensure the government could collect taxes on revenues they generated locally.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) issued a statement imploring parliamentarians to reject the bill, on the basis that it posed a grave threat to press freedom, due to potential content restriction and banning of “creation or use of anonymous profiles.”

The CPJ is bankrolled by Open Society Foundations, a welter of leading Western news outlets, US corporate and financial giants, and Google and Meta, both of which would be adversely affected by the legislation.

The law nonetheless passed, imposing a deadline of September 3rd for registration. While TikTok and Viber complied, US platforms – including Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, WhatsApp, and YouTube – refused, prompting Kathmandu to ban usage of 26 foreign-owned sites. This was the spark that ultimately toppled Nepal’s government.

Secure environment

On September 4, the Federation of Nepali Journalists published a statement signed by 22 civil society organizations, expressing “strong objection” to the mass shutdown.

FNJ is funded by NED and the Open Society Foundations. Most of its co-signatories receive money from the same sources, and other Western foundations, governments, and social media platforms. For Hami Nepal, the ban was a “tipping point”, scheduling a mass rally for four days later.

The NGO extensively prepared participants in advance, even establishing a “protest support helpline”.

The September 8 protests quickly turned violent. “Gen Z” leaders distanced themselves from the destruction, claiming their peaceful action had been “hijacked” by “opportunists”.

Yet, Hami Nepal’s Discord server had bristled with belligerent messages in the preceding days. Some users openly advocated killing politicians and their children. Others posted requests for weapons, including machine guns, and openly announced their intention to “burn everything”.

So it was Nepal’s parliament that got set ablaze and the Prime Minister’s official residence torched, prompting ministers to flee in helicopters.

The next night, in the wake of K. P. Sharma Oli’s resignation, Nepalese military chiefs met with protesters to discuss the shape of the country’s future government.

As The New York Times reported on September 11, chief “Gen Z” agitators told army officials they wanted Sushila Karki as interim leader – days before this was apparently confirmed by a competitive Discord vote. Kathmandu’s powerful, popular military has pledged to “create a secure environment until the election is held,” effectively signing off on the violent coup.

It may be significant that one of Hami Nepal’s donors isn’t publicised on its website – arms dealer Deepak Bhatta. He has an extensive history of procuring weapons for Nepal’s military and security forces, and allegations of corruption have swirled around many of these deals.

For example, in July 2022, he was accused of sourcing small arms for local police from an Italian company at four times the actual unit price. Bhatta’s long-running relationship with the army could well have facilitated its friendly contact with protest leaders.

Yugoslavia’s CIA, NED and USAID-orchestrated “Bulldozer Revolution” in 2000 was the world’s first “color revolution”. Over subsequent decades, the US has ousted governments the world over using strategies and tactics identical to those that successfully dislodged Slobodan Milosevic from office.

In almost all cases, youth groups have been key “regime change” foot soldiers. In Belgrade, after almost a decade of lethally destructive sanctions, capped off with a criminal 78-day-long NATO bombing campaign, many residents of the country had legitimate grievances and wished to see Milosevic fall.

Nonetheless, the aftermath was a blunt-force lesson in the importance of being careful about what one wishes for. Milosevic’s downfall is dubbed the Bulldozer Revolution due to iconic scenes during the much-publicised unrest of a wheel loader helping anti-government agitators occupy state buildings, and shield activists from police gunfire. Its driver quickly turned against the “Revolution”.

Subsequent Western-imposed privatization decimated Yugoslavia’s economy, causing his successful independent business to fail, and him to go bankrupt. He subsisted until his dying day on meager state welfare payments.

Herein lies the rub. There’s little doubt that many Nepalese citizens were justifiably disillusioned with their government and sought change. Yet, colour revolutions invariably exploit grassroots public discontent to install governments considerably worse than those that preceded them.

In this context, the military, including disgraced local businessman Durga Prasai, who supports the restoration of Kathmandu’s monarchy, in transition talks with “Gen Z” activists, is rendered deeply suspect. That he has been falsely promoted by the BBC as the protesters’ leader is all the more ominous.

Even enthusiastic local supporters of Nepal’s “revolution” acknowledge it is uncertain whether Sushila Karki will be able to convene elections in six months.

In any event, all established political parties were in the firing line of demonstrators, leaving the question of who will contest any future vote likewise an open one.

There is quite a political vacuum in Kathmandu presently, and history shows us NED, Open Society Foundations, and intelligence-connected Western foundations are ever-poised to seize such “windows of opportunity”. Watch this space.

And what is particularly revealing is a fact, as reported in sections of Indian media, that a plan was in the works for years to bring about a “regime change” in Nepal, engineered by the US.

