Israel expanded the geography of countries it has bombed on Tuesday, targeting a delegation of Hamas officials involved in peace negotiations in Qatar. Sputnik asked a pair of regional experts how the aggression will impact Israel’s position in the region in the long term.
Israeli military operations in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and now the Gulf signal an “overstretch” that won’t be left without serious diplomatic repercussions, Ankara-based security analyst Dr. Hasan Selim Ozertem has told Sputnik.
“Looking at Europe, looking at the US, looking at the Gulf, these countries have started to articulate their concerns about Israeli aggression, which was not the case before because of the leverage of the Israeli lobby, especially in US politics,” Ozertem explained.
With Qatar serving as mediator in the Gaza war, the Doha attack “also undermines Israel’s credibility” among the Gulf powers Tel Aviv wants to forge ties with through the Abraham Accords.
Israel’s aggression may even result in the creation of new regional pacts, Ozertem says.
“The Saudi Crown Prince said [Riyadh] will be supporting Qatar. In the past, we know that Qatar and Saudi Arabia had political problems. They managed to solve them. Now we are talking about a military alliance…an anti-Israeli opinion or bloc in the region among local actors… increasing the probability of potential confrontation between Israel and others.”
Burning Bridges
“By attacking Doha as peace negotiations for ending the Gaza genocide were in progress, Netanyahu once again demonstrated his disdain for negotiations and his preference for brute force as the ultimate solution,” says Mehran Kamrava, a professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar.
Netanyahu’s strategy of “managed chaos” threatens to spiral out of control, and further isolate Israel “by making it a rogue, pariah state,” Kamrava said.
Besides Israel’s reputation, the attack promises to “cost the US much of its already diminished credibility in the Arab world,” the scholar says, emphasizing that unconditional US support for Israel is proving “extremely costly” as the Israeli government takes actions that make it seem increasingly “unhinged” and “devoid of all rationality.”
The European Commission has announced plans to scrap consensus-based decision-making in EU foreign policy, in a step that could sideline member states resisting Brussels’ line.
Brussels has long weighed replacing unanimity – a founding principle of EU foreign policy – with majority voting, arguing the change would speed up decisions and stop individual states from blocking measures such as sanctions and military aid for Ukraine. Under the current system, all 27 members must agree for decisions to pass. The proposed reform would require a qualified majority, meaning decisions would be adopted if backed by a set threshold of states.
In her ‘state of the union’ address on Wednesday, Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said it was time to “break free from the shackles of unanimity,” and insisted that the bloc act “faster.”
“I believe that we need to move to qualified majority in some areas, for example in foreign policy,” she stated.
The EC chief, who has repeatedly invoked the “Russian threat” to justify military aid to Ukraine, sanctions, and the push for accelerated militarization, was met with opposition from Slovakia and Hungary. Both governments have repeatedly threatened to use their veto powers to block EU actions they view as harmful to their national interests.
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has warned that removing members’ veto power on foreign policy would spell the end of the bloc and could be “the precursor of a huge military conflict.”
Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban has dismissed officials in Brussels as “bureaucrats” and argued that abandoning consensus would undermine national sovereignty, as member states could be dragged into wars without their consent. Orban said the EU is on the verge of collapse and will not survive beyond the next decade without a “fundamental structural overhaul” and disentanglement from the Ukraine conflict.
Moscow has accused the West of pursuing “uncontrolled militarization” to prepare for war with Russia, while dismissing claims it intends to attack NATO or EU states as “nonsense.” Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, have accused Western leaders of fearmongering to justify inflated military budgets and to cover up their economic failures, insisting that aid to Kiev only prolongs the hostilities.
After nearly two years of balancing diplomatic efforts, Qatar found itself at the centre of the very conflict it had sought to mediate. An Israeli airstrike on Doha on Tuesday, aimed at members of Hamas’s political bureau, disrupted months of negotiations aimed at resolving the conflict in Gaza and may hinder Qatar’s ability to facilitate a ceasefire between the opposing parties. Hamas stated that the strike conducted by Israel under the name “Operation Summit of Fire“, which took months of preparation according to Israeli media, did not take the lives of Khalil al-Hayya or other high-ranking officials; however, it did result in the deaths of his son, three bodyguards, and a Qatari security officer.
