Senator Rand Paul Introduces Federal Bill to END Vaccine Makers’ Liability Shield
By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH | FOCAL POINTS | February 14, 2026
Senator Rand Paul has introduced S.3853, a federal bill that would amend the Public Health Service Act to end the long-standing liability protections for vaccine makers.
The bill was introduced on February 11, 2026, and referred to the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee.
At the time of writing, no bill text has yet been released, so the precise statutory changes remain unknown. However, based on the title and summary, the legislation appears aimed at dismantling the liability framework established under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which shields manufacturers from civil lawsuits and routes injury claims through the failed Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).
Current evidence indicates that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 likely sparked the autism epidemic. By granting legal immunity to vaccine makers, 3.2% of American children now have autism:

Bill S.3853 would collapse the vaccine cartel’s 40-year reign of penalty-free mass harm. If passed, this legislation would truly Make America Healthy Again.
The Hidden Map: US and Israel May Use Unexpected Neighbors to Attack Iran
By Robert Inlakesh | The Palestine Chronicle | February 15, 2026
Amidst heightened tensions between the US-Israeli alliance and Iran, an enormous amount of focus has been placed in the media on Iran’s missile program and how this will impact any upcoming war. What is often ignored are the origins of the regional threats to Tehran and its stability.
While covering each and every threat to the Islamic Republic of Iran would be beyond the scope of such an article, there are a number of hostile nations surrounding the country that can be used to destabilize the nation. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) and, to a lesser extent, Azerbaijan, are often cited as pro-Israeli, but there is another nation that flies under the corporate media’s radar.
Iran shares its second-largest land border with the nation of Turkmenistan, a country that is rarely mentioned as a regional player. What many don’t know is that the nation, long characterized as a neutral player, has strong ties with both the US and Israel.
Turkmenistan: Neutral State or Strategic Corridor?
Unlike many Muslim-majority nations, Turkmenistan has long recognized and maintained ties with the Israelis, their relationship beginning in 1993. Then, in April of 2023, these ties were further cemented with the inauguration of a permanent Israeli embassy in Ashgabat for the first time.
It should therefore be no surprise that Tel Aviv and Ashbagat’s relationship is closest in the intelligence sharing and security cooperation spheres. Afterall, the Israeli embassy – opened back in 2023 – was strategically placed only 17 kilometers away from Iran’s border, marking a major symbolic achievement for Israel, especially as it operates through what are suspected to be thousands of Mossad recruited agents inside the Islamic Republic.
Although Israel has no official military bases inside Turkmenistan, there have been a number of reports indicating that it has set up attack drone bases inside the country. This would make sense, considering that Ashbagat has been purchasing Israeli drone technology since the 2010s, more recently acquiring the SkyStriker tactical loiter munition (suicide drone), developed by Elbit Systems.
Ashgabat has long been in alignment with the West. In May of 1994, it became the first country to join NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) program. However, the following year, the UN approved granting Turkmenistan the status of a neutral country, meaning it would not join military blocs.
In 2001, following the September 11 attacks, this neutral stance suddenly began to change. While other Central Asian nations – Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan – all immediately offered their military bases to the United States, due in large part to their concerns over the advancements of the Taliban, Turkmenistan only publicly admitted to allowing the US to use its airspace for military cargo aircraft to travel in transit.
In reality, the US airforce were operating a team on the ground in Ashgabat in order to coordinate refueling operations. In 2004, the Russian State protested the growing US-Turkmenistan military relationship, after reports emerged stating that American forces had “gained access to use almost all the military airfields of Turkmenistan, including the airport in Nebit-Dag near the Iranian border.”
Reports, which are not possible to independently verify but nonetheless have appeared consistent throughout the years, indicate that the US military has even established remote desert bases throughout different locations inside Turkmenistan.
Clinging to its neutral status on the public stage, Ashgabat rejects any mention of cooperation of this kind, including the denial of a 2015 statement by then US Central Command chief Lloyd Austin that the Turkmens had expressed their interest in acquiring US military equipment.
Signals of Military Activity
Perhaps the most concerning developments are the more recent revelations, revealed through OSINIT channels and Turkmen media, citing flight trackers to monitor the movement of US aircraft in the region. These reports indicate the confirmation that US Air Force transport aircraft C-17A Globemaster III and MC-130 Super Hercules have landed at undisclosed locations in Turkmenistan.
The significance of this, opposed to the rest of the military buildup that has been occurring in potential preparation for an attack on Iran, is that of the MC-130 Super Hercules, which is used specifically for transporting special forces teams, running night operations, as well as performing unconventional takeoffs and landings.
Paired with a recent report issued by the New York Times, indicating that the US’ options not only include an air campaign against Iranian nuclear and missile sites, but ground raids using special forces, it could be concluded that Turkmenistan is the location from which the US may seek to inject special forces units into Iran.
The Wider Ring around Iran
The Turkmenistan factor clearly cannot be ignored here, despite it often being dismissed as a neutral power that maintains friendly relations with both Russia and China. In fact, because of these relationships, with Moscow in particular, Tehran has refrained from attempting to expand its reach into the Central Asian country.
To Iran’s benefit is that Chinese and, to a lesser extent, Russian influence can reduce the extent to which the US and Israel can use Iran’s neighbors to threaten it. In Pakistan, for example, it is clear that both Islamabad’s joint security concerns – largely over Balochi militant groups – along its border, in addition to Beijing’s influence, make it highly unlikely that Pakistan would remain neutral and is instead inclined to help support Iran; within its limits, it should be added.
Azerbaijan is another potential threat to the stability of the Islamic Republic, due in large part to the large Azeri population in Iran’s own Azerbaijan Province. However, the vast majority of Azeri citizens are in fact loyal to the State and no major separatist movement exists at this time. The Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Ayatollah Khamenei himself are both ethnically part Azeri.
Meanwhile, many supporters of the Israeli puppet Reza Pahlavi openly express their intention to crack down on the Azeri ethnic minority inside Iran. During the reign of the CIA-MI6-installed Shah of Iran, minority groups suffered immensely, due to a clear tradition of ethno-nationalism that exists amongst the current supporters of the deposed monarchy.