Internal USAID communications reviewed by The Sunday Guardian, together with program outputs released by US democracy organizations, show that since 2020, the US has committed over $900 million in assistance to Nepal. A significant portion of this funding has been directed toward programs administered through the Washington-based consortium CEPPS, which comprises the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the International Republican Institute (IRI), and the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES).

As the report states, $900 million represents one of the largest per-capita US democracy investments in the region, and the goal was to have a government that serves the US interests.

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia’s Hi-Tech Starlink Analog Can Free Global South From US Tech Dominance: Here’s How

Sputnik – 17.09.2025

Roscosmos is “moving at a rapid pace” toward fielding an alternative to Elon Musk’s satellite internet empire. Veteran military expert Yuri Knutov breaks things down.

What’s Russia Building?

Bureau 1440 is working on a low-Earth orbit sat net for broadband data delivery:

  • multiple test vehicles are already in orbit
  • communications tested at ranges of 30-1,000 km
  • first stage of series deployment slated to start in December (300 satellites); 900 in stage two
  • ~500 base stations planned
  • homegrown terminal coming “soon,” per Roscosmos chief Dmitry Bakanov
  • trial roll-out planned for 2027

What Makes Russia’s Version Better?

Musk’s system works like this: ground-based Starlink Gateways communicate with orbiting satellites using electromagnetic radiation, with signals then communicated back down to Earth-based terminals.

Russia’s system uses laser beams, which “are more modern digital technologies providing faster & higher quality data transmission, as well as improved resistance to interference,” Knutov explains.

Longer Range

An effective range of up to 5,000 km “means far fewer satellites are needed than Elon Musk’s system (hundreds vs thousands),” Knutov explains.

That makes the Russian system not only less costly, but less harmful to the already heavily overcrowded LEO environment.

Doppler Effect: Solved

“We’ve been able to completely compensate” for the Doppler signal frequency issue, occurring from the high speeds (27,000 km/h) at which satellites orbit Earth, “allowing the signal to be maintained virtually free of interference & distortion.”

Global Implications

The system will provide secure, high-speed communications to:

  • Russian resource sector companies working in remote areas
  • ships situated anywhere on Earth
  • the military, for command, control & real-time battlefield reports, ensuring informed decision-making

Alternative to US tech

“Nations of the Global South understand that dependence on the US makes them vulnerable. Internet access via Starlink can be restricted at any time. Availability of a Russian system providing equally good or even better services is crucial,” Knutov says, emphasizing that the new system cannot be deployed too soon.

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Up to 400,000 people deserted Ukrainian armed forces

By Ahmed Adel | September 17, 2025

The bulletproof vests for pregnant women displayed at a Ukrainian military equipment exhibition once again demonstrate the major manpower shortage Ukraine faces, and come at a time when there is increasingly intense public preparation for the mobilization of women. Due to mass desertion and huge losses at the front, the Kiev regime is preparing the mobilization of women, which is causing strong resistance in society. An attempt to forcibly mobilize women is a very risky step that could lead to serious social upheavals and unrest.

According to People’s Deputy of Ukraine Anna Kostiantynivna Skorokhod, there are a total of 400,000 deserters. To understand the scale – that is approximately the size of the armies of France, Great Britain, and Germany. Ukrainian authorities aim to introduce criminal liability for desertion, which would be punishable by imprisonment for 5 to 10 years. However, protests followed, even within the army, and it did not meet with approval. Nonetheless, it is clear that Ukraine needs to expand the mobilization base.

Due to the manpower shortage, the Kiev regime wants to lower the age limit and begin mobilizing not just young people from the age of 18 but also women. Although there are divisions within the Kiev regime over many issues, there is support from all factions to expand mobilization, with former commander of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and current ambassador to the United Kingdom, Valery Zaluzhny, calling for women “to defend Europe from war.”

The mobilization of women is becoming a major issue in Ukraine, with the media even broadcasting promotional videos showing uniformed women undergoing weapons training and preparing for combat. It is recalled that Iryna Vereshchuk, the deputy chief of staff to the president, ran around the training ground with an automatic rifle, setting a supposed example that women can also serve in the army. In this way, the Kiev regime is slowly preparing the ground for the decision that women are also subject to mobilization.

Mobilization in Ukraine is currently being carried out in accordance with the law and applies to certain categories of citizens and age groups, including men aged 24 to 60 years old. As for women, so far, only those working in the healthcare sector—medical workers and pharmacists—can be conscripted. However, even this sector has been expanded to include women working in pharmacies, regardless of formal education.