Earlier this week, Qatar’s prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, had met with Hamas representatives to discuss a proposal that Trump envoy Steve Witkoff had presented the week before in Paris. The Hamas representatives, possibly including some who had just flown in from Turkey, opted to reconvene on Tuesday to discuss the proposal further. Israel, aware of the group’s assembly in Doha, seized this opportunity to launch its attack.
On Tuesday, Israel targeted Hamas leadership in the West Bay Lagoon area, close to the Qatari Defence Minister’s HQ, and in the vicinity of the central business district, home to many foreign embassies, wealthy residences, schools and supermarkets. The strike targeted high-ranking Hamas officials as part of the Hebrew State’s ongoing campaign against the resistance group. This strike — which Israel claimed was executed following an attack that left six dead at a bus stop in Jerusalem on Monday — struck residential buildings that housed several members of the Hamas Political Bureau, as the group’s key figures convened to deliberate on a US ceasefire proposal concerning the Gaza Strip.
Many believe that Israel, in partnership with the United States, might have lured Hamas into a trap, using a 100-word proposal, which is believed to have been crafted by Israel, aiming to bring Hamas’s leading political figures under one roof in Doha under the guise of negotiations, only to eliminate them. Hamas was expected to provide an answer on Tuesday evening to a US proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza. This clearly mirrors the approach taken by Trump earlier this year to soothe the Iranians through continuous nuclear talks while secretly planning the assassination of senior officials in Tehran.
Qatar had been apprehensive about a potential attack ever since Eyal Zamir, the chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, cautioned on August 31 that “most of the remaining Hamas leadership is abroad, and we will reach them as well.” In response, Qatar sought guarantees from the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, and the White House that such an assault would not take place on Qatari territory. Although these assurances were provided, Israel once again violated its commitment and went ahead with the air strike, breaking all sorts of international laws while directly challenging Qatar’s sovereignty.
Ahmed Hashim, professor of war studies at Deakin University, believes that “Israel used its modified Adir version of the US F-35 fighter jets, accompanied by its customised F-15I Ra’ams for ‘air cover’, to carry out this illegal operation. Professor Hashim explained that Israel usually keeps about 46 Adir F-35 jets at its Nevatim air base, which is 2,250 kilometres from Doha. Professor Hashim added that “The Adirs can be fitted with fuel tanks that allow them to fly about 2,200km, but they do not need to be flown all the way to a target.”
“I don’t think the planes were over the Doha district. They struck from a distance with precision. And I think they were guided there by intelligence provided by ground.”
Many questions have remained unanswered. For instance, how the Israeli jets could have flown undetected over Saudi Arabia, and most likely Jordan, to reach Qatar, or what projectile Israel used, and why Qatari Air Defenses were not activated? Israeli media are reporting that the strikes involved 15 Israeli fighter jets, firing 10 munitions against a single target, which implies the Israelis knew exactly where the Hamas officials were located. According to an ABC report, retired Lieutenant General Mark Schwartz, who served as US security coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority, said the comments made by the White House indicated that the US leadership was notified of the attack as it was unfolding, “unfortunately, too late” to stop it.
Netanyahu, who has labelled the assault as “justified”, continues to pursue his vision of a Greater Israel along with his ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump has openly condemned the Israeli actions and has cowardly distanced himself from the Hebrew state, which has taken full responsibility for the operation. Furthermore, flight trackers’ data suggest that the UK may have provided support for the operation.
UK fuel tanker took off from Qatar, refueled Israeli fighter jets that were attacking Qatar then landed in Qatar. pic.twitter.com/xZYzu7jlQ6
The United States claimed it had issued a warning to Qatar prior to the strike.; however, Qatar contests this claim, stating that the Americans communicated with Doha only 10 minutes after the attacks, notifying them that Israel had carried out an airstrike against Hamas in Doha.
Nevertheless, Qatar has clearly affirmed its commitment to continue mediating in the Gaza conflict, even in light of Israel’s unprecedented assault on its territory. Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani vowed on Tuesday to retaliate against Israel for its strike against Hamas’s political leadership in Doha. At a press conference, the Qatari prime minister stated:
“The State of Qatar is committed to acting in a decisive way against anything that would target its territories and will reserve the right to retaliate and will take all the needed measures to retaliate.”
VIDEO: Qatari PM calls the Israeli attack ‘state terrorism’ (Source: Al Jazeera English)
. The Israeli strike on Hamas leaders in Qatar has unsettled Gulf allies and strained US relations, prompting concerns about sovereignty and the latitude afforded to Israel. While numerous Gulf nations have succumbed to the US security extortion model to safeguard their oil and gas assets, the dependability of the United States in the Middle East is expected to come under serious scrutiny.