Baku, for its part, is the top gas supplier to Israel, maintaining close military, diplomatic and intelligence ties with them. Azerbaijan even made Hebrew media headlines for its use of Israeli suicide drones and other military equipment during its war with Armenia.
On the other hand, Iran is militarily superior to Azerbaijan and has a considerable base of support amongst the nation’s population, of which the majority belong to the Shia branch of the Islamic faith. Therefore, Tehran has major leverage and could not only paralyze its oil and gas infrastructure, but perhaps has the potential of organic movements forming within Azerbaijan that will owe allegiance to Iran.
There is also the threat that the Israelis, in particular, will attempt to use Kurdish militant groups in Iraqi Kurdistan in order to carry out attacks on the Islamic Republic. Israel does not publicly acknowledge its presence in northern Iraq, yet Iran has directly struck its bases housing Mossad operatives in the past, while Kurdish separatist groups have been utilized countless times in attempts to destabilize the country. During the June 12-day-war last year, Israel also weaponized these proxies.
For those also concerned about Afghanistan’s role in threatening Iranian security, this has always historically been a precarious situation, yet Tehran has not only been improving its ties with Kabul, it officially recognized the Islamic Emirate during the past week. Again, this does not mean there is no potential threat there, but an alliance that holds with the Taliban government may prove important.
Gulf States, Jordan and the Regional Balance
Then there are the more obvious players, the UAE and Bahrain, which are not only partners of the Israelis as part of the so-called “Abraham Accords” but are overtly aligned with Tel Aviv’s regional agenda.
The Emiratis are speculated to hold some cards regarding trade, but their leverage is negligible. Both the Bahraini and Emirati leaderships are clearly anxious, because Iran’s responses to the use of their territory to attack the Islamic Republic could quickly collapse their regimes.
Jordan, meanwhile, is where the US appears to be focusing much of its military buildup, even withdrawing forces previously stationed in Syria’s al-Tanf region into the Hashemite Kingdom’s territory.
The Jordanian leadership is evidently permitting its territory to become a key battleground, which will likely be subjected to attacks if the US chooses to use it to aid the Israeli-US offensive, but it is simply powerless in such a scenario.
Jordan has become a Western-Israeli intelligence and military hub in the region, meaning that if King Abdullah II objects to the demands of its allies, he understands well that his rule could be ended in a matter of hours. Therefore, he must risk his country being caught in the crossfire and just hope that an internal uprising doesn’t take shape, which is one of the reasons why he has been so hostile to the Muslim Brotherhood, fearing they could end up leading any revolt as the organization did in Egypt.
Turkiye, on the other hand, which is also a major regional player, is likely to play both sides behind the scenes, attempting to stay out of such a fight. If it takes either side, it will suffer the repercussions. Perhaps the most important role it could play is to prevent its bases or airspace from being used by the US.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar both maintain cordial relations with Iran, clearly favoring a scenario where no war occurs at all, because they are home to US bases. As we saw last June, the US used its CENTCOM headquarters in Doha to direct its attack on Iran’s nuclear sites, and as a result, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) struck US facilities there.
Riyadh and Doha do not want to get dragged into such a scenario. It is also of note that they have a vested interest in neither side winning the war conclusively, because it is in their interests for there to be a multi-polar West Asia, not an Israeli-dominated region that will inevitably consume them.
A Conflict with Wider Consequences
Some have also speculated about Syria’s role in any war. Damascus is clearly in the US-Israeli sphere of influence, but it will have a negligible impact in its current form. If Syria’s military forces assault Lebanon or Iraq, they will suffer enormous blows and fail tremendously. The only wildcard with Syria is whether armed groups there will choose to use the opportunity to attack Israel, although as a military power, the Syrians are a relative non-factor at the current time.
For now, the US-Israeli plot to stir civil war inside Iran and to follow through with an air campaign that aids their proxies has failed. Given the readiness of Iran’s allies in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and even Palestine, perhaps beyond, the US would be entering a point of no return scenario if it were to attempt a regime change operation.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.
Trump, Netanyahu Agree to Target Iranian Oil Exports to China
What will it cost the US economy?
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | February 15, 2026
President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to increase economic pressure on Iran by attempting to cut oil exports to China.
A US official speaking with Axios said during the meeting between Trump and Netanyahu last week, the leaders “agreed that we will go full force with maximum pressure against Iran, for example, regarding Iranian oil sales to China.”
Kpler estimates that 80% of Iranian oil sales are to China. The Trump administration has attempted to cause intense economic suffering in Iran, hoping the result will be the overthrow of the government in Tehran.
Trump recently signed an executive order authorizing the White House to impose 25% tariffs on countries that buy Iranian oil. It’s unclear if the President will be willing to upend the delicate Trump relationship with China to damage the Iranian economy.
The US is ramping up the economic war as talks with Iran are ongoing. US and Iranian negotiators are scheduled to meet in Geneva on Tuesday. The US and Israel are demanding that Iran agree to limits on its nuclear and missile programs. Tehran says it is refusing to place any restrictions on its missile program.
According to officials speaking with Axios, Netanyahu and Trump disagreed during the meeting about negotiations with Iran. The President believes a deal is possible, while Netanyahu told Trump that Iran will not sign an agreement and that, if it did, Tehran would not comply with it.
CBS News reports speaking with two sources who said during a December meeting, Trump told Netanyahu that Israel could strike Iran if Iran does not agree to a deal with the US.
Russia open to discussing Ukraine’s ‘external governance’ – senior diplomat
RT | February 15, 2026
Russia is ready to discuss establishing “temporary external governance” in Ukraine under UN auspices to facilitate long-overdue democratic elections, Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin has said.
In an interview with TASS released on Sunday, Galuzin noted that the idea was first floated by Russian President Vladimir Putin in March 2025, describing it as one possible way to further the peace process.
This step, he said, “would make it possible to hold democratic elections in Ukraine, bring to power a capable government with which a full-fledged peace treaty could be signed, along with legitimate documents on future interstate cooperation.”
“In general, Russia is prepared to discuss with the US, European nations, and other countries the possibility of introducing temporary external governance in Kiev,” he added.
Galuzin acknowledged that while the UN “does not formally have a standardized mechanism” for these types of cases, there are historical precedents.
Moscow proposed the idea of external governance after the expiration of Vladimir Zelensky’s presidential term in 2024. At the time, the Ukrainian leader refused to hold new elections, citing martial law, which prompted Russia to declare him “illegitimate.” Moscow has since said Zelensky’s legal status is a major obstacle to concluding a binding peace deal.
Following US pressure, Zelensky signaled that he is open to having an election, but demanded security guarantees from the West and Russia.
In March 2025, the US dismissed the external management proposal, saying governance in Ukraine is “determined by its Constitution and the people of the country.” Prior to this, however, US President Donald Trump branded Zelensky “a dictator without elections.”
US Caribbean Buildup Near $3B — Report
Sputnik – 15.02.2026
The US military surge around Venezuela that culminated in the military aggression and abduction of President Nicolas Maduro is approaching a $3 billion price tag, Bloomberg reported.
Bloomberg calculations show the deployment at its peak cost more than $20 million a day, with as much as 20% of the US Navy’s surface fleet tied up in the region. Former Pentagon comptroller Elaine McCusker estimated that Operation Southern Spear has “probably cost about $2 billion since August 2025,” excluding intelligence and targeting expenses.
The White House has said the operation did not cost taxpayers extra because the forces were already deployed. But experts cited by Bloomberg noted that combat activity, higher operational tempo and personnel benefits add to expenses, and there is “no contingency fund in the DOD budget for unexpected operations.”
Despite the USS Gerald R. Ford being reassigned to the Middle East, Bloomberg reported the Caribbean deployment has no clear end date, even as US lawmakers say they have not been provided with detailed cost estimates.
Billions spent. No formal accounting.
And the tab keeps rising.
Munich Security Conference and the U.S. elephant in the room
Strategic Culture Foundation | February 13, 2026
Cosmetic cover-up of Western elite corruption and crimes is no longer possible.
The annual Munich Security Conference opens this weekend with the theme: “Under Destruction… The world has entered a period of wrecking-ball politics.”
The use of euphemism and blandishment is out in force this year as the Western elite gather in Bavaria.
However, absurdly, the conference, as usual, shies away from calling out the main source of global threat… the United States of America.
This is absurd but not surprising. Because the MSC has always been about rationalizing Western imperialist violence with the euphemistic spin of couching it as “security challenges”.
The Munich gathering is the world’s largest corporate conference on global security. It has been described variously as “Davos with guns” and “the Oscars for security policy experts”. The forum began meeting in 1963 and is dominated by Western perspectives, closely aligned with Western governments, the NATO military alliance, and think tanks like the Washington-based Atlantic Council, the London-based Chatham House, the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and Soros’ Open Society.
Sponsors of the MSC event include Western weapons manufacturers, such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Rheinmetall, as well as Wall Street and European banks, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and Commerzbank, and Big Tech like Microsoft and Palantir.
It is thus a conclave of Western global elites who come together in Bavaria every year to work out policies and arrangements to expedite the domination of the planet by Western capital. One might well ask: “Security for whom?”
This year, the global elites are facing acute problems arising from two sources: the fallout from the Epstein transnational pedophile network that has implicated the entire Western ruling class in systematic corruption and sordid, horrific crimes of sex trafficking children for the heinous gratification of the elite.
As with much of the Western establishment’s response to the Epstein scandal, the order of the conference will be an attempt to cover it up, if it is even mentioned.
The second source of acute challenge is the descent into rampant imperialist violence by the United States. This is not merely a symptom of Donald Trump as the 47th president in the White House. The descent into barbarism has been underway for decades. It has only accelerated under Trump (a partying friend of Epstein) as the U.S. moves desperately to shore up its declining global hegemony. That desperation is motivated by the emergence of a more equitable multipolar world and the inherent failing of American-led Western capitalism. The existential struggle for preserving U.S. domination has resulted in an explosion of international violence and lawlessness, which also threatens the privileges of supposed American allies.
A survey of barbarism under Trump over the past year includes:
- Bombing Iran and ongoing threats to annihilate the country
- Attacking Venezuela and kidnapping its president, Nicolás Maduro
- Seizing oil tankers from Russia and China in international waters
- Blockading Cuba and shutting down vital public utilities
- Continuous bombing of Somalia; at least 30 times in 2026 alone
- Bombing Nigeria and dispatching U.S. troops there
- Threatening aggression against Canada, Greenland, Colombia, Mexico, and Panama
- Threatening illegal trade sanctions on numerous countries
Needless to say, these are all criminal violations of the United Nations’ Charter and international law. And yet Trump thinks he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize. The disconnect speaks of insanity. How perverse that this could all be a deliberate distraction from the association with child rapist and Mossad asset Epstein.
But the truth is, the U.S. has always ordained itself the right to violate international law and use violence for regime change and wars of conquest. This has been going on for decades. The Western allies and media have pretended that this criminal imperialism did not exist and indulged in an illusion of “rules-based order”, as the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney candidly admitted last month at the Davos forum.
What is new is that the lawlessness of U.S. imperialism has now become transparent and not camouflaged with pretexts about “defending democracy and the free world” and other deceptions. What is new, too, is that Western allies are also being threatened in the American rush to shore up its failing global power.
Laughably, the Munich forum this year is all about trying to delicately approach the subject without spelling it out.
In the Foreword to the conference’s introductory report this year, the chairman, Wolfgang Ischinger, writes:
The Munich Security Conference 2026 is taking place at a moment of profound uncertainty… a result of the changing role of the United States in the international system. For generations, U.S. allies were not just able to rely on American power but on a broadly shared understanding of the principles underpinning the international order. Today, this appears far less certain, raising difficult questions about the future shape of transatlantic and international cooperation.
Given the significance of this recalibration of U.S. foreign policy, we decided that this year’s Munich Security Report should address the elephant in the room head-on… the United States’ evolving view of the international order.
Addressing the elephant in the room is exactly what the Munich conference is not doing by using euphemisms to cover up what is out-and-out U.S. imperialist violence.
In the Executive Summary of the report, the MSC authors continue:
The world has entered a period of wrecking-ball politics.
Sweeping destruction – rather than careful reforms and policy corrections – is the order of the day. The most prominent of those who promise to free their country from the existing order’s constraints and rebuild a stronger, more prosperous nation is the current U.S. administration. As a result, more than 80 years after construction began, the U.S.-led post-1945 international order is now under destruction.
Again, this is the sort of odious cover-up that one would expect from a forum that is sponsored by the Western capitalist elite.
The only time that the Munich conference got a taste of the truth was 19 years ago when Russian leader Vladimir Putin delivered a still-memorable speech in 2007. Putin caused uproar among the Western elite and media when he condemned the unilateral use of “hyper military force” by the United States and its lack of respect for international law, which he said was leading to chaos and destruction.
Putin said in his 2007 address:
We see growing disregard for international law’s basic principles. One state – the United States – has overstepped its national boundaries in every sphere.
And, of course, this is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasize this – no one feels safe! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them.
Nearly two decades later, Putin’s condemnation has only grown ever more relevant to describe today’s world of unbridled U.S. barbarism. “The vampire’s ball is over,” he added in a 2024 interview with Dmitry Kiselev.
A major part of the problem has been the impunity and vassalage that Western states have afforded the empire. As with the Epstein scandal and its evil, the West has indulged to the point where the system is out of control and is a threat to all.
The Munich conference, like Davos, the G7, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, and other gatherings of the Western elite, is all about suppressing the truth so that there is no accountability for the crimes and sins of Western capitalism and its imperialist violence.
But a day of reckoning is coming as the obscenities of Western power become increasingly exposed.
Epstein Pitched JPMorgan Chase on Plan to Get Bill Gates ‘More Money for Vaccines’
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | February 10, 2026
In the years leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic, Bill Gates and key figures from the Gates Foundation regularly interacted with Jeffrey Epstein, discussing ways to finance and develop a global pandemic preparedness and vaccination network.
The communications between Gates and Epstein were included in the “Epstein Files” released Jan. 30 by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Last year’s passage of the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act prompted the release.
Sayer Ji told The Defender the files show that Epstein “functioned as a switchboard” connecting “hedge funds, central banks, billionaires, academic institutions and global health initiatives.”
Ji published his analysis of health- and medical-related information in the files in a series of Substack articles and posts on X.
Seamus Bruner, director of research at the Government Accountability Institute, said the files revealed the workings of a network of “Controligarchs on steroids, but with shocking new receipts.”
Bruner said the files showed that Epstein helped develop “the architecture for pandemic profiteering” years before the COVID-19 pandemic.
The documents largely date from the 2010s — after Epstein’s 2008 conviction for soliciting underage sex and his inclusion on a registry of sex offenders.
Ji noted that months before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, many of the same actors who appear in the Epstein files participated in Event 201 — a simulation of a global pandemic caused by a coronavirus.
The pandemic preparedness infrastructure built in the years before the pandemic helped lead to this simulation, Ji wrote.
According to The Hill, members of the U.S. Congress began reviewing unredacted versions of the documents on Monday.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who co-sponsored the Epstein Files Transparency Act along with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), told The Defender the documents’ release is about justice, not politics.
“Rep. Ro Khanna and I have tried to keep the Epstein files from being political. The Democrats want to make it about Trump, and the Republicans want to make it about the Clintons. We want to make it about the survivors and getting them justice and transparency,” Massie said.
Gates, Epstein and the ‘architecture behind pandemics as a business model’
Ji’s series of Substack posts revealed what he described as “a 20-year architecture behind pandemics as a business model — with Bill Gates at the center of the network,” along with multinational financial institutions like JPMorgan Chase.
The documents, dating from 2011 to 2019, illustrate an “architecture whose foundations predate the COVID-19 era by more than a decade,” Ji wrote. He said they constitute evidence of “a major Wall Street bank asking a convicted sex offender to define the architecture of a Gates-linked charitable fund.”
The documents included several emails outlining the development of a Gates-led charitable fund. A Feb. 17, 2011, email from JPMorgan Chase’s Juliet Pullis to Epstein included questions from the “team that is putting together some ideas for Gates.”
Epstein’s reply outlined how this fund could be structured. The proposal would be developed further in the following months.
In a July 26, 2011, email from Epstein to JPMorgan Chase executive Jes Staley, on which Boris Nikolic, Gates’ chief science and technology adviser, was copied, described a “silo based proposal that will get bill [Gates] more money for vaccines.”
By Aug. 17, 2011, Staley and Mary Erdoes, then-CEO of JPMorgan Asset and Wealth Management, were discussing more details of the proposed fund, including developing “an offshore arm — especailly for vaccines” and projecting “billions of dollars” in donations within two years.
In a response later that day, Epstein said Gates was “terribly frustrated” at the slow pace of establishing the fund. He said Gates was insistent that “additional money for vaccines” be included in an upcoming presentation about the fund.

By Aug. 31, 2011, JPMorgan Chase had apparently developed a proposal called “Project Molecule,” where the bank would partner with the Gates Foundation to develop a perpetual charitable fund for pandemic preparedness and surveillance, vaccine promotion and disease eradication.
According to Ji, the proposal contains many of the ideas Epstein had previously discussed with JPMorgan Chase executives. It also contained plans to spend millions of dollars to purchase oral polio vaccines for Afghanistan and Pakistan, a rotavirus vaccine for Latin America, and a meningitis vaccine for Africa.
The proposal suggested that Melinda Gates chair the fund’s strategic program/grant and distribution committee and that Erdoes, Warren Buffett, Jordan’s Queen Rania and Seth Berkley, CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, also participate. The Gates Foundation funded Gavi’s launch in 1999 and holds a permanent seat on its board.
Ji wrote that while Epstein’s name does not appear in the Project Molecule proposal, it acts as the “institutional translation of the architecture he was sketching informally.”
By 2013, these efforts appear to have led to the launch of the Global Health Investment Fund. A confidential Sept. 23, 2013, briefing described the fund as “the first investment fund focused on global health drug and vaccine development.” The fund promised investors annual returns of 5%-7%.
Among the attendees at the fund’s September 2013 launch were JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon and representatives of Pfizer, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline (now GSK).
Gates could ‘work with anyone on earth’ but ‘chose a registered sex offender’
According to Ji, Nikolic’s involvement is significant. In August 2013, Gates and Epstein signed an agreement, in which Gates “specifically requested” that Epstein “personally serve” as Nikolic’s representative. The letter noted Epstein’s “existing collegial relationship” with Gates.
“This agreement was executed five years after Epstein’s conviction for soliciting a minor for prostitution,” Ji wrote. “Gates had the resources to work with anyone on earth. He chose a registered sex offender — and put it in writing.”
The documents showed that a month earlier — on July 18, 2013 — Epstein authored a draft email apparently intended for Gates. It references Epstein’s friendship with Gates, his disappointment that Gates sent him an “unfriendly strongly worded email,” and referenced sordid communications the two apparently previously shared.
“TO add insult to the injury you them implore me to please delete the emails regarding your std, your request that I provide you antibiotics that you can surreptitiously give to Melinda and the description of your penis,” Epstein wrote.
In a video posted on X, Michael Kane, director of advocacy for Children’s Health Defense, said that while it’s unknown whether Epstein ever sent that email to Gates, “the next month they’re in a contract together.”
“I think Bill Gates got the message,” Kane said.
In November 2023, a federal judge approved a $290 million settlement between JPMorgan Chase and over 100 women who accused Epstein of sexual abuse. The women alleged that JPMorgan Chase continued doing business with Epstein despite internal warnings over a span of several years.
“JPMorgan banked Epstein for years despite clear red flags — over $1 billion in suspicious transactions flagged internally and ignored. They knew. They didn’t care,” wrote The Truth About Cancer.
Did Epstein play role in launch of the ‘biosecurity state’?
According to Ji, the documents provide a roadmap for how a pandemic preparedness infrastructure was developed and how it helped make Event 201 possible.
“By the time Event 201 convened, the architecture … was no longer conceptual. It had been funded, structured, bonded, insured, staffed, and legally papered. What remained was the rehearsal,” Ji wrote.
September 2014 documents show that Gates disclosed his upcoming meeting with President Obama to Epstein, just as an adviser to then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak sent Epstein an invitation to a private, off-the-record reception with Obama the following month.
Ji said the communications occurred during “the week Ebola was formally reclassified as a threat to international peace and security.” He said the timing is significant, as this “was the week the biosecurity state was born.”
According to Ji, these developments helped activate the infrastructure outlined in Project Molecule, where Epstein acted as a node for Ebola-related project proposals.
This included Epstein receiving a United Nations (U.N.) diplomat’s proposal for the development of a “Nexus Centre for peace and health” that would take “into account the serious impact of Ebola,” and a proposal by a group of scientists for a pre-symptomatic Ebola detection system using PCR testing.
The scientists behind the proposal — affiliated with a U.S. military biolab at Fort Detrick, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health — asked Epstein to send the proposal to Gates and the Gates Foundation.
By October 2014, Epstein was warning Kathy Ruemmler, then White House counsel to Obama, of the political cost if Obama didn’t take action on Ebola. By 2015, Epstein was acting as an intermediary in efforts to convene global experts who would “discuss how we can most effectively address and prevent pandemics.”
The proposal, by the International Peace Institute’s Terje Rød-Larsen, led to the convening of a May 2015 closed-door meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, titled “Preparing for Pandemics: Lessons Learned for More Effective Responses.” The World Health Organization (WHO), World Bank and U.N. were involved with the meeting.
The meeting’s agenda included sessions addressing “how pandemics should be anticipated, how authority should be exercised, how multiple stakeholders should be coordinated, and — critically — what legal, institutional, and financial mechanisms must be put in place in advance to enable rapid, centralized response,” Ji wrote.
According to Ji, the COVID-19 pandemic response has its roots in the 2014 Ebola response, as Ebola “was the first disease to formally justify the suspension of normal political and sovereign constraints on a global scale. … When the next global health emergency arrived — COVID-19 — the playbook was already written.”
“Epstein appears in the background of precisely these formative conversations — serving as a connector between global finance, philanthropic capital, and biological risk governance,” Ji told The Defender.
Epstein involved in ‘strain pandemic simulation’ two years before COVID
By 2017, these conversations led to proposals for pandemic simulations.
In a January 2017 iMessage thread between Epstein and an unidentified physician seeking help in finding a new job, the physician cited “expertise with public health security.”
The physician, who had experience at the U.N., WHO, Gates Foundation and World Bank, said he “just did pandemic simulation,” which could become a “big platform.”
Referring to Gates, the physician told Epstein, “He hates mental health but he’s crazy about vaccines and autism stuff. That could be start to a more broad conversation.”
A March 2017 email chain, which included Epstein and Gates, discussed efforts by the then-bgC3, Gates’ private strategic office, to develop “Follow-up recommendations and/or technical specifications for strain pandemic simulation.”
Ji noted that in 2017, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) was launched at the World Economic Forum (WEF), with Gates Foundation funding and a goal of creating “pandemic-busting vaccines” within 100 days. Later that year, the World Bank issued the first-ever pandemic bonds.
Event 201, held just six weeks before the first publicly acknowledged COVID-19 cases were announced, involved the Gates Foundation, WEF and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Global financial institutions, media organizations and intelligence agencies also participated.
The simulation focused on the response to a novel coronavirus outbreak by governments, pharmaceutical companies, media outlets and social media platforms.
Ji said the Epstein Files don’t show that COVID-19 was planned or manufactured, or that Event 201 led to COVID-19. Instead, they prove that “the institutional infrastructure to capitalize on exactly this kind of crisis was already built, tested, staffed, and insured.”
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.
Germany’s CDU Pushes Real-Name Social Media Mandate and ID Checks
The party could ask Germans to show their papers before they can post a tweet
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 14, 2026
Germany’s governing CDU is preparing to discuss a proposal that would fundamentally alter the architecture of online speech by tying it to verified real-world identities.
At the upcoming federal party congress in Stuttgart on February 20 and 21, the Schleswig-Holstein branch of the Christian Democratic Union, the party of Chancellor Friedrich Merz, will push not only for a minimum age for social media (which would require users to show ID) but for a “Klarnamenpflicht” that would require users to register with their real names and confirmed identities.
This identity mandate is key to the motion. The state association led by Minister President Daniel Günther argues: “A real-name requirement creates greater accountability, facilitates legal enforcement, and strengthens trust in digital discourse.”
It further claims that such a rule would strengthen protection for young people online. The proposal also states: “The anonymity of the internet fosters hatred, incitement, and criminal behavior.”
If adopted, the requirement would compel platforms to authenticate users against official identification or comparable verification systems. Age checks for minors would likely depend on the same infrastructure. That means collecting and storing legally attributable identity data at scale. Anonymous or pseudonymous participation would no longer be the default condition of online engagement.
Alongside the real-name demand, the motion calls for “a statutory minimum age of 16 years for open platforms, flanked by mandatory age verification.” A ban for those under 16 takes “into account the special developmental needs of young people,” the text explains, citing the “Australian model” as a template.
Australia enacted such legislation in December 2025, requiring platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, and X to block accounts belonging to millions of users under 16 and introduce ID checks.
The CDU motion frames its broader objective as a need to “organize the digital public sphere.” It declares: “The CDU stands for a free, but responsible digital order.” It also states that freedom of expression requires state “Leitplanken” (guardrails).
General Secretary Carsten Linnemann has publicly endorsed the age restriction. “I am in favor of social media from the age of 16,” he told Bild newspaper. “We must protect children in the digital world from hate, violence, crime, and manipulative disinformation.”
Within the coalition government, consensus is not guaranteed. Justice Minister Stefanie Hubig of the Social Democratic Party of Germany has indicated openness to the concept, while other Social Democrats oppose it.
The CDU’s motion commission recommends referring the proposal to internal party bodies, including the Federal Committee for Digital Affairs and the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, before any legislative step.
The European Commission has warned that additional national platform obligations beyond the Digital Services Act are a “clear no-go,” adding: “The DSA regulates that.”
Patrik Baab: Europe’s New Iron Curtain – Freedom of Speech Dies
Glenn Diesen | February 14, 2026
Patrik Baab is a German journalist and best-selling author who reported on both sides of the frontline in Ukraine. Baab outlines how the freedom of speech is destroyed by a failing political elite.
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
- X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
- Patreon: / glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…
- Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ exports Israeli ‘ceasefire’ diplomacy to the world
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | February 13, 2026
The new order that is being brought about by the US Trump administration, through his Orwellian-named “Board of Peace,” is simply an Israeli model being exported to the world. It is a desperate attempt to both safeguard America’s position as the dominant superpower while also being a Zionist coup.
Although the so-called “Board of Peace” (BoP) was granted legal authorization by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) over its proposed purpose in supporting the Gaza ceasefire, the organization’s founding charter fails to mention Gaza or Palestine once. It also has no Palestinians who are part of it.
The BoP itself is very clearly a body that seeks to replace the United Nations, paving the way for a world that no longer considers the Geneva Conventions or International Law. We also see proof of the US moving in this direction through its latest 2026 defense budget, recently passed through Congress. Not only does it direct its mandatory $4 billion to the Zionist entity, but it also bars financing the UN’s Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Washington actively sanctions UN officials and ICC judges. Additionally, it withdrew from the UN’s Human Rights Council. None of this is random; it is all part of a carefully calculated plot, one that ultimately works to the benefit of the Israelis.
During the Biden administration, the United States adopted what is known as the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII), something proposed before the G7 nations and is being continued by the Trump administration, with a few Republican policy-leaning tweaks.
The PGII is the US’ vision to combat China’s Belt and Road Initiative, but using precisely the opposite approach. Washington seeks Western multi-national corporations to work under a model of stakeholder capitalism – originally proposed through the World Economic Forum – meaning that the corporations make all the major decisions. Projects driven by shareholders, corporations that direct public relations and shape soft power, also allow them to inject the funds instead of the government. Think of the unofficial role of the East India trading company, yet on steroids.
While the corporations pursue their agendas, shape policy, and are exempt from any real oversight or accountability, here comes the “Board of Peace” that will preside over the entire project. The BoP is a pay-to-play subscription service, a system run by a dictator and filled with billionaires, one that uses the power of the US in order to force the world to bend to its demands.
The BoP is filled with Zionists, UAE stooges, corrupt authoritarians, and Trump’s inner circle of both competent and incompetent business elites. Its first major project, where it will behave just like a replacement UN, is the Gaza Strip.
Forever wars
Such a world order, if this project doesn’t crash and burn, is designed to work on the basis of Donald Trump’s favourite slogan: “Peace Through Strength.” In other words, might makes right, which is exactly the way that conflict management is achieved.
If we look at the way that the Trump administration commits itself to ceasefire diplomacy, spearheaded by Zionist businessmen Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, it becomes clear that the way they work is through imposing impossible scenarios to sustain, instead of solving issues. This is born out of pure arrogance.
The brief exchange between Pakistan and India was not resolved, nor was the dispute between Thailand and Cambodia, which are both claimed by US President Trump as wars he ended. Ceasefires may have been concluded, but there are no solid follow-up steps that seek to properly address any root issues. It is just an order issued to both sides that now is the time to bring the fight to a close.
Where this is the most evident and relevant to the BoP is the case of Gaza, the first testing ground for the new alternative UN system. The Gaza ceasefire addresses none of the underlying political issues, doesn’t use any legal framework to find solutions, and is simply an agreement that gives the Israelis everything they want.
If Hamas even appears to have committed a small violation of the ceasefire, the US-led Civil Military Coordination Center (CMCC) – which 20+ US-controlled regimes are member to – the Israelis are given a free hand to commit mass murder. Meanwhile, the Zionist entity has been monitored every step of the way in its slaughter of 600 Palestinians and 1,600+ ceasefire violations.
It’s the same kind of ceasefire diplomacy that gave the world the predicament of Lebanon, where the Israelis have committed over 10,000 violations of the ceasefire since November 2024. The Zionist entity has gained a world record by violating the Lebanon ceasefire more times than any army has ever done in recorded human history.
Despite the clear faulty nature of this kind of businessman, diplomacy by intimidation, strategy, the US regime and its Zionist handlers brag about their successes and the alleged “peace” they have restored. In reality, they are only fanning the flames of forever wars, conflicts which actually become more unsolvable as a result of the ceasefires brought about.
The BoP also hopes to use this same strategy to bring about an agreement between Russia and Ukraine, but is dramatically failing to do so. One newer target has also been Sudan, but again, this kind of ceasefire will not solve the underlying issues that caused the conflict to begin with.
The US-Israeli alliance wants a new system under the BoP, one that replaces the UN, but not one that mirrors it. Nations no longer make decisions; corporations and billionaires do, while the Israelis and the US regime are able to operate in any way they choose, without even considering the implications of their actions on anyone else.
Ultimately, this kind of chaotic world order that is being built comes as a result of the UN’s failure, but it demonstrates just why the world valued the United Nations for so long, because it was supposed to stop genocides and war crimes. Unfortunately, the US-Israeli alliance decided that the world that existed prior to the Second World War was a desirable future.
Israeli army closes dozens of cases involving killing of Palestinians inside torture camps
The Cradle | February 13, 2026
The Israeli military has closed dozens of war-crimes investigations into its soldiers arising from the first two years of its genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, the Jerusalem Post reported on 8 February.
Publication of the details of the case closures was delayed by fears that doing so would ease the way for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to pursue war crimes charges against the soldiers.
Many of the closed cases relate to the deaths of as many as 98 Palestinian detainees from Gaza held in military detention facilities.
Torture and rape are common in Israeli detention centers, including Sde Teiman, where a 2024 leaked video showed the gang rape of a Palestinian detainee.
The arrest of the soldiers who carried out the rape was widely condemned by Israeli politicians and media commentators, who argued that rape was justified.
According to the Jerusalem Post, cases involving the deaths of detainees in custody constitute a “significant number” of about 100 criminal probes that the military’s legal division has opened into soldiers’ conduct.
However, the 100 cases where a probe has been opened make up just a “small proportion” of the roughly 3,000 cases of alleged war crimes for which a preliminary review took place.
Additional indictments may be filed in the Sdei Teiman cases, the Jerusalem Post added.
That Israel has closed many cases with no prosecutions undermines its argument that the ICC has no jurisdiction to prosecute its soldiers and politicians for war crimes.
Israel claims that it has a “robust, independent, and functioning” legal system capable of investigating any alleged wrongdoing. Therefore, according to the Complementary Principle, the ICC has no jurisdiction over its actions, Israel argues.
The Complementary Principle asserts that the ICC should complement national criminal systems, not replace them.
In November 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant on war crimes charges, including using starvation as a weapon of war.
Israel and the US responded by issuing threats and imposing unilateral economic sanctions on the court’s judges.
Israel is also facing charges at a separate international court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), that it is in breach of the Genocide Convention.
In March 2024, the ICJ issued a preliminary ruling requiring that Israel must take provisional measures to stop the possibility of perpetrating a genocide, including halting the military assault it was carrying out on the city of Rafah, allowing humanitarian aid to enter unhindered, and permitting a fact-finding team to enter the strip.
In December 2023, South Africa filed a case at the ICJ alleging Israel is carrying out a genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.
The Jerusalem Post reported that Israel’s response to the South Africa case, due on March 12, is still being prepared by its legal team. It will reportedly include a 1,000-page legal brief, along with 4,000 or more pages of exhibits.
The South African case covers Israel’s actions in Gaza between 2023 and 2024. Pretoria has not yet submitted a detailed attack on the Israeli military’s conduct in 2025. It is expected to do so this spring or summer.
Israel will likely be required to respond by the spring of 2027.
“There are concerns among Israeli lawyers about the genocide charges, not only due to exaggerated public statements made by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, but also resulting from statements made near the start of the war by more authoritative defense figures,” the Jerusalem Post reports.
Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defense Minister Gallant, Smotrich, Ben Gvir, and many other Israeli politicians have made multiple public statements urging the army to commit genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.
According to the UN, genocide means any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group:
Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Europe creates a ‘Russian government-in-exile’, consisting of a bunch of losers
By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 14, 2026
The Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), part of the Council of Europe (not the European Union), established in October 2025 a platform for Russians in exile called the Russian Democratic Forces, which is intended to represent a new Russian government-in-exile in Europe.
With little media attention, Europe is attempting to elevate the status of the Russian opposition, while openly admitting that the new, so-called opposition lacks the structure and power to make a significant difference. Above all, they admit that the selection of members for this so-called government-in-exile was fundamentally undemocratic.
Following the formation of a so-called representative delegation of Belarusian democratic forces, the Assembly recently decided to appoint a Russian delegation as well – again, without democratic consultation.
Regarding the Russian Democratic Forces, some individuals were invited to participate in hearings organized by Assembly committees. During these hearings, the discussions focused solely on how these figures could help end what they call “Russia’s war of aggression” and on ways to strengthen sanctions against Russia.
The most absurd claim is their desire to guarantee Russians access to free and independent media in order to counter Russian disinformation. This is reminiscent of the sanctions Europe has imposed on Russian media outlets such as RT, Sputnik, Channel One Russia, etc., and, of course, this geopolitical website, the Strategic Culture Foundation, where this article is published. The new media outlets they propose to establish are, naturally, funded by Europe itself – a platform for the so-called Russian government-in-exile.
They will rely exclusively on European disinformation articles opposing the current Russian government. The Russians in exile, out of fear, will write articles filled with anti-Russian propaganda and criticism, afraid of losing their European residence permits or visas should they write anything positive about Russia.
The absurdity of it all, of course, is that Europe itself has been censoring its own media and journalists since new legislation, such as the Digital Services Act (DSA), was approved. Since February 2025, the EU has officially implemented the 2022 law to combat disinformation, particularly what they call “fake news” originating from Russia.
Or take the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA): This law came into effect in May 2024 and supposedly protects media pluralism and ensures that journalists can work without state interference or abuse of legal process. An example of this absurdity – and the exact opposite of what the EMFA advocates – is the case of German journalist Hüseyin Dogru, who has been completely cut off from funding due to European Union sanctions and can no longer provide for his family’s basic needs while living in Germany. He is accused of spreading disinformation about Russia and Israel.
Another initiative is the so-called European Democracy Shield, presented in November 2025. This initiative aims to protect the EU’s democratic information space from foreign interference and information manipulation. Yet this initiative is now being violated by Europe itself. As they state: “The European Democracy Shield initiative aims to strengthen information integrity in Europe by addressing issues such as disinformation and election interference.” But this is exactly the opposite of what the EU is doing by establishing – by Europeans – a so-called Russian government-in-exile, which, by their own admission, may not have been entirely democratic in its establishment or candidate selection.
After all, it is the European Union itself, through the European Commission, that has established an undemocratic Russian government-in-exile, as they themselves admit. The president of the so-called committee that approves the candidates and the structure of the platform is German, and other committee members come from Spain and Cyprus. Not a single Russian sits on the Assembly’s board.
They even prepared a list of so-called “democratic” candidates promoting the new Russian government-in-exile – a list of “Participants of the Russian Democratic Forces” for the platform. This list is approved exclusively by the Bureau of the Assembly – the European Union, or in this case, the European Commission – based on a proposal from the President of the Assembly, who, as mentioned, is a European citizen of German nationality. The list of potential candidates is submitted to the President of the Assembly in consultation with organizations of the Russian Democratic Forces whose members meet the criteria, and is approved by them.
This is, of course, utterly absurd. Imagine the reverse situation: Russia establishes a committee for, say, Dutch or German citizens in exile, appoints them as the opposition government for the Netherlands and/or Germany, and recognizes them as a government-in-exile in Russia. Perhaps Russia should do this as counter-propaganda – to show Europe and make it clear that their behavior is absurd, undemocratic, and, above all, insane. I can just imagine the headlines in European media and the outrage from European politicians and journalists – full of words like “undemocratic and criminal” – if Russia were to do this!
Among the members of the so-called Russian government-in-exile are names such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the oligarch once convicted in Russia for fraud and theft, who has already served time in a Russian prison, and chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov, who has a far stronger connection to modern-day Azerbaijan or Armenia, having been born and spent his entire childhood in Baku, present-day Azerbaijan.
Another well-known opponent is Vladimir Kara-Murza, who claims to have been poisoned by Putin – similar to the Skripal and Litvinenko cases, or more recently, the allegation that Navalny was poisoned in a Russian prison. He is described as a Russian-British political activist, journalist, author, filmmaker, and a former political prisoner. He is the vice-chairman of Open Russia, an NGO founded by the convicted former oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, which promotes civil society and democracy in Russia. In essence, they promote the interests of the US and Europe and advocate for Russia’s subordination to them, running as puppet presidents and governments for the West.
Also part of the new Russian government-in-exile are the deranged members of the provocative punk rock group Pussy Riot, such as Nadya Tolokonnikova. These individuals, eager to attract attention with provocative actions against the Russian Orthodox Church – actions bordering on Satanism (in Europe they are called feminists) – have been condemned in Russia for their behavior. Wikipedia (a Western propaganda tool) even acknowledges that public opinion in Russia is not sympathetic to the band members. They have been labeled an extremist organization in Russia. These are just a few candidates; the rest of those chosen are even less significant or unknown to the Russian people.
Europe is also using ethnic minorities in Russia – such as the Bashkirs, Chuvash, Tatars, Chechens, and many others – to sow division and thus break up Russia, following the example of the Balkanization of the former Yugoslavia. A good example of the propaganda machine targeting ethnic minorities in Russia is the German Center for East European and International Studies, called ZOiS, located in Berlin, Germany.
For instance, a certain PD Dr. Sabine von Löwis has written an article there on “Conflict Dynamics and Border Regions,” which discusses: “The disintegration of the Soviet Union led to the creation of not only the fifteen successor states but also a series of de facto states and peoples.” The goal is likely to drive a wedge between the various groups living in the Russian Federation.
The Russian government-in-exile, as the EU calls it, was established following the example of the Americans, who have appointed puppet presidents and governments worldwide to destabilize the countries they effectively occupy and thus plunder their resources. Russia itself is rich in resources such as gas, oil, and minerals. Some members of Russia’s indigenous peoples, as mentioned above, are also on the list of the so-called Russian government-in-exile. This is a blatant provocation by the EU to drive a wedge between Russians – or at least that is the intent. In recent years, entire sessions have appeared on YouTube proposing to divide Russia along ethnic lines, just as was done with the former Yugoslavia, which is now under the control of Europe and the US.
Recent examples of US regime change, with European assistance, include Syria, Venezuela, the blockade against Cuba, the ongoing destabilization of Greenland, and, of course, the conflict in Ukraine. Russia’s neighbors, such as Georgia, Moldova, Armenia, and Azerbaijan, have also fallen victim to provocations involving regime change and destabilization. This task is now largely reserved for the Europeans – particularly in Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia – with US assistance behind the scenes.
But do not think for a moment that Ukraine will be completely abandoned to Europe. The Americans, together with the Europeans, are eyeing the riches, natural resources, and rare earth metals found primarily in the Donbas, which are now largely in Russian hands. Leaving Ukraine to the Europeans is merely a pretext for so-called peace talks.
Times are growing dangerous these days, with an American administration that talks about peace while simultaneously attacking countries, kidnapping presidents, and throwing them in jail. It supports terrorist leaders in Syria and transfers thousands of ISIS terrorists from the Kurdish-controlled al-Hawl camp to Iraq. What will they do with them? Release them for a potential coming war against Iran – an ally of Russia? Hopefully not, but these days, we cannot be sure. The West is in free fall, without rules or morals.