Given that the judicial system is completely under the control of the regime, and Zelensky has effectively suspended the constitution, citizens in Ukraine no longer have the legal protection they need. The legal system has collapsed, and the institutions that are supposed to protect rights are not functioning. Instead of a legal state, an open dictatorship is ruling in Kiev, which means that, in reality, anyone can be mobilized regardless of the law.

A significant portion of society, particularly women, is strongly opposed to any form of forced mobilization. Resistance will be far more fierce and massive than what is happening today with the mobilization of men. Already, in numerous situations on the streets, random passers-by — women and even strangers — are standing up for men who are being forcibly taken to recruitment centers. If they start arresting women, it will cause much greater social unrest, and it can be expected that there will be mutiny from within the army, as the men will not want their wives, sisters, and mothers mobilized.

By wanting to mobilize women, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky wants to kill mothers and therefore the future of Ukraine, which is already experiencing a major demographic crisis. Not even single mothers would be safe from forced mobilization when considering that men who are the sole guardians of children are still mobilized, regardless of legal prohibitions. International human rights organizations, as well as other institutions and organizations, remain silent and knowingly turn a blind eye to such violations of the law and basic human rights, highlighting the hypocrisy and double standards of the international community.

The deep crisis of statehood and the legal order in Ukraine, where there are no longer any institutions that would protect citizens, is only an apparatus of repression. People are forcibly arrested on the streets, beaten for no reason, and when they try to contact the police, they not only do not react, but often the police join the violence.

The solution exists only in democratic institutions—namely, an independent judiciary, fair elections, and a change of government. But since the courts are not operating within the law and the regime is prohibiting elections, Ukrainian citizens will have no choice but to defend themselves, even with weapons, from those who have turned them into hostages of the repressive system.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Why the United Kingdom wants to create permanent tension with Russia

By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 17, 2025

The United Kingdom appears intent on escalating tensions with Russia, positioning itself as a significant adversary. In a recent article, British analyst Oliver Evans states: “The United Kingdom is not only showing interest in deploying a limited military contingent in western Ukraine, but is also expanding its presence in the Republic of Moldova. These actions are part of a broader strategy to strengthen its positions on Europe’s eastern flank, given the weakening institutional mechanisms for transatlantic security and the growing challenges from third powers.”

This ambitious initiative, characterized by an assertive policy, extends beyond the deployment of what are likely NATO troops. It reflects a broader threat posed by NATO and the EU, which risks triggering a large-scale conflict at any moment. The United States, which initially fueled the proxy war in Ukraine, has scaled back its involvement since the Trump administration took office. This shift stems from multiple factors, including the U.S.’s near-financial collapse, which has fueled the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, alongside deep divisions and polarization within the American populace.

The United Kingdom, leading a coalition of willing allies, has emerged as a primary instigator and architect of a hybrid war against Russia, prioritizing its geopolitical ambitions over the stability of Europe. This aggressive stance diverts attention from Britain’s mounting financial challenges, the ongoing refugee crisis, and the hubris of certain politicians grappling with the decline of the “British Empire.”

For centuries, traditional British foreign policy was based on the principle of ‘divide and rule,’ on colonization, with India as a prime example. Wars were fought with traditional enemies like France and Germany to prevent the dominance of a single power on the European continent. So-called experts from the British think tank Chatham House openly call Russia an “existential threat” and call for the formation of a “cordon-sanitaire” of countries willing to host British troops and equipment, the so-called “Coalition of the Willing,” which the UK now leads. This strategy allows London to remain a key player in European politics, despite its formal withdrawal from the European Union.

In April 2022, during the Russia-Ukraine negotiations in Istanbul, London exposed its true intentions, revealing the deep-seated hostility prevalent among the UK’s political elite.

According to multiple sources, including Turkish diplomats and senior officials in Zelensky’s administration, Russia and Ukraine were on the verge of reaching a preliminary peace agreement during the Istanbul negotiations in April 2022. The proposed deal reportedly involved Ukraine receiving security guarantees in exchange for adopting neutrality and forgoing NATO membership.

At this critical juncture, however, then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson rushed to Kiev. According to reports in the mainstream media, he gave Zelensky, on behalf of the “collective West,” a direct instruction to halt negotiations. Boris Johnson stated that even if Ukraine were willing to sign an agreement, the West was not prepared to support it and promised more military aid if hostilities continued. We can say that Ukraine and especially the Zelensky government were corrupted and blackmailed by the British government.

