Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Dr. Suzanne Humphries – Doctors are NOT Taught about Vaccines in Medical School

“We are basically given a piece of paper that says when the vaccines are due and when to give them.”

Dr. Suzanne Humphries: “You may not know this, but doctors are not taught about vaccines in medical school. We are not taught what is in vaccines, the adjuvants, we are not taught how vaccines are manufactured, as far as what kind of animals go into them, we are not taught the potential dangers of vaccination, we are basically given a piece of paper that says when the vaccines are due and when to give them.”

There is your 30 seconds of Vaccine Education. You now have the amount of Education as the average doctor. Congratulations!

Don’t you think there is a purpose to keeping doctors in the DARK?

Then Dr. Humphries did her own research on what she was told about Smallpox Vaccines and Polio Vaccines – two diseases she said she was “continuously told were eradicated by vaccination.”

Dr. Humphries found out that this was a total LIE. She wrote this in her book

She found that populations that stopped Vaccinating for Smallpox had a DECLINE in smallpox.

She says the Polio vaccination did not make polio go away and this story is a more complicated one.

Today Dr. Humphries spends 6 to 8 hours every single day researching immunology and everything she needs to know about vaccinations – the “deeper details of vaccinations.”

Dr. Humphries says that medical authorities use fear to get populations to get vaccinated and the authorities tell doctors to persuade you to get vaccinated, to use fear if necessary and even to kick you out of the office if you refuse to get vaccinated.

Nothing better than the “Doctor knows Best” attitude.

Vaccines are Safe & Effective and they Need to be Given.

The medical “authorities” do not want doctors or their patients looking into the data, they just want both to comply and they use the doctors as your higher authority, but the doctors don’t know any more than you do, they are just TOLD that the vaccines are safe and effective and are told to tell you that.

That’s how the vaccine game is played and that’s how they are setting children up for a lifetime of illnesses, diseases and a much shorter lifespan than their parents and grandparents.

What is ONE Question that a Doctor should Ask EVERY Single time someone comes in their office?

Doctors should ask “When was the last time you were vaccinated and what vaccine(s)?”

Do they? NOPE.

Their superiors would have a cow if they knew they were doing this and connecting some common sense dots.

They don’t want you to know and they don’t want your doctor to know. Just follow the orders, keep your mouth shut and don’t question the narrative.

Doctors actually believe what they are told most of them get vaccinated themselves.

What better way to get the masses to get vaccinated when the doctors themselves are taking the jabs?

Doctors do not have the time to educate themselves, they are too busy and they choose to do other things on their days off.

They certainly are not going to receive this education from med school.

There are TWO Sciences here – one by the Private Medical Industry and one by Independent Scientists and Researches. One has Big Pharma Interest and the other doesn’t.

Big Pharma Science has a MAJOR “Conflict of Interests.” They can design studies by word trickery that make them reach any endpoint they desire. That is how it is done. 100%.

Don’t worry about the Thimerosal (49% Mercury) and the Aluminum in the jabs, just trust the final headliners that say the vaccines are safe and effective.

Dr. Humphries goes over some date with Unvaccinated vs Vaccinated and the picture is very clear.

Then she goes over Tetanus Vaccines – one jab you do not want to take. You can watch the full video in the source #1 below.

Improvements in lifestyles, good hygiene and nutrition had more to do with the decline of death and the incidences of diseases than both antibiotic intervention and vaccinations.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, Video | | Comments Off on Dr. Suzanne Humphries – Doctors are NOT Taught about Vaccines in Medical School

Mother of Twins Who Died 8 Days After Vaccinations Charged With Murder

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 1, 2026

A 23-year-old mother charged with two counts of first-degree murder in connection with the deaths of her twin toddlers was set to be arraigned later today, after an Idaho grand jury indicted her late Monday, the Payette Police Department said in a press release.

Police arrested Andrea Shaw on Tuesday afternoon, more than a year after her two children — fraternal twins Dallas and Tyson Shaw — were found dead at their home in Payette on May 1, 2025, eight days after receiving their 18-month vaccines.

The Payette Police Department said the arrest follows “a lengthy and thorough investigation” and said it would have no further comment regarding evidence in the case. “Future information will be presented through the judicial process,” officials said.

Shaw alleges that her twins’ deaths were caused by the vaccines they received at a routine doctor’s appointment. She is one of five plaintiffs — along with two other mothers, two physicians and Children’s Health Defense (CHD) — in a lawsuit against the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

The lawsuit accuses the AAP of running a decades-long racketeering scheme to defraud American families about the safety of the childhood vaccine schedule.

Attorney Rick Jaffe, counsel of record for Shaw on two civil matters related to the deaths of her children, including the AAP lawsuit, said he believes “the criminal investigation and now the indictment is the natural consequence of the institutional vaccine program that refuses to admit vaccination carries any risk to infants.”

Jaffe, who is not involved in the criminal investigation, added, “Andrea’s indictment makes all the more urgent that the public health authorities acknowledge and address the harm that vaccination is causing to some infants, rather than just shifting the blame to the parent.”

Nurse Angela Wulbrecht, an advocate for people injured by vaccines and who has been supporting the Shaws, told The Defender she was “ shocked and heartbroken” to learn of Shaw’s arrest.

“Over the past year, I have had the privilege of walking alongside Andrea and her family after the unimaginable loss of her twin babies,” Wulbrecht said. “I have witnessed a mother’s profound grief, unwavering love for her children, and determination to seek answers.”

Andrea gave birth to a new baby, born three weeks prematurely, on June 25, Shaw’s attorney Joseph Filicetti told the local KTVB7 news station. Her husband is caring for the newborn while she is incarcerated.

Shaw told physician of family history of adverse vaccine reaction

The details of the Shaw twins’ story are laid out in court documents that are part of the lawsuit against the AAP. Andrea and her husband Nathaniel also shared their story in May 2025 with CHD.TV.

According to Andrea, she and her mother-in-law say they warned the twins’ pediatrician that there was a family history of adverse reactions to the flu shot.