Israel’s “Abraham Accords” now face uncertainty, as experts indicate that the topic of normalisation is currently at a halt in the Gulf Arab nations, at least for the time being…
Russia has condemned Israel’s strike on Qatar’s capital Doha as a blatant violation of international law and the UN Charter, saying the attack undermines efforts to reach a peaceful settlement between Israel and Hamas, Moscow’s Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday.
Israel struck a residential building in Doha on Tuesday in an operation involving about 15 warplanes and at least ten missiles. The raid, which reportedly left several Hamas members dead, including the son of senior official Khalil al-Hayya, was aimed at taking out the group’s political wing, according to the IDF.
Hamas said its top leadership survived what it called an assassination attempt against negotiators involved in settlement talks.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry said the strike on Qatar, “a country that plays a key mediating role in indirect talks between Hamas and Israel on ending the nearly two-year war in Gaza and securing the release of hostages,” could only be viewed as an attempt to undermine international peace efforts. Moscow urged all sides to act responsibly and refrain from steps that could further escalate the conflict.
Moscow reiterated its stance, calling for an “immediate ceasefire in Gaza” and urging a comprehensive resolution of the Palestinian issue. The Russian Foreign Ministry said “such methods of fighting those whom Israel considers its enemies and opponents deserve the strongest condemnation.”
Qatar, which is hosting Hamas officials as part of its mediation efforts, said a local security officer was among the six people killed in the strike.
Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani condemned the attack as an act of “state terrorism” and warned that his country reserved the right to respond. He accused his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu of undermining regional stability and said the incident has derailed US-brokered mediation efforts.
Israel, which blames Hamas for the deadly October 2023 assault on southern Israel, has vowed to hunt down the group’s leaders “wherever they are.”
Gaza’s authorities say Israel attacks since October 7, 2023 have claimed the lives of at least 64,000 people. Human rights observers have accused Israel of committing genocide by making the enclave uninhabitable and worsening famine conditions through restrictions on aid.
The recent shift by Armenian elites toward the European Union is not merely a geopolitical mistake — it is a clear manifestation of a historical and cultural fallacy. By invoking a supposed “Europeanness” of Armenia as a justification for its pro-Western pivot, the leadership in Yerevan resorts to a nationalist rhetorical myth with no grounding in objective reality. It is a fabricated narrative, sustained by emotional discourse and by inferiority complexes typical of post-Soviet elites who reject their own identity.
By any reasonable criterion — geographic, cultural, or even genetic — Armenia is an integral part of Asia. It is located south of the Caucasus, a region historically considered a transitional zone, but unmistakably Asian. Forcing its insertion into Europe is an act of geopolitical distortion that ignores physical geography and rewrites the map according to Atlanticist interests.
The only tangible “argument” used to support this supposed European connection is linguistic. Indeed, Armenian is an Indo-European language — just like Portuguese, Tajik, or Sinhala. But no one in their right mind considers Brazil, Tajikistan, or Sri Lanka to be European countries. Language alone does not define civilizational belonging, nor does it align peoples with geopolitical blocs.
In practice, the Armenian people possess a genetic and cultural composition derived from the autochthonous peoples of the Caucasus, with some minor external influences resulting from centuries of invasions and migrations. Their religion, Miaphysite Christianity, links them more closely to the Egyptian Copts, the Ethiopian Tewahedo Church, and the Assyrians than to Eastern Orthodoxy or Catholicism. The very ecclesiastical structure of the Armenian Apostolic Church reflects this Asian and Oriental specificity.
Armenian “Europeanness,” therefore, is nothing more than an ideological discourse, rooted in a desperate attempt to detach from its geographic and historical neighborhood — Russia, Iran, and the Turkic world — and artificially insert itself into a Europe that doesn’t even recognize them as “equals.” The alliance with the West is not based on “cultural affinity,” as claimed, but on an illusory calculation of “protection” from its regional neighbors, especially Azerbaijan and Turkey. A strategic misjudgment with high political cost.
Furthermore, the Armenian nationalist obsession with the so-called “Armenian hypothesis” — which postulates the origin of Indo-European languages in historical Armenian lands — is another rhetorical element without mainstream scientific acceptance. The dominant theory in historical and linguistic sciences remains the Pontic-Caspian steppe hypothesis, which holds that the Indo-Europeans originated in the Eurasian steppes, not on the Armenian Highlands.
Curiously, this rejection of Asian identity is shared by their Azerbaijani rivals, who in turn deny their Caucasian origins in favor of a “Turkic” link to Central Asia, justified solely by their use of the Turkic language. Both sides reveal the same symptom: rejection of local reality and glorification of external identities as a form of psychological compensation and a bid to integrate into geopolitical projects alien to their own history.
At its core, Armenia’s rapprochement with the European Union has nothing to do with “European values” or “shared identity.” It is a project of subordinate integration, in which Brussels offers vague promises in exchange for geopolitical loyalty. The stance of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is symptomatic of this process of forced Westernization — even if it means isolating Armenia from its historical allies and falling into the hands of structures that will never guarantee its regional survival.
Russia, on the other hand, has always been the true guarantor of Armenian sovereignty — including during the most critical moments of its recent history. The attempt to break with Moscow in the name of an artificial identity project reveals the strategic myopia of Yerevan. True national freedom is not achieved by serving Ursula von der Leyen or Kaja Kallas, but by reaffirming a realistic and independent position within Greater Eurasia, under the multipolar security umbrella led by Moscow and its allies.
According to police reports cited by BFM TV, 75 individuals were detained in Paris, while another eight were arrested in cities across the country.
The movement, which originated as a grassroots campaign online, is aimed at halting daily life in France in protest of the national budget plan proposed by outgoing Prime Minister Francois Bayrou.
More than 1,000 [?] people joined protests across France, with over 30 separate gatherings reported in cities including Marseille and Lyon, where protesters overturned trash bins and blocked major roads.
Several high schools in Paris were also shut down by student demonstrations.
Organizers expect over 100,000 people to participate in the protest actions throughout the day, marking a significant escalation in public resistance to the government’s proposed austerity measures.
The “Block Everything” movement was initiated by a small online group called Les Essentiels, which declared, “On September 10, we stop everything, not to escape, to say no.” The movement has since gained backing from the leftist France Unbowed (LFI) party.
Political crisis deepens as Macron names new prime minister
In response to the crisis, French President Emmanuel Macron appointed Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu as the new prime minister on Tuesday. Lecornu has been tasked with consulting political parties before forming a new government.
Budget-related political infighting has become a persistent issue in French politics. Last year, the failure to pass the 2025 budget led to the collapse of Michel Barnier’s government after a no-confidence motion united both far-left and far-right parties.
In parallel with the grassroots movement, France’s major trade unions have announced a national day of mobilization on September 18, signaling a broader, more coordinated wave of resistance to the government’s economic policies.
As tensions mount, the coming weeks are expected to test both the resilience of the protest movement and the ability of the Macron administration to restore political and economic stability.
Moscow has dismissed Poland’s latest claim that Russian drones breached the country’s air space. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said no evidence has been provided linking the UAVs to Russia.
On Wednesday, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk stated that the country’s military had shot down a “huge number of Russian drones.” Warsaw has described the incident as an “unprecedented violation of Polish airspace” and an “act of aggression.”
However, Peskov has dismissed the accusations, pointing out that “The EU and NATO leadership accuse Russia of provocation on a daily basis. Most often, without even trying to provide any arguments.”
Meanwhile, Russia’s charge d’affaires in Warsaw, Andrey Ordash, told RIA Novosti that when he was summoned to the Polish Foreign Ministry on Wednesday, the Polish authorities did not provide any evidence that the downed UAVs belonged to Russia. He noted that the drones had flown into Poland from Ukraine.
Tusk has claimed, however, that the aircraft came from Belarus rather than Ukraine, and characterized the incident as a Russian “provocation.”
The Belarusian military had previously reported giving Poland early warning that some drones used by Ukrainian and Russian forces for mutual attacks “lost their track as a result of the impact of the parties’ electronic warfare assets.”
After announcing the alleged airspace violation, Tusk formally invoked Article 4 of NATO’s founding treaty, which provides for consultations in case one of the bloc’s members believes its security is threatened.
Last week, former Polish President Andzej Duda referenced a November 2022 incident in which a Ukrainian missile landed on Polish territory. Kiev insisted it was an intentional Russian attack and called for NATO-level retaliation. Duda said that Ukrainian authorities were trying to get the US-led bloc into a direct confrontation with Russia, describing such a scenario as a “dream” for Kiev, but unacceptable for Poland.
Poland has allegedly detected 19 drones entering its aerospace at night, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Wednesday.
There were no targets of Russia’s this night’s mass strike on the Ukrainian military enterprises were located in Poland, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Wednesday.
“There were no intentions to engage any targets on the territory of Poland,” the ministry said on Telegram.
The flight range of Russian drones used in the strike on the Ukrainian military complex does not exceed 700 kilometers (435 miles), the ministry said.
“The maximum flight range of the Russian UAVs used in the strike, which allegedly crossed the border with Poland, does not exceed 700 km. Nevertheless, we are ready to hold consultations on this subject with the Polish defense ministry,” the statement said.
Strikes On Ukraine’s Military
Russia launched massive strike overnight on Ukrainian defense industry enterprises in the Ivano-Frankovsk, Khmelnytsky, and Zhytomyr regions, as well as in the cities of Vinnytsa and Lvov
These enterprises produced and repaired armored vehicles, aviation equipment for the Ukrainian Armed Forces, as well as engines and drones
The strike hit the Lvov Armored Vehicle Factory and the Lvov Aircraft Repair Plant (LDARZ), where long-range drones were manufactured
The objectives of the massive strike were achieved, and all designated targets were hit
Poland has allegedly detected 19 drones entering its aerospace at night, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Wednesday.
“Nineteen violations of Polish aerospace have been recorded,” Tusk said. “At the moment, we have confirmation that three drones have been shot down. It is likely that the fourth object was shot down,” Tusk added.
At the same time, the Polish prime minister did not rule out the appearance of information about a larger number of downed objects. Verification of such information “will take some time.” Now, the search for the wreckage of the downed drones and their identification is underway.
On September 9, 2025, another Lion Electric school bus burst into flames in Montreal — this time with five children and their driver on board. Thankfully, everyone escaped safely, but this marks the third Lion Electric bus fire in less than a year (Ascot Corner, Huntsville, and now Montreal).
In this video, I break down what happened, why the fire department’s explanation doesn’t quite line up with the bus’s construction, and why these repeated incidents raise serious questions about safety, accountability, and taxpayer funding. Lion has already taken nearly $160 million in U.S. funding for 435 buses, yet many districts never received vehicles — and the ones that did are stuck with broken, unsafe buses and voided warranties.
Are these buses ready for prime time, or is this a dangerous rush to electrify at any cost?
In a U.S. Senate hearing today, attorney Aaron Siri revealed the results of a large study that found vaccinated children were far more likely to develop chronic disease than unvaccinated kids.
The study never underwent peer review and was never published, because the authors — staunch vaccine supporters — told Siri they were concerned about losing their jobs or reputations because their findings contradicted the official public health narrative and vaccine policy.
Siri’s testimony, delivered during Tuesday’s Senate hearing, “How the Corruption of Science has Impacted Public Perception and Policies Regarding Vaccines,” addressed the study’s origins, findings and suppression.
The study involved over 18,000 children enrolled in Henry Ford Health system’s insurance plan in Michigan.
“The results are astonishing,” Siri told The Defender. “For example, vaccinated children had 4.29 times the rate of asthma, 3.03 times the rate of atopic disease (a group of allergic conditions), 5.96 times the rate of autoimmune disease, and 5.53 times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorder.”
These findings were statistically significant — even when accounting for gender, race, birthweight, premature birth, and respiratory distress or trauma at birth.
But rather than publishing the results, the study authors and their bosses at Henry Ford Health refused to make them public — even though the lead author previously assured Siri and Del Bigtree he would publish the results, whatever the findings.
Hearing held so ‘more Americans have their eyes open to the reality and truth’
Today’s hearing was the third so far this year on vaccine injury held by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. The study’s results were entered into the congressional record.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), subcommittee chair who organized the hearing, told The Defender he hoped the hearing would open people’s minds so that “more Americans have their eyes open to the reality and truth.”
He noted the fierce resistance that U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. faced at last week’s Senate hearing from senators who had “totally closed minds.”
Johnson said he didn’t presume to know the full truth about vaccines’ impact on health. “I don’t know because we haven’t even been allowed to ask the question — much less get the answer.”
The hearing pitted staunch vaccine supporters Scott and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), subcommittee ranking member, against Johnson, Siri and Rogers.
There were tense exchanges about what constitutes bias and corruption in research.
Blumenthal said he “deeply feared” for the future of public health in the U.S. and claimed Kennedy wanted staff who embraced the secretary’s “dogma.”
Vaccinated kids 2.48 times more likely to be diagnosed with chronic health condition
According to Siri, the study authors looked at health data of 18,468 kids born between 2000 and 2016 who were enrolled in the Henry Ford Health system’s insurance plan.
Siri published excerpts from the study’s manuscript, including its results, in his new book “Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines.” Released on Sept. 4, the book challenges what he calls the “religion” of vaccines. Siri said:
“It is time to start treating vaccines as what they are, consumer products, not items of worship. We can save children from harm from infectious disease and from vaccines. We can do both.”
The study authors divided kids into two groups: vaccinated and unvaccinated. Nearly 2,000 were in the unvaccinated group. Roughly 16,500 kids received one or more vaccines, with the median number of vaccines being 18.
The authors found links “between vaccination and the incidence of asthma, atopic and autoimmune disease, and mental health and neurodevelopmental disorders including developmental delay and speech disorder,” according to a copy of the study Siri obtained.
The authors calculated incident rate ratios — the odds that a vaccinated child would develop a given medical condition versus an unvaccinated child. Overall, vaccinated children were 2.48 times more likely to be diagnosed with a chronic health condition than unvaccinated kids.
Vaccinated children were over four times more likely to be diagnosed with a speech disorder than unvaccinated children, and nearly six times more likely to be diagnosed with an autoimmune disease.
In some cases, the authors couldn’t do the calculation because no child in the unvaccinated group had the target disease. For instance, none of the unvaccinated had diabetes, brain dysfunction, behavioral dysfunction or tics.
The authors said the study couldn’t be used to prove vaccines caused the chronic conditions, but they concluded that the findings warranted further research.
How the study came about
According to Siri, the Henry Ford Health study came about after the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) in early 2017 searched for a highly qualified scientist to do a study comparing health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated kids.
Bigtree, ICAN’s founder, had previously met Dr. Marcus Zervos, co-director of the Center for Emerging and Infectious Diseases at Wayne State University and head of the Infectious Diseases division at Henry Ford Health.
Siri, who represents ICAN, and Bigtree met with Zervos. “While Dr. Zervos was a vaccine believer,” Siri told The Defender, “he showed signs of possibly being open to conducting some actual safety science.”
Siri and Bigtree initially thought it would be advantageous for the study to analyze children’s health data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) database. But accessing VSD data was a complicated proposition.
Zervos instead suggested he and his colleagues do the study using data they already could access through Henry Ford Health’s vast database. Henry Ford Health runs over 550 medical sites in Michigan, according to its website.
Siri said:
“Once Dr. Zervos appeared committed to performing the study, I made two requests. They were merely requests because I was in no position to dictate or demand anything.
“The first was that they would publish the study no matter what the result. The second was that the unvaccinated group would truly be unvaccinated — meaning no vaccines — so that the study would actually assess health outcomes between exposed (one or more vaccines) and unexposed (no vaccines) children.”
Zervos “looked us right in the eyes and assured us that he was a man of integrity and would publish the results, whatever the finding,” Siri recalled. Zervos also agreed to use a truly unvaccinated control group.
Study never published
In early 2020, Siri received a copy of the study but discovered that it had not been submitted to a journal for publication.
Lois Lamerato, Ph.D., who had worked on the study with Zervos, told Siri she and Zervos both thought the study was well done and worthy of publication.
But the “higher-ups” at Henry Ford Health, to whom she was required to send a copy before submission, did not want to submit it. Lamerato also said she was worried the study, if published, would make doctors feel uncomfortable.
According to Siri, Henry Ford Health officials didn’t provide any substantive explanation for not wanting the study published. Siri said:
“The real reason it was not submitted for publication, no doubt, was because of its finding that vaccinated children suffered from multiple times the rate of various serious ailments.
“Had the finding shown vaccinated children were healthier or at least had the same outcomes as unvaccinated children, then this study would have no doubt been submitted for publication and published many years ago. Instead, it remained hidden from the world.”
Other studies also show increased autism in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated
Scott, an infectious disease specialist at Stanford Medicine, presented information during the hearing on studies supporting vaccine safety claims. He said he had no financial conflicts of interest, as his research is either self-funded or funded by Stanford.
Rogers, a fellow with the Brownstone Institute and independent journalist, testified on published research related to the causes of autism.
The U.S. has yet to start writing its report on the possible causes of autism, U.S. Food and Drug Commissioner Marty Makary told Bloombergyesterday.
Rogers has researched autism since 2015, when his then-partner’s son was diagnosed with autism. At the time, he was pursuing a doctorate in political economy at the University of Sydney.
According to Rogers:
“I went to the CDC’s webpage on the causes of autism. As a Ph.D. student, I was trained to focus on primary source documents, so I read all of the references in their footnotes. … To my surprise, I quickly discovered that the CDC’s narrative did not add up.”
He also noticed that the U.S. government wasn’t responding with a sense of urgency to the sharp increase in autism, despite the cost already having reached “hundreds of billions of dollars.”
So he changed his doctoral thesis topic to “The Political Economy of Autism” and spent four years analyzing published materials on autism’s prevalence, causation and cost.
Roger’s thesis, which passed peer review in 2019, is among the top 10 most-downloaded doctoral research papers in the history of the University of Sydney.
He gave senators a birds-eye view of the published literature. “Here are the facts,” Rogers said.
Twenty-two studies claim that vaccines don’t cause autism — but none have completely unvaccinated control groups. “So unfortunately,” Rogers said, “if you want to understand what’s causing the autism epidemic, these studies are of no use.”
Meanwhile, six published studies that included an unvaccinated control group found an increased risk of autism in the vaccinated. “Unfortunately, these studies have been systematically suppressed and ignored by the mainstream media and the medical establishment,” he said.
Rogers cited additional studies that showed an increase in autism following vaccination.
For instance, a 2018 study showed that up to 88% of autism cases are characterized by autistic regression — meaning a child who had been developing normally suddenly begins to lose skills, such as speech and eye contact. This suggests an acute toxic exposure triggered the development of autism, Rogers said.
“We now have eyewitness testimony from thousands of parents that the acute toxic exposure that preceded the autistic regression was a ‘well-baby’ vaccine appointment,” Rogers said.
What about genetic causes of autism?
According to Rogers, purely genetic causes of autism wouldn’t make sense. “Genes don’t suddenly create epidemics — the human genome just doesn’t change that fast.”
Most studies that look at both genes and environmental toxins, like pesticides and heavy metals, don’t control for vaccines as a possible covariate or confounder.
This makes it impossible to tease out the true impact of the toxin from the possible impact of the vaccine.
“The best available evidence suggests that anything that causes an immune activation event — an infectious disease, an industrial toxicant, or a vaccine — can cause autism.”
According to Rogers, autism is most likely caused by “vaccines and about a dozen additional toxicants.”
He added, “If we stop exposing children to these hazards in the first place, that would stop the epidemics of chronic illness in children. Now we must summon the political will to act.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that Russia strongly condemns attempts by the West to remove Milorad Dodik, president of Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina, from power.
“We strongly condemn attempts to remove Serbian leaders disliked by the West from power through fabricated criminal cases. In particular, our interlocutor today, our friend, the legally elected, legitimate president of Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik,” the Russian foreign minister said at a press conference on Tuesday.
Sergey Lavrov said he considers the upcoming October 25 referendum on confidence in Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik to be an honest initiative.
“I want to mention the referendum that Republika Srpska, under President Dodik, is planning for October 25, asking citizens whether they support the republic’s leadership or not. I consider this an honest step,” Lavrov said.
Lavrov added that Russia will raise the issue of Bosnia and Herzegovina during its October chairmanship of the UN Security Council.
“As a permanent member of the UN Security Council and one of the guarantors of the Dayton Accords, Russia will continue efforts to support this key document and the forces that defend the preservation and unconditional respect of Dayton principles in practice. We will pay special attention to this topic in October, when Russia will chair the Security Council, and the next meeting on Bosnia and Herzegovina is scheduled for October 31,” Lavrov said following talks with Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik.
The foreign minister emphasized that Russia will carefully prepare for the upcoming meeting. “Our colleagues will have to answer uncomfortable but entirely legitimate questions,” he said.
Lavrov also noted that “the West does not like referendums; Kosovo’s independence was declared without any referendum at all.”
The latest allegations by Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky that a Russian airstrike targeted civilians are completely false, a source with the Ministry of Defense in Moscow told RIA Novosti on Tuesday.
Zelensky shared extremely graphic footage from the Ukrainian-controlled village of Yarovaya, in Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic. He claimed a Russian “guided aerial bomb” killed more than 20 “ordinary people who were collecting their pensions.”
The allegation does not hold water, a military source told the news agency, pointing out that the latest strikes in the area – not on the village itself but in its vicinity – were conducted on September 7. The damage shown in the video does not correspond with an aerial bomb strike, the source noted, suggesting the incident was “yet another false flag staged by the Kiev regime.”
“The crater shown does not match in shape and size of what would be left by an actual aerial bomb. The most common Russian bomb in the special military operation zone is the FAB-500, which contains about 200 kilograms of explosives,” the source said. The smallest munition used, FAB-250, contains around 100 kg of explosives and also leaves a massive crater on impact, he added.
The lack of any reporting on the incident prior to Zelensky’s post, after which the news spread all across “Ukrainian propaganda outlets,” also suggests the affair had been carefully orchestrated, the source pointed out.
“The false flag is supposed to demonstrate Kiev’s ‘concern’ for the population of the [Donbass] territories under its control and, simultaneously, to show the ‘cruelty’ of Russia,” the source suggested.
The incident appears to be a part of a broader campaign backed by Kiev to derail any potential negotiations to settle the conflict, as well as to justify its refusal to withdraw from the parts of the formerly Ukrainian regions it still controls, the source claimed, apparently referring to the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions.
US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has proposed removing $600 million in Ukraine support from the draft Pentagon spending bill, arguing that Americans’ “hard-earned tax dollars” should not go to foreign aid.
The Georgia Republican proposed cancelling the allocation of these funds in the 2026 and 2027 fiscal years to shift priorities toward the US.
With Donald Trump back in the White House, the US has dramatically cut military aid to Kiev, pausing more than $1 billion in planned funds.
In a video post on X on Tuesday, Greene said that her amendment would strike $600 million from the defense bill, money that she noted “goes to Ukraine.” She argued that the US had already sent “over $175 billion to this war” and that it was “enough of your hard-earned tax dollars.” She described the measure as part of the America First agenda, saying US funds should not be used for “foreign wars” while the country faces a $37 trillion debt.
The congresswoman stated that the US usually allocates $300 million annually but that “Speaker Johnson and Republicans are feeling so generous they’re wanting to give them 600 million this time. My amendment will take it out.” Greene said, adding she has “never voted to fund this war.”
Greene introduced another amendment after learning that “another $100 million” had been earmarked for Kiev and said she wanted to remove all funding in case others in Congress felt “so giving.” Greene also put forward measures to cut aid for Israel, Syria, and Iraq adding that the money should be “kept back here at home.”
While previous President Joe Biden’s administration approved large-scale aid packages to Kiev, Trump has cut assistance but allowed some deliveries, such as Patriot air-defense systems. He has repeatedly expressed concern about possible misuse of US aid to Kiev, claiming that billions allocated under Biden may have been embezzled. In July, Trump said that any additional weapons delivered to Ukraine would have to be paid for by Europe’s NATO members.
Ukraine’s European backers are pressing for more weapons as part of security guarantees, while Russia insists Western military aid is an obstacle to reaching a peace deal.
There was a time when I, like tens of thousands of my progressive partners, held Noam Chomsky and Amy Goodman in awe. After all, Amy informed us and Noam spoke for us, coherently explaining the issues. However, as I became more aware and more informed, I realized that there were great differences between their thinking and mine.
In many instances, our gurus spoke with forked tongue. Although Amy’s program Democracy Now! was informative, there were many areas of reporting that were out of bounds and were not reported on.
One could legitimately claim that reporters cannot report on everything and they would be right. But let us be honest. When 9/11 occurred, it was an historical event and an event that changed the course of history. Where was Amy? Relatively silent. She invited David Ray Griffin, who has written several books illustrating the lies and misdirections of the government’s narrative about that day, to Democracy Now! which one could claim was a significant journalistic move.
However, instead of interviewing him so that he could reveal to her listening audience the facts that he had accumulated that put into question the government’s explanations of that day, she paired him with a pro-government guest who spent the hour attacking Griffin personally and ignoring any of the data Griffin produced. It became a three-ring circus and helped sabotage any impetus the Truth Movement might have gained within the progressive community. Was that her goal? I’m not sure I can answer that but it was a successful strategy, progressives seemed reluctant to support the Truth Movement. The Movement was being portrayed as one in which there were marginal “conspiracy nuts” leading the charge and should be avoided. … 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 