Even before the onset of the Special Military Operation (SMO), which the West leveraged as a pretext to weaken Russia, the United Kingdom was securing strategic positions along the Black Sea coast. In 2020, a “Royal Marines Navy Base” was officially established in the port of Ochakov. Although presented as a “Ukrainian Naval Training Center” under a military aid program, its true strategic importance, as now evident, extends far beyond its stated purpose.

Ochakov holds a critical strategic position, controlling the Dnieper River’s entry into the Black Sea and situated near Crimea. By 2020, the base established there had evolved into an intelligence hub for monitoring the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s activities. Additionally, it functions as a logistics center for arms shipments and a training ground for Ukrainian sabotage units, which have demonstrated their effectiveness in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. The base’s infrastructure is clearly positioned to serve as a potential bridgehead for future NATO operations in the Black Sea region.

Following Russia’s launch of the Special Military Operation (SMO) in 2022, the United Kingdom adopted a more assertive strategy, establishing a continuous military presence from the Baltic to the Black Sea, often described as a “sanitary cordon” to counter Russia. Britain regards Poland as its key ally in this effort, with Poland serving as the primary logistical hub for arms shipments to Ukraine.

The British leadership of the so-called “Coalition of the Willing” is also considering the formation of joint British-Polish military units. Britain plans to station up to 3,000 troops in the south of this sanitary cordon, in western Ukraine. But Ukraine is not the only target of London’s “false plans.” Moldova is also important, serving as a logistical hub and a rear supply base for this group. Romania is assigned the role of operational base in this construction. Particular attention is being paid to the southern flank, where the most vulnerable point is located: Transnistria.

Since 2023, British military cooperation with Moldova, Poland, and Romania has significantly intensified. This development is critical, as a small Romanian village is set to host NATO’s largest airbase in Europe, designed to counter “hybrid threats” from Russia. Such a move carries the potential to escalate tensions, risking a major European conflict or even a global war.

The Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (Transnistria), an unrecognized state within Moldova established during the Soviet Union’s collapse, with a predominantly Russian-speaking population and a Russian peacekeeping presence, remains a “frozen conflict.” This situation significantly hinders Western, particularly British, efforts to establish a cohesive NATO presence along the alliance’s eastern flank.

Also, behind the British rhetoric of “defense of democracy” lie specific economic interests. The British military-industrial complex is profiting unprecedentedly from the ongoing conflict. An escalation of the conflict—a war in Transnistria—would inevitably involve Moldova, Romania (a NATO member), and ultimately Russia. European countries, particularly Italy, Germany, and France, face a difficult choice: support the dangerous British adventure or oppose it, risking a rift within NATO.

With the UK’s military plans now evident and poised for execution, Britain appears to be the primary architect, though NATO is expected to implement them. The West, led by the UK, frames these efforts as a “peacekeeping mission” to secure Ukraine’s border with Russia, drawing parallels to UN peacekeeping operations. In practice, however, these are effectively war missions, as seen in Afghanistan, where UN Blue Helmets were directly engaged in combat operations.

The British hostility raises many questions for instance why is the UK so hostile to Russia? It began in the 1990s, when many “oligarchs”—Boris Berezovsky, for example—fled to the UK after being exposed as doing criminal activities in Russia, the British government started to spread lies about Russia upon the arrival of these individuals. Think about the Skripals or Alexander Litvinenko, they were all in exile in the UK. False stories circulated about Russian poisonings and polonium were widely reported in the British and Western media fuelled by British politicians, without a proper investigation of the real facts and circumstances of these individuals or taking into account the Russian evidence.

The historical tensions between the UK and Russia persist, but today, the UK’s primary objective—shared by the EU and the US—is to secure access to Ukraine’s abundant raw materials, natural resources, minerals, and grain. Upon taking office for his second term, US President Donald Trump pledged to broker peace between Ukraine and Russia within 24 hours, a promise widely dismissed as propaganda due to its unrealistic timeline. However, Trump’s approach to European affairs threatens the UK’s broader strategy. His plan reportedly involved pressuring Ukrainian President Zelensky to recognize Crimea as Russian territory and accept the Russian control of the Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson regions, legitimized through a democratic referendum in 2022.

Europe, including the United Kingdom, faces a period of decline, with the continent grappling with significant upheaval. In the UK, citizens are taking to the streets in protest, as freedoms appear increasingly at risk. Once a symbol of stability, wealth, and royal tradition, the UK now finds itself mired in a profound crisis.

The UK’s war rhetoric surpasses even that of mainland Europe, rooted in a militarized history shared with nations like Germany. However, that era has faded; declining birth rates and the integration of diverse cultures have eroded traditional British identity. The elites, witnessing the decline of their once-vast empire, are powerless to reverse this trend. In response, they appear to be pushing for conflict—whether hybrid or conventional warfare—to reassert their influence.