However, the pediatrician dismissed these concerns. Nurses administered the flu vaccine along with hepatitis A and DTaP shots on April 23, 2025. The twins had previously received most routine childhood vaccinations, including their 1-year shots.

Within hours, Andrea said the toddlers became lethargic and ill. The next morning, their lips were blue, and they struggled to move. Andrea took the twins to the emergency room and told the doctor they had received three vaccines the day before.

The treating physician in the emergency room diagnosed them as suffering from “post-immunization reaction, initial encounter.”

The babies remained symptomatic over the days that followed. A week later, on the morning of May 1, Andrea found both children unresponsive. Police and paramedics were called, and investigators immediately focused on the parents. Andrea and Nathaniel told CHD.TV that the police immediately treated them as suspects.

“They said that it wasn’t medical and that they figured asphyxiation, and that I had supposedly had a postpartum overwhelming blackout and done it to my children,” Andrea said. The family filed a report with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS.

Rather than investigating Andrea’s vaccine concerns, the Payette Police Department opened an investigation into her.

Medical industry ignores vaccines as possible cause of SIDS

When infants under age 1 die suddenly, and a cause can’t be determined, the deaths are typically classified as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). SIDS is the third leading cause of infant mortality in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Public health researchers developed a “triple-risk model” for explaining SIDS. That model says SIDS occurs when a baby has an unknown medical condition, is going through an important period of development where the body changes quickly, and encounters an outside stressor, such as sleeping on its stomach.

But even as the medical industry claims to remain puzzled about the cause of SIDS, numerous studies have reported a plausible association between vaccines and SIDS in peer-reviewed literature for decades.

Researchers theorize, for example, that some children with underdeveloped liver enzyme pathways may not be able to process excipients — inactive ingredients used as preservatives or to enhance a vaccine’s efficacy — which can lead to illness or death.

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has also recognized links between vaccines and infant deaths. Last year the program compensated two families whose babies died. The program determined the deaths were vaccine-induced.

Due to concerns over the link between vaccines and SIDS, some states recently introduced legislation to require that medical examiners document recent immunizations on the death certificates of children who died from unknown causes.

How common is it to bring criminal charges against parents in infant deaths?

In recent years, some parents have been criminally charged when their infants die after sleeping on their stomachs.

Last year, two different sets of Pennsylvania parents were charged with felonies for placing their babies in unsafe sleeping positions. Attorney Daniel Nevins told Spotlight PA that such charges are rare and that the burden of proof on the prosecutors will be high.

But some parents have been convicted. In 2014, Virginia resident Candice Christa Semidey, age 25, was charged with murder after she swaddled her baby and put it to sleep on its stomach, The Washington Post reported. In that case, police did not think that she intended for the baby to die.

She pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter and child neglect. She was ordered to serve three years of probation to avoid a five-year prison term.

Some charges have also been brought against parents in the deaths of infants sleeping with Boppy pillows. There have also been several cases of parents charged for sleeping in the same bed as their child.

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.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Mother of Twins Who Died 8 Days After Vaccinations Charged With Murder

EU court backs criminal prosecution for sharing RT videos

RT | July 2, 2026

The EU’s top court has ruled that private individuals can face criminal prosecution for posting RT videos on public websites, widening the bloc’s crackdown on Russian media.

The Court of Justice of the European Union issued the ruling on Thursday in a case from Germany, where three people are being prosecuted for publishing RT DE videos on a freely accessible website.

The site did not charge readers and was financed only through voluntary donations. The CJEU, however, said that made no difference and ruled that all persons who are “directly or indirectly” responsible for making banned content available to the public can be treated as “operators” under EU sanctions rules.

The judges argued it was irrelevant if the individuals were running a business, how long the content was available, or how widely it was spread.

Under the German law cited in the ruling, violations of EU sanctions-based media bans can carry up to five years in prison.

The ruling effectively pushes the EU ban on RT beyond broadcasters, platforms or media companies, allowing for the criminal prosecution of any individuals accused of making RT content publicly available online.

The EU banned RT and Sputnik, among other Russian media outlets, after the Ukraine conflict escalated in 2022. Brussels said the sanctions would remain in place until the end of the Ukraine conflict and after Moscow ceases to conduct “disinformation and information manipulation actions against the EU.”

The measures were followed by platform blocks, app-store removals, banking restrictions, and personal sanctions against media figures and journalists accused of working with Russian outlets.

Germany had targeted RT even before the bloc-wide ban, with RT DE facing licensing pressure, platform bans, banking problems and regulatory action.

RT has vehemently condemned the restrictions and rejected the EU’s accusations, stressing that the bloc has consistently failed to point to a “a single example, a single grain of evidence” of false reporting.

Moscow has repeatedly condemned the restrictions as censorship and an information war against Russia, accusing EU governments of using the Ukraine conflict as a pretext to silence dissent, suppress Russian-language media, and intimidate journalists who challenge the mainstream Western narrative.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , | Comments Off on EU court backs criminal prosecution for sharing RT videos

Monsters playing victims: Danny Danon’s twisted war on the truth

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | July 2, 2026

Whether Israelis will ever comprehend the irreparable damage inflicted upon their country’s reputation by their UN Ambassador, Danny Danon, is a moot point. The damage Israel has done to itself through its barbaric practices in occupied Palestine is simply impossible to overcome.

Danon, however, utilises a peculiar approach to defending Israel within international institutions: he relies on bullying, intimidation, and an overt attempt to silence anyone who dares to challenge the official Israeli narrative—particularly women leaders.

Yet, what makes his behaviour most outrageous is his deployment of these abrasive tactics to suppress an issue that demands the utmost sensitivity: the systemic use of sexual violence and human rights abuses against Palestinians.

The confrontation took place during a UN General Assembly session convened to mark the International Day for the Elimination of Sexual Violence in Conflict. Senior UN officials were presenting harrowing findings documenting sexual violence against Palestinian detainees.

True to form, Danon refused to engage with the substance of the reports. For Israeli diplomacy, the enemy is never merely the armed adversary; it is the judge, the independent human rights observer, and the UN investigator whose sole mandate is to document violations of international law.

The immediate target of Danon’s wrath was Pramila Patten, the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict. Instead of reflecting on the grim findings, Danon demanded Patten’s resignation. He accused her and the broader international community of harbouring an “obsession” with targeting Israel.

When Vanessa Frazier, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, attempted to intervene on a point of order per established protocol, Danon unleashed a vitriolic verbal assault. Refusing to yield, he shouted over her, ordering her to “be quiet” and drowning out the chamber with his outbursts. “Shame on you. You are part of this obsession,” Danon bellowed.

While such unruly behaviour should have resulted in Danon’s immediate removal from the chamber, the diplomatic asymmetry of the UN prevailed. It was Frazier who found herself trying to de-escalate, politely clarifying that her procedural request was “not personal.” Danon shot back with typical defiance: “You will not be allowed to bully us.”

Herein lies the supreme irony of Israel’s diplomatic relationship with the UN and international law. Israel stands as one of the most egregious, serial violators of international law in modern history—a decades-long pattern of behaviour left unpunished by Western vetoes, which ultimately emboldened it to carry out an ongoing genocide in Gaza. Yet, Israeli officials persistently claim the mantle of the ultimate victim, alleging they are the targets of antisemitism, unfair bias, and now, “bullying” by the very institutions they defy.

But the mountain of evidence cannot be shouted away. According to an extensive report issued by Patten’s office, there are verified patterns of systemic abuse, sexual degradation, and psychological torture weaponised against Palestinian men, women, and children in Israeli detention camps like Sde Teiman.

The weight of this evidence reached such an undeniable threshold that the UN Secretary-General’s office formally added Israel to the global ‘List of Shame’—the blacklist of states committing grave violations against children in armed conflict.

None of this exposure is enough to convince Danon or the broader Israeli political establishment that Israel does not possess a sovereign right to violate international law. In their view, merely pointing out these crimes constitutes an act of aggression.

This systemic denial extends to every facet of the conflict. A comprehensive UN investigation recently concluded that Israel has deliberately targeted Palestinian children in Gaza as a core component of its military campaign.

The numbers are staggering: Between 7 October 2023, and 7 October 2025, an estimated 20,179 Palestinian children were killed—about 30 percent of all Palestinian deaths.

“The evidence shows that Palestinian children have been deliberately targeted and killed by the Israeli security forces,” stated commission chair Srinivasan Muralidhar, noting that Israeli authorities have systematically continued to commit the crime of genocide.

While these findings provide another layer of ironclad legal proof regarding genocidal intent, the true significance of the report lies in its exposure of the rationale behind targeting youth. Typically, the disproportionate slaughter of children and women is dismissed by Western apologists as “collateral damage”. The UN inquiry shattered this defense, offering a far more consequential conclusion: the targeting of Gaza’s children is part of a calculated strategy to destroy the biological continuity and future existence of the Palestinian people in Gaza.

As Muralidhar bluntly summarized: “By targeting children, Israel is attacking the very capacity of the Palestinian people to exist.”

It remains a profound disappointment that the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice—often swift to indict war crimes committed elsewhere—continue to move at a glacial pace regarding Israel.

Tragically, the catastrophe continues unabated because there is still no meaningful international mechanism willing to enforce sanctions or employ genuine pressure to halt it.

This is precisely why Danny Danon wants the world to be quiet. His outbursts are not merely directed at UN diplomats; they are directed at global civil society, ordinary citizens, and anyone refusing to look away. Israel demands absolute silence while Palestinians are starved, raped, and murdered. According to its twisted logic, committing these atrocities is an inherent right, and objecting to them is an act of malice.

If this logic is allowed to prevail, it becomes the blueprint for every future aggressor who wishes to kill, rape, and starve a population for geopolitical gain. Palestinians and Lebanese are already forced to inhabit this dystopian reality. Our collective responsibility is clear: we must refuse to be quiet. We must speak out, ensuring our voices drown out the shouts of Danon and his peers, so that murder and systemic violence are never normalised as tools of military necessity.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture, War Crimes | , , , | Comments Off on Monsters playing victims: Danny Danon’s twisted war on the truth

EU hides secret Gaza files as UN says Israel is committing genocide

MEMO | July 2, 2026

The European Commission is refusing to release 17 secret reports on EU-funded infrastructure in Gaza, which could reveal further evidence of Israel’s destruction of European-backed civilian projects and increase pressure on Brussels to confront whether its continued partnership with Israel violates the human rights obligations underpinning EU-Israel relations.

The refusal came on the same day that a UN inquiry said Israel continues to commit genocide in Gaza by deliberately targeting Palestinian children, raising questions over whether the EU is concealing evidence that could strengthen calls to suspend or review its agreements with Israel.

According to EUobserver journalist Nikolaj Nielsen, the refusal was signed on 23 June by Michael Karnitschnig, acting head of the Commission department dealing with the Middle East. Nielsen had requested the documents under freedom of information rules in February, seeking reports covering EU-funded infrastructure projects in Gaza from 2020 to the end of 2023.

“We have examined whether there could be an overriding public interest in disclosure, but we have not been able to identify such an interest,” Karnitschnig wrote, according to EUobserver.

The claim is likely to provoke outrage. The documents relate to EU-funded infrastructure in Gaza, including solar panels, water desalination projects, renewable energy schemes and potentially other civilian facilities such as hospitals and schools. Many of these projects are believed to have been destroyed during Israel’s military assault on the besieged enclave.

Their disclosure could reveal not only the financial cost to European taxpayers but also the extent to which Israel has targeted or destroyed civilian infrastructure in Gaza. Such findings would increase pressure on Brussels to act under the human rights clauses which form the basis of EU cooperation with Israel, including the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

The Commission also invoked the protection of international relations as a reason for withholding the documents. EUobserver reported that some of the projects were either suspended or completed, with implementing partners including Germany’s KfW development bank, Oxfam Novib and WE WORLD.

One project cited by the Commission reportedly sought to support water treatment in Khan Yunis, a city in southern Gaza which has suffered widespread devastation following Israel’s ground invasion.

The refusal has raised fresh questions about EU transparency and accountability, especially as EU taxpayers have funded many of the projects damaged or destroyed by Israel. EUobserver has separately estimated that Israel has bombed or bulldozed around €150 million worth of EU-funded buildings in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, without paying compensation.

Earlier this month, EU Commissioner Dubravka Šuica told members of the European Parliament that the bloc has requested Israel to return or compensate for EU-funded assets whenever they are demolished, dismantled or confiscated.

The Commission’s refusal to publish the reports came as UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel concluded that Israel continues to commit genocide and other atrocity crimes by deliberately targeting Palestinian children.

“Israeli authorities and security forces have deliberately targeted Palestinian children resulting in genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in the Gaza Strip and war crimes in the West Bank,” the UN report stated.

The UN Commission said the “deliberate targeting of children” forms one of the key elements establishing genocidal intent by Israeli authorities and security forces to destroy Palestinians, in whole or in part, in Gaza.

Srinivasan Muralidhar, chair of the Commission of Inquiry, said Palestinian children “have been deliberately targeted and killed by the Israeli security forces,” adding that even after the October 2025 ceasefire, children have continued to be killed and seriously injured.

The report also accused Israeli authorities of arresting Palestinian children and subjecting them to torture and other forms of mistreatment in prisons and detention facilities. It further said Israeli security forces used sexual violence against children as part of a broader pattern of collective oppression under occupation.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Comments Off on EU hides secret Gaza files as UN says Israel is committing genocide

The assassination of Iran’s supreme leader: America’s strategic miscalculation under the shadow of Israeli narratives

By Timothy Hopper | MEMO | July 2, 2026

As Iran prepares for the funeral ceremonies of Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, the former Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, the scale of anticipated public participation indicates that they are set to become one of the most significant mass gatherings in contemporary Iranian history. Reports indicate that vast crowds are expected to arrive from across the country, alongside official delegations from numerous states. This moment offers a clear opportunity to assess the U.S. and Israeli decision to assassinate him in February 2026. The operation rested on a flawed assessment of Khamenei’s real role and standing within Iran’s social and political structure. In this regard, the United States was shaped largely by Israeli media narratives and intelligence assessments—accounts that substantially underestimated Ayatollah Khamenei’s popularity, institutional influence, and capacity for social mobilization. The preparations already underway and the expected scale of the turnout make this analytical failure harder to ignore. They show how far American policymakers relied on an incomplete and one-sided picture of Iranian reality.

To understand this miscalculation, it is necessary to return to the framework that had cast a long shadow over analyses of Iran before the attack. For years, Israeli media outlets and a number of research institutions close to Israel’s political and security establishment portrayed Khamenei as a leader with limited social backing, governing a society marked by deep divisions, economic discontent, and generational distance. These narratives repeatedly suggested that removing him could trigger serious instability, or even a fundamental transformation of Iran’s political system. Such an image aligned with the stated purpose of the joint U.S.-Israeli operation: weakening and destabilizing Iran’s political order. Yet this analysis ignored the more complex realities of Iranian society and politics. In assessing Khamenei’s structural position and the attachment of significant parts of society to ideas such as independence, security, and resistance to external pressure, Washington effectively accepted a narrative that minimized decisive factors. The result was an expectation that his removal would rapidly expose internal fractures. Developments since then—including a relatively orderly leadership transition and the continued functioning of core institutions—have pointed in the opposite direction.

Khamenei’s position in Iran went far beyond that of a conventional head of government. For more than three decades, he stressed national self-reliance, scientific and technological development despite external constraints, and sustained resistance in foreign policy against outside pressure.

These priorities helped produce a measure of institutional resilience and measurable progress in certain sectors. Iran has, of course, faced genuine social discontent, economic pressure, and political divisions. But that did not mean Khamenei’s role had been reduced to personal isolation, nor that his removal would necessarily paralyze the country’s political machinery. Israeli media coverage generally emphasized critical currents and visible signs of dissatisfaction while downplaying evidence of broader attachment to ideas such as independence, national sovereignty, and security. This selective emphasis produced an image of fragility and isolation that did not correspond to the durability of Iranian structures after his assassination. America’s acceptance of that image represented a serious intelligence and analytical failure in understanding the depth of Khamenei’s place within Iran’s political structure.

The February attack was accompanied by public statements from American and Israeli officials describing it as a decisive blow. The initial expectation appears to have rested on the assumption that the vacuum created by eliminating the leader would intensify internal divisions or create opportunities for greater outside leverage.

In practice, Iran preserved the functional continuity of its core institutions and its broad policy direction. This outcome showed that Khamenei’s influence was not merely personal. It had taken root in institutions, political networks, security structures, and the political culture of the Islamic Republic.

Washington’s error was to imagine that the base of support around him was narrower and more brittle than events ultimately showed it to be. The upcoming funeral ceremonies, scheduled to unfold over several days and across major cities, are set to draw exceptionally large crowds and will provide further tangible evidence against those earlier assumptions. The anticipated presence of mourners and foreign delegations will demonstrate a degree of recognition, respect, and social connection that earlier reporting and assessments had treated as marginal.

From a broader policy perspective, this episode reveals the dangers of excessive reliance on particular intelligence and media sources. In Iran’s case, cultural, religious, and historical forces shape political loyalties and behavior in ways that demand a more precise understanding of the country’s internal realities—not broad, externally produced narratives. Analyses that overlook these factors are vulnerable to strategic error. What was supposed to weaken Iran’s political structure instead reinforced commitment to established principles, heightened sensitivity to foreign intervention, and underscored the perceived necessity of institutional continuity. The forthcoming ceremonies, with their extensive organization, will serve as a visible corrective to assessments shaped by one-sided reporting.

By relying on Israeli media narratives and intelligence assessments of Khamenei’s position and the level of support surrounding him, American decision-makers arrived at a conclusion that developments since the assassination have not borne out.

In conclusion, the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei and the domestic and international response to it expose the limits of policymaking built on incomplete information and politically shaped interpretations. The forthcoming funeral ceremonies and the anticipated exceptional public turnout will offer a vivid illustration of social cohesion in Iran—one that stands in clear contrast to earlier predictions of rapid collapse or internal rupture. This expected turnout suggests that America’s assessment of Iran’s Supreme Leader and the degree of public support he commanded was significantly influenced by Israeli media and intelligence narratives, and ultimately proved mistaken. Rather than producing the disruption that had been anticipated, the process has highlighted Iran’s institutional continuity and social resilience.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on The assassination of Iran’s supreme leader: America’s strategic miscalculation under the shadow of Israeli narratives

Senator Claims Iran was “Stacking” Missiles and Drones to Bomb Europe

John Kennedy forgets to mention Iran’s ballistic missiles can’t reach London or Paris

By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | July 2, 2026

Senator John Kennedy, the Democrat turned Republican from Louisiana, came up with a whopper during an interview with a comedian slash podcaster. It is a take on Netanyahu’s perennial claim Iran is five minutes away from having nuclear weapons that maniacal mullahs will use to bomb New York, London, Berlin, Brussels, in addition to all Arabs and Muslims in West Asia.

Kennedy told Theodor Capitani von Kurnatowski III, aka Theo Von, US intelligence informed him Iran is “stacking ballistic missiles and killer drones like never before” and will rain them down on London, Paris, and Germany. The culprit here is Iran’s Khorramshahr medium-range ballistic missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers, said to be derived from the North Korean Musudan (BM-25) missile. London is over 5,000 kilometers from Iran, while Paris is over 4,000 kilometers, and Berlin 3,000 kilometers.

Trump to the rescue, according to Kennedy. The president faced a “nightmare decision: Let them arm up until they could rain fire on our allies and threaten the homeland… or strike first and save the world? He chose to bomb their nuclear sites and stop the madness.”

I thought the illegal sneak attack on Iran, including the assassination the Supreme Leader of Iran, the 86-year old Ali Khamenei, eliminated Iran’s supposed nuclear threat, or that’s what Trump told us, ad nauseam. Iran has never possessed nuclear weapons and remains a non-nuclear-weapon state under international treaties, specifically the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). US intelligence agencies have assessed that Iran is not currently building a nuclear weapon.

Trump’s former (now persona non grata) Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Tulsi Gabbard, told a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in March Operation Midnight Hammer had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment capability. No mention on the obliteration of the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab, Iran, murdering 156 civilians, 120 of them school girls. That collateral damage is 1,200 kilometers from the Fordow Uranium Enrichment Plant.

Anyway, anything Mr. Kennedy says should be taken with a boulder of salt and a fistful of antacid. He has benefited from $113,680 donated by the Israel lobby. He co-sponsored the Taylor Force Act (legislation prohibits American funds from being given to Palestinian entities), the Israel Anti-Boycott Act (making “economic speech” illegal), the Combating BDS Act of 2017 (making Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions illegal), and the United States-Israel Security Assistance Authorization Act (providing and additional $3.3 billion to Israel for “self-defense,” that is to say abducting, torturing, raping, and murdering thousands of Palestinians).

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Senator Claims Iran was “Stacking” Missiles and Drones to Bomb Europe

Does the Pentagon even know who its boat strikes are killing?

By Adam Isacson | Responsible Statecraft | July 1, 2026

The numbers are stomach-turning. In less than 10 months, U.S. forces acting on orders from the Trump administration have killed 215 people in 63 aerial attacks on small boats in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific.

Since the first attack on September 2, the Trump administration has told us that they are killing drug traffickers. But drug trafficking, especially being a low-level courier, is not a crime punishable by the death penalty, and, even if it were, the U.S. legal system assumes innocence and guarantees a day in court. Skipping that step makes this murder under U.S. law: the equivalent of a cop shooting a fleeing suspect in the back.

The administration is attempting to get around this by claiming that every one of the dead is a “narco-terrorist,” a member or “affiliate” of a profit-seeking criminal group recently added, with no outside review, to a secret Defense Department list of “Designated Terror Organizations,” or DTOs. Because the United States is in a “non-international armed conflict” with the DTOs, a secret Justice Department memo argues, our military is permitted to kill them on sight, even with no self-defense justification.

Yet the administration has still not presented any evidence that a bombed vessel was even carrying drugs, much less that its deceased crew was affiliated with a criminal or “designated terrorist” organization.

What we know so far indicates that the U.S. military is being used to assassinate unknown individuals based on alarmingly flimsy evidence. And the targeting criteria are quite loose.

On the rare occasions when crew members have been recovered, “Military briefers have admitted to members of Congress that they cannot satisfy the evidentiary burden necessary to hold or prosecute survivors of the boat strikes,” reported the Intercept’s Nick Turse, who has covered the boat strikes extensively. Three survivors have been recovered alive; all have been let go without charges.

Questioning Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a hearing earlier this month, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) revealed that those carrying out boat-strike targeting are using three criteria that Kaine was not authorized to disclose publicly. He could disclose, however, that “evidence of narcotics on the boat” was remarkably not one of the three criteria.

In fact, the U.S. military usually doesn’t even know the identities of the people on the boats. The Washington Post reported that the targeting instructions in the boat-strike campaign’s August 5 Defense Department Execute Order (EXORD) “do not require positive identification of any individual but rather ‘reasonable certainty’ that adult males are members of, or affiliated with,” a DTO.

A former U.S. official who had read the EXORD told the Post, “The campaign may be killing individuals who in some cases have a tenuous link to any organized drug-running operation.” That official added, “When you define ‘DTO’ and ‘affiliate’ so loosely and you’re attacking boats, (the guidelines are) basically meaningless.”

The term “affiliate,” which the Trump administration is using to end lives on the open ocean, is especially squishy. Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told the New Republic’s Greg Sargent that, in a briefing with Pentagon officials, “They did not in any way, shape, manner, or form explain what the ceiling and floor are for ‘affiliated.’” People who received a classified briefing interviewed by the Intercept “said that they were under the impression that little more than a conversation with a DTO member might confer ‘affiliate’ status.”

Vague claims of “affiliation” or behavioral patterns introduce confirmation bias and guesswork into a lethal process. This vastly increases the probability that the boat strikes are killing people who have committed no crime at all.

“Some people who are familiar with boat movements” along the Caribbean coast of Colombia and Venezuela told the Latin American Center for Investigative Journalism that “it is common for the same boats that carry drugs on the outward journey to bring passengers back. The capitanes, as the boat operators are known, take whatever work they can get.”

The Intercept raised the possibility, acknowledged by a senior military officer, that some of those killed in the first strike on September 2 may have been migrants or human trafficking victims. That boat had 11 people aboard, a strangely large number for a short-hop drug delivery of less than 100 miles between Venezuela and Trinidad.

Evidence points to some of those killed in boat strikes being fishermen plying their trade. While residents of poor coastal fishing communities may “take occasional trafficking jobs to get by,” which blurs their identities, the likelihood of dying in a strike is scaring people away from getting in boats simply to fish, the New York Times reported from coastal Colombia and Ecuador. “Residents described entire communities abandoning fishing because the small ‘lanchas,’ or speedboats, used by traffickers and fishers are often indistinguishable.”

In Santa Marta, Colombia, the family of fisherman Alejandro Carranza, killed in a September 15 strike, insists that he was not involved in the drug trade. “If he was some kind of narcoterrorist,” the mother of three of Mr. Carranza’s children asked New York Times reporters, “then why are we living in misery instead of a mansion?”

Two of those killed in an October 14, 2025 strike were Chad Joseph, 26, and Rishi Samaroo, 41, both from the village of Las Cuevas, Trinidad. Their families are suing the United States for damages under the Death on the High Seas Act and the Alien Tort Statute. The complaint in Burnley v. United States argues that both men had been in Venezuela for months working on farms and, in their final communications, told their families that they had obtained passage by boat home to Trinidad.

In Sucre, Venezuela, where 90% of the population lacks basic food security, some of the dead were fishermen or taxi drivers who agreed to crew a boat that shipped drugs to Trinidad in exchange for a few hundred dollars. Some, like a “beloved” indoor soccer player, may simply have been aboard for the ride.

To all the concerns about the quality and reliability of intelligence used to target people for lethal boat strikes, we must add recent cases elsewhere pointing to U.S. reliance on faulty intelligence, or even just hunches. In March 2025, the Department of Homeland Security rendered 252 Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador’s feared Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) prison, alleging that they were all “terrorist” group members, an assertion that proved shockingly wrong, according to subsequent investigations. The New York Times revealed that an early March raid on an alleged DTO encampment in northern Ecuador, planned jointly by U.S. and Ecuadorian forces, in fact targeted a dairy farm. A March bombing in Iran that killed students at a school for girls is a well-known recent example elsewhere.

If even a few of the boat-strike victims are just fishermen, passengers, or low-level couriers with no relationship to big criminal syndicates, the Trump administration’s justification for the strikes simply cannot be sustained. It would confirm that this justification rests on a very rickety foundation of questionable intelligence, which should expose many in the chain of command to national and international criminal or civil liability.

The boat strikes need to stop immediately, and its architects and willing implementers must be investigated and held accountable at the earliest opportunity.

Adam Isacson has worked on defense, security, and peacebuilding in Latin America since 1994. He now directs WOLA’s Defense Oversight program, which monitors U.S. cooperation with Latin America’s security forces, as well as other security trends.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Does the Pentagon even know who its boat strikes are killing?

Masters of the Sea: How the West Tramples International Law While Posing as the Defender Against a “Shadow Threat”

By Mohammed ibn Faisal al-Rashid | New Eastern Outlook | July 2, 2026

Operation Irini has morphed from an instrument for arms control in Libya into a tool for geopolitical pressure on Russia, offering the world a glaring example of double standards.

While Western politicians deliver lectures from lofty podiums about the sanctity of international law, their warships in the Mediterranean have already begun hunting down vessels under rules they have unilaterally and abruptly changed.

A Mandate Lost: When the UN No Longer Holds Sway

On May 25, 2026, the mandate of UN Security Council Resolution 2292 expired. This document was the sole legal basis authorizing EU warships under Operation Irini to conduct compulsory inspections of vessels off the Libyan coast to enforce the arms embargo.

So what did the West do? Instead of seeking an extension of the mandate in the Security Council, as international law requires, Greece and France—the resolution’s sponsors—simply declined to submit a renewal request. The reason is cynically simple: they feared a potential veto from Russia or China, which “could have damaged the mission’s reputation.”

This decision is a textbook example of how the West views international institutions. They are convenient as long as they serve Western interests. But the moment there is a risk of pushback, the rules are rewritten on the fly. Ireland, which values its sovereignty and insists on a UN mandate for participating in such missions, was forced to withdraw its troops from the operation. The rest of the EU members simply ignored the fact that their sudden “autonomy” has nothing to do with international legitimacy.

Rebranding the Mission: From Libya to EU Interests

Official Brussels continues to maintain the rhetoric that Operation Irini (EUNAVFOR MED IRINI) is a cornerstone of European support for the Libyan settlement. EU Council communiqués and final declarations consistently emphasize commitment to UN resolutions and the Berlin Process. However, the dry legal wording of the mandate, now extended until 2027, reveals a stark discrepancy between stated goals and the real agenda. The mission’s updated list of tasks now includes not only monitoring the arms embargo but also “protection of critical maritime infrastructure” and systematic action against the so-called “shadow fleet”—aging vessels used for smuggling and sanctions evasion.

This is a conceptual shift. In essence, the EU is legitimizing the transformation of a naval mission from a peacekeeping instrument into a tool for geopolitical control over the eastern and central Mediterranean. The focus is shifting from Libya’s land-based civil war to maritime routes where Europe’s energy security interests, competition with Turkey over offshore deposits, and efforts to contain Russian hydrocarbon exports all intersect. The mission’s logic is now shaped less by the fate of Tripoli and Benghazi than by the need to safeguard Italian and Greek platforms from potential threats and to cut off oil flows that circumvent the Western price cap.

Particularly telling in this context is Libya’s own position. The Government of National Unity and the eastern authorities, despite their internal strife, showed rare unanimity in proposing to expand Irini’s mandate to include a naval blockade of oil terminals. Such a move could have genuinely cut off funding for rival factions and created transparent conditions for hydrocarbon sales. Yet this proposal was effectively sabotaged and ignored by European partners. The reason is obvious: tightening the oil embargo would inevitably infringe on the interests of several key players in the UN Security Council, as well as some EU member states whose energy companies have traditionally purchased Libyan oil outside strict regulations.

Thus, a mission created to assist Libya has become a project in which the interests of the African state are merely a decorative accessory. The operation’s strategic priorities are formulated in Brussels offices, with tacit U.S. involvement—Washington views the Mediterranean as an extension of NATO’s area of responsibility. Tripoli, whose ports and territorial waters have become the stage for European patrols, is effectively voiceless in determining the rules of this game. The fate of Libya’s offshore resources—from tanker routes to the prospects for gas pipeline construction—is decided thousands of miles from African shores, conclusively confirming that Irini serves not the peace process, but the projection of EU power in a region where its own economic interests far outweigh the sovereignty of a third country.

Hunting Russia: A Direct Violation and Escalation

The most glaring example of Western hypocrisy is the change in the rules of engagement under Irini. In June 2026, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas proudly announced that warships had been authorized to stop and inspect foreign tankers that Brussels deems part of Russia’s “shadow fleet.”

“Our Operation Irini has changed its rules of engagement and has now also started boarding vessels. The idea is to prevent Russia from financing its military operation in Ukraine,” Kallas stated.

Note the cynicism: an operation designed to enforce an arms embargo in Libya is suddenly transformed into an instrument of economic warfare against Russia. And no new UN resolution was required for this. Irini simply “changed the rules” unilaterally. Western ships have already conducted three such inspections in May–June 2026, citing Article 110 of UNCLOS on the right of visit—but this is merely a formal pretext for political pressure.

Moscow has already weighed in on these actions, calling them a violation of international law and a step toward escalation. And this is entirely justified. The West is not seeking peaceful solutions to the conflict. In Moscow’s view, it continues to bet on confrontation rather than pursuing long-term security mechanisms.

Russia: A Bastion of Multipolarity and Rule of Law

Against the backdrop of this arbitrariness, Russia’s position stands as a model of state wisdom and respect for international law. Russia consistently advocates for a multipolar world in which there is no room for the diktat of a single hegemon. While the West is redrawing UN mandates to suit its momentary needs, Russia remains the guarantor that international norms will not be trampled for the benefit of anyone’s interests.

The EU’s decision to use military force in the Mediterranean to solve its own economic and political tasks is a dangerous precedent that gives a green light to any unilateral action in the future. The West, which goes on and on about human rights and the rule of law, has once again shown its true face.

Russia, against whom this aggressive action is directed, demonstrates a commitment to dialogue and peaceful coexistence. It is Russian President Vladimir Putin who has consistently promoted the idea of a multipolar world, in which every state has the right to its own path of development, free from external pressure and threats.

Muhammad ibn Faisal al-Rashid, Political Scientist, Expert on the Arab World

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , | Comments Off on Masters of the Sea: How the West Tramples International Law While Posing as the Defender Against a “Shadow Threat”

The Right-Wing Zionist Wave Sweeping Latin America

José Niño Unfiltered | June 30, 2026

Abelardo de la Espriella’s razor-thin victory over leftist Iván Cepeda on June 21, 2026 represented the most recent rightward shift in Latin America’s politics. The defense attorney from Barranquilla captured 49.66 percent of the vote against Cepeda’s 48.7 percent—a margin of roughly 250,000 votes in what Al Jazeera called one of Colombia’s closest elections. Within hours, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar called to congratulate him, and de la Espriella posted his response publicly.

“Colombia will restore and strengthen its relationship with the State of Israel like never before. Israel can count on Colombia as a loyal friend and steadfast ally,” de la Espriella declared. Sa’ar called him “a true friend of the Jewish people and the State of Israel,” adding that he looked forward to “revitalizing relations between Israel and Colombia and taking them to their highest level ever” and that he had already invited the incoming president to visit Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered his own congratulations, saying he looked forward to “working with you to strengthen the bond between Israel and Colombia.” De la Espriella has pledged to reverse Petro’s 2024 decision to cut ties with Israel and has promised to relocate the Colombian embassy to Jerusalem.

No figure looms larger in this transformation of Latin American politics than Argentine President Javier Milei. The libertarian economist who took office in December 2023 has positioned himself as Israel’s most devoted ally anywhere on earth.

“I am sincerely proud to be the most Zionist president in the world,” Milei declared at Yeshiva University in March 2026. At the Western Wall in June 2025, he proclaimed that “My support for Israel comes from the heart, because I believe this is a just cause—the cause of the West. I will always stand by your side.”

Milei personally studies Torah with Rabbi Shimon Axel Wahnish from the Moroccan Jewish community in Argentina and has said he intends to convert to Judaism after leaving office. In June 2025, he became the first non-Jewish head of state to receive Israel’s Genesis Prize, known as the “Jewish Nobel,” awarded for his “unequivocal support” of Israel.

He directed his entire $1 million prize toward creating the American Friends of Isaac Accords, the vehicle through which Argentina and Israel formally signed the Isaac Accords on April 19, 2026 in Jerusalem. The framework explicitly mirrors the Abraham Accords that normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, but targets the Western Hemisphere instead.

The goals are clear. Partner countries should move their embassies to Jerusalem, designate Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations, shift anti-Israel voting patterns at the United Nations, and create frameworks for trade in technology, agriculture, water, health, and cybersecurity.

At least one nation had embraced the embassy mandate well ahead of the Accords. Paraguay’s Santiago Peña reopened his country’s embassy in Jerusalem on December 12, 2024, making Paraguay the sixth country in the world—after the United States, Guatemala, Honduras, Kosovo, and Papua New Guinea—and the first since the October 7 attacks to establish diplomatic presence in the contested city.

“Mr. prime minister, on behalf of all the Paraguayan people, we were with you, we are with you, we will stay with the people of Israel forever,” Peña declared at the ceremony with Netanyahu present. He called the move “a tipping point in our own history” and “a moral obligation that the Paraguayan people have asked us to fulfill.”

Paraguay was not alone in courting Tel Aviv. Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa, the banana fortune heir who won re-election in 2025, traveled to Jerusalem in May of that year for meetings with Netanyahu, at which Noboa declared that “Israel and Ecuador have the same enemies” and pledged to fight poverty, terrorism, and suffering “until the end.” Israeli diplomatic sources confirmed to Jewish Insider that both Ecuador and Paraguay are expected to formally join the Isaac Accords framework.

Nowhere did the shift register more dramatically than in Chile. José Antonio Kast’s victory in Chile’s December 2025 election delivered perhaps the most symbolically significant prize. Kast overturned four years of Gabriel Boric’s more pro-Palestinian governance. After Iran’s 2024 drone attack on Israel, Kast had warned that “Iran launches a drone and missile attack on Israel. They could be the same drones that it gifted to Bolivia to monitor our borders. Chile has a serious national security problem.”

In May 2026, Kast met with Israeli President Isaac Herzog and pledged to return Chile’s ambassador to Israel, ending a lengthy vacancy by naming Gabriel Zaliasnik as ambassador. He promised expanded cooperation in agriculture, health, artificial intelligence, technology, and security. Notably, Kast achieved this while governing a country home to the largest Palestinian diaspora outside the Arab world, estimated at 500,000 people.

The same paradox surfaced again, more sharply still, in Central America. Nasry “Tito” Asfura won Honduras’s late 2025 election with Trump’s endorsement, becoming president on January 27, 2026. Despite his Palestinian Christian ancestry, the conservative former mayor of Tegucigalpa made Israel one of his first international destinations after being elected, traveling there alongside the United States.

“It is a great honor for me to be in Israel again and to strengthen the ties which have been in existence over the last 77 years,” Asfura stated in Jerusalem. “I hope we are entering a new era where we can improve our relations, relations of brotherhood, and prosperity, of investment.” Israeli Foreign Minister Sa’ar told the Jerusalem Post Magazine that Asfura “has a clear worldview that is pro-Western, pro-American, and pro-Israeli,” and characterized the broader regional shift as a “Blue Wave” of right-wing governments aligning with the United States and Israel.

Bolivia’s Rodrigo Paz ended nearly 20 years of socialist MAS party rule by winning the October 2025 election. Within weeks, he restored diplomatic relations with Israel—ties the prior government had severed in 2023. Netanyahu congratulated Paz personally, and the two agreed to “promote cooperation in various fields, with an emphasis on security, and to restore the vibrant tourism of many Israeli travelers to Bolivia’s natural landscapes and rich cultures.”

Not every convert to the cause fits the expected profile. Nayib Bukele represents the most curious figure in this constellation. The Salvadoran president, who has Palestinian ancestry on his father’s side, has become an ardent Israel supporter despite his Palestinian Christian heritage. After October 7, 2023, Bukele posted that “As a Salvadoran with Palestinian ancestry, I’m sure the best thing that could happen to the Palestinian people is for Hamas to completely disappear. Those savage beasts do not represent the Palestinians.” El Salvador voted against the UN General Assembly resolution calling for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza in December 2023.

To the south, another government moved along the same axis. José Raúl Mulino, Panama’s security-focused former defense minister, won the 2024 elections and tilted the country firmly toward Washington and Jerusalem. In May 2026, Israeli President Herzog made the first official visit by an Israeli head of state to Panama. Mulino issued a joint declaration pledging expanded cooperation in security, commerce, technology, agriculture, and water management. Panama remains the only Latin American country that has never recognized a Palestinian state.

The October 2026 Brazilian presidential election represents the next battleground. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who compared Israel’s actions to the Holocaust and withdrew Brazil’s ambassador in 2024, faces Senator Flávio Bolsonaro in what polls show as a statistical tie—the BTG/Nexus survey of late March 2026 showed them tied at 46 percent each in a simulated runoff, with the race narrowing from a 12-point Lula lead in December 2025. The first round is scheduled for October 4, 2026, with a runoff on October 25 if no candidate clears 50 percent.

Flávio Bolsonaro, whose father Jair Bolsonaro was imprisoned for the January 8, 2023 coup attempt and barred from office, has positioned himself as the conservative consolidation candidate. A Bolsonaro victory would add the hemisphere’s largest country to the pro-Israel bloc. The Brazil-Israel Parliamentary Caucus signed the Isaac Accords “Declaration of Shared Principles” in April 2026, demonstrating legislative support even while Lula governs.

Behind each of these realignments lay forces larger than any single election. Trump’s return to the presidency in 2025 directly tied American financial and political backing to right-wing candidates. The region’s growing evangelical Christian population, with its theologically driven support for Israel, has provided an important voting base. As the Jerusalem Post observed, Israeli officials have declared 2026 “the year of Latin America.” With more than a dozen countries having restored or strengthened ties with Israel, the Isaac Accords and the broader rightward shift have fundamentally redrawn the hemisphere’s diplomatic map with direct implications for Israel’s global standing, American regional strategy, and the future of Palestinian diplomacy in the Western Hemisphere.

The latest boondoggles in Eurasia—from the Russo-Ukrainian war to the Iran war—have forced the Judeo-American project to seek softer targets. Latin America, with its fractured polities, corrupt elites, and vast resources, is the obvious prize. The so-called right-wing resurgence is not a recovery of national pride but rather a vassalage dressed in conservative robes. Each new president who rushes to Tel Aviv is a tool, not a leader. Pace some naive nationalist minds in the West, Zionism is not nationalist in nature, but rather an expansionist movement with global ambitions. The illusion that it respects sovereignty must be shattered by serious political movements. A coordinated multi-national resistance is the only force that can stop this hemispheric takeover and other Jewish supremacist endeavors from consolidating across the globe.

July 2, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Right-Wing Zionist Wave Sweeping Latin America