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Putin signs off on Europe’s largest ever high-speed rail project

RT | September 17, 2025

Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin has announced plans for a massive high-speed rail (HSR) network. It is set to be the largest in Europe, spanning more than 4,500km (2,800 miles), and will use domestically built trains capable of reaching 400kph (250mph).

At a government meeting on Tuesday, the prime minister said the new line will cut travel time between Moscow and St. Petersburg from four hours to just over two. The network will also connect Moscow with Minsk, Adler on the Black Sea, Ekaterinburg in the Urals, Ryazan, and other cities.

“Travel between cities should be not only safe and comfortable but also not too time consuming,” Mishustin stated. “In the modern world, time is becoming increasingly valuable. Because of that, we are mastering technologies for faster travel and [are working] on a development scheme for high-speed rail infrastructure.”

He noted that the project has been approved by President Vladimir Putin and will be finalized within the next six months.

Mishustin said construction of the first HSR line between Moscow and St. Petersburg is already underway. The 679km route will be the first to feature the new generation of high-speed trains. While he gave no details about the train’s specifications, media reports suggest that the name could be chosen in a public vote, with options including ‘Luch’ (Russian for ‘ray of light’). The current line between the two cities, the fastest in Russia, operates Siemens Velaro Sapsan trains with a top speed of 250kph.

Once completed, Russia’s HSR network will overtake Spain’s 3,970km system, the largest in Europe and second worldwide after China. The new Russian trains will also outpace Europe’s fastest, the French TGV, which runs at up to 320kph, covering the London-Paris route in three hours.

China remains the global HSR leader, with more than 64,000km of lines in operation. It also fields the world’s fastest trains, including the Shanghai Maglev at 460kph and the CR400 Fuxing Hao at 350kph.

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Who Killed Charlie Kirk?

By Ron Paul | September 16, 2025

I had the pleasure of appearing on Charlie Kirk’s program a few times over the years and I always found him to be polite, respectful, and genuinely interested in ideas. Even in areas where we might not have agreed, he listened carefully. He was a strong advocate of free speech and he made a career of trying to convince the youth of the value of free speech and dialogue regardless of political differences.

At the young age of 31 years old, he had already founded and ran the largest conservative youth organization in the country and as such he had enormous influence over the future of the conservative movement and even the Republican party. As I discovered during my Republican presidential runs, the youth of this country are truly inspired by the ideas of liberty, peace, and prosperity.

I do not believe we have anything near the real story about the horrific murder of Charlie Kirk last week. The narrative presented by the FBI and other government agencies is wildly contradictory, with an ever-changing plotline that makes little sense.

Some individuals close to Kirk have reported that his foreign policy position was shifting away from the standard neoconservative militarism in favor of a more non-interventionist approach. Tucker Carlson recently recounted that Kirk had even gone personally to the White House to urge President Trump to refuse to take military action against Iran. He was rebuffed by President Trump, Carlson informed us.

Likewise, conservative podcaster Candace Owens, who was a close friend of Charlie Kirk, has stated on her program that Kirk was undergoing a “spiritual crisis” and was turning away from his past embrace of militarism and in favor of America-first non-interventionism, particularly regarding the current unrest in the Middle East.

Was Charlie Kirk murdered – directly or indirectly – by powerful forces who could not tolerate such a shift in views in such an influential leader? We don’t know.

If anything, those seeking to prevent the ideas of peace from breaking out would wish to cover it up, as they have done in so many past political killings. As I recounted in my most recent book, The Surreptitious Coup: Who Stole Western Civilization?, the turbulent 1960s saw several killings of major US figures, including JFK, RFK, and Martin Luther King, who were challenging the status quo and pushing for a shift away from the Cold War confrontationist mentality.

The real assassins of these peace leaders from last century were nihilists who did not believe in truth. They only believed in power – the power that comes from the barrel of a gun. Rather than compete in the marketplace of ideas they preferred to snuff out any challenges and therefore decapitate any possibility that our country could take a different course.

More than sixty years after the murder of President Kennedy, the vast majority of the American people do not believe the official story of how he was killed and why. Truth will eventually break through even when the wall of lies seems impenetrable.

If it is true that Charlie Kirk was preparing to shift his organization toward a foreign policy embraced by our Founders, the killing was even more tragic. But no army – or assassin – can stop an idea whose time has come. That may be his most important legacy. Rest in peace.

September 17, 2025 Posted by | Book Review, Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Wars for Israel | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »