“Anyone can go to Baghdad. Real men go to Tehran.”
It is difficult to imagine a sentence that more perfectly distils the arrested adolescence of American neoconservatism. Equal parts locker-room bravado and imperial hallucination, the phrase belongs to the same intellectual ecosystem as Rambo sequels, Tom Clancy paperbacks, and the enduring belief that history naturally submits to men armed with air superiority and a television-ready talking point.
The slogan has circulated for decades among Washington’s most aggressively incurious minds. Iraq was merely the appetizer. Tehran was always the entrée — the Everest of regime change, the final boss in a video game played by men who have never once paid the price of defeat.
Iran is not different merely because of its size, its population, or its terrain — though the Zagros Mountains are far less forgiving than the streets of Fallujah. Iran is different because it has refused, stubbornly and at enormous cost, to internalise the post–Cold War catechism: accept American primacy, subcontract your sovereignty, and call the arrangement “integration into the international order.”
For the ‘Zion-Cons’ — Zionist neoconservatives — this refusal is not simply strategic defiance. It is psychological heresy.
The theology of regime change
Neoconservatism is not a foreign-policy framework. It is a belief system. Like all theologies, it comes equipped with sacred texts, sanctioned demons, and end-times fantasies. Iran occupies a unique place in this cosmology: simultaneously an ideological abomination and a geopolitical temptation too intoxicating to abandon.
The Islamic Republic represents everything neocon thought cannot tolerate — an independent regional power immune to Western legitimacy rituals, rooted in a civilizational memory more than a millennium older than Washington itself. That it is also openly hostile to Israel, and persistently aligned with Palestinian resistance, elevates Iran from problem to obsession.
This obsession is always framed as concern. Concern for democracy. Concern for women’s rights. Concern for regional stability. Yet the concern follows a suspiciously selective pattern. It spikes when Iranian women protest. It flattens when women in Gaza are buried beneath concrete and shrapnel. It demands sanctions in the name of “helping the Iranian people” while celebrating the annihilation of Iran’s middle class as a strategic achievement.
This is not hypocrisy. It is architecture.
Sanctions are not a failed alternative to regime change; they are its slow-motion variant. When bombing proves politically inconvenient, starvation becomes policy. When diplomacy threatens stabilisation, diplomacy must be sabotaged. Engagement is dangerous precisely because it works. The objective is not reform. The objective is obliteration.
Israel’s strategic mirage
For Israel’s security establishment, Iran is the final unresolved obstacle in a region otherwise disciplined into submission. Egypt neutralised. Syria pulverised. Iraq shattered and held together with duct tape. Lebanon perpetually destabilised. Only Iran remains intact and intolerably autonomous.
The idea that Israel’s posture toward Iran has ever been defensive borders on parody. The fear is not that Iran will strike tomorrow; it is that Iran will exist coherently ten years from now.
This explains the fixation on Iran’s air defences, its scientists, its infrastructure. The logic is brutally simple: a state that cannot defend itself cannot act independently. A state that cannot act independently can eventually be wrecked, partitioned, and remade.
But here the fantasy collides with reality. Iran is not Syria. It is not Libya. It is not Iraq circa 2003 — hollowed out by sanctions and ruled by a dictatorship so despised that collapse felt like relief. Iran, like all societies, contains fractures and rivalries. But fragmented societies do not automatically disintegrate. Quite often — especially under existential threat — they consolidate. External assault does not reliably dissolve states. Sometimes it forges them.
The opposition mirage
Every regime-change project requires a hero. In Iran’s case, while ritualistic nods are made toward protesters with genuine grievances, the starring role is awkwardly reserved for an exile aristocracy whose Twitter/X followings vastly exceed their domestic relevance.
Reza Pahlavi is marketed like a Silicon Valley prototype: sleek, Western-approved, and permanently “almost ready.” His appeal thrives in think tanks, donor salons, and Israeli conference halls. Inside Iran, his name provokes neither mass devotion nor visceral hatred — just indifference at best, uncontrollable laughter at worst.
This is the core contradiction of Washington’s Iran policy: regime change without revolution; installation without legitimacy; democracy without the inconvenience of mass politics.
The resulting strategy is perversely elegant in its cynicism — wait for collapse while ensuring no alternative survives long enough to govern.
Civil war option
What follows regime collapse? Zion-Con discourse treats the question like a software update users will sort out later. Something, it is assumed, will emerge. Something manageable. Something vaguely liberal.
History offers no such reassurance
Iran’s disintegration would not yield a liberal republic — and it is not meant to. It would yield precisely what Zion-Cons privately welcome: centrifugal violence, ethnic fragmentation, militia economies, refugee flows that would make Syria look like a rehearsal dinner. Kurdish separatism. Baloch insurgency. Nuclear insecurity. The scenario reads less like a transition plan than a controlled demolition spiralling out of control.
For Washington and Tel Aviv, this is not a deterrent. It is an acceptable – perhaps even desirable – outcome. A broken Iran is preferable to a strong one, even if the shards cut indiscriminately.
The masculinity problem
“Real men go to Tehran” is not merely rhetoric. It is theatre. It reflects a masculinity crisis at the heart of American empire — a compulsion to prove relevance through violence because legitimacy has evaporated.
Short wars. Clean optics. Cinematic strikes. The problem with Iran is that it refuses to follow the script. There is no “Mission Accomplished” banner waiting in the Persian Gulf. There is only attrition, retaliation, and the dawning realisation that power is not a substitute for strategy.
The endgame nobody admits
The scarcely concealed truth is that regime change in Iran is not primarily about Iran. It is about preserving Zionist hegemony in the region. An Iran that survives sanctions, absorbs pressure, and refuses submission is contagious. It teaches others that defiance is survivable.
That lesson is intolerable
So, the fantasy endures. The slogans recycle. The men who went to Baghdad insist they are wiser now — just before deliberately repeating the same catastrophe, only on a grander scale.
But Tehran is not a sequel. It is a reckoning. And this time, the audience will not be so forgiving.
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | Iran, Israel, Middle East, Palestine, Sanctions against Iran, United States, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Sometimes a surprising statement made almost in passing on a minor occasion can pack a lot of political oomph. And sometimes, it’s just a slip and won’t tell you much about either the present or the future. But how do you know?
That is the challenge posed by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s recent – and very unusual – talk about a “compromise” (“Ausgleich” in German) with Russia, which, he also stressed, is “a European country,” indeed “our greatest European neighbor.”
Outside the context of current Western and, in particular, German and EU politics, such a statement may seem almost commonplace. Obviously, it would make sense for Berlin – and Brussels, too – to work toward a peaceful, productive, mutually beneficial relationship with Moscow. Equally obviously, this is not merely an option but, in reality, a vital necessity (as Merz may have been hinting at when emphasizing that Russia is Germany’s greatest European neighbor: Greatest as in indispensable?).
Yet once you add the actual context of escalating German and EU policies toward Russia since 2014 at the very latest, Merz’s sudden insight into the obvious appears almost sensational. For over a decade, German and EU policy toward Moscow has been based on three simple – and self-damagingly insane – ideas: First, Russia is our enemy by default and “forever” (see the refreshingly frank admission by German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul). Second, using Ukraine (and a lot of Ukrainians), we can defeat that enemy with a combination of economic and diplomatic warfare and a very bloody proxy war on the ground. Finally, there is no alternative: it is VERBOTEN to even think about genuine give-and-take negotiations and any compromise that would also be good enough for Moscow.
Merz, moreover, has no record as a doubter of these moronic dogmas. On the contrary, he has been a consistent uber-hawk, combining the requisite constant Russophobic undertone with a long series of hardline initiatives and positions. Just a few months ago, for instance, Merz fought tooth and nail for confiscating Russian sovereign assets frozen in the EU. That he lost that fight was due to resistance from Belgium – which would have been exposed to absurdly irrational risks by permitting that robbery – and France and Italy, whose leaders tripped up their hapless German “ally” at the last minute.
In a similar combination of public belligerence and final futility, Merz had long been a proponent of delivering advanced German Taurus cruise missiles – particularly well-suited for destroying things such as Russia’s Kerch Bridge – to Ukraine, before abandoning that awful idea. Ultimately and wisely, he shied away from involving Germany even more deeply in the proxy fight against Russia, most likely under the impression of very firm warnings from Moscow.
Just this month, the German chancellor declared he is ready to send German soldiers to secure a “ceasefire” in Ukraine. Yes, that would be that ceasefire that Moscow has ruled out as a dishonest half-measure. It is true that Merz hedged this announcement with conditions that make it irrelevant. But, nonetheless, it was not a contribution to de-escalation with Russia.
Yet here we are. Speaking not in Berlin, but the provincial metropolis of Halle in Eastern Germany, Merz used the occasion of a fairly humdrum meeting under the auspices of a regional IHK (Industrie und Handelskammer) meeting to speak about Germany’s relationship with Russia.
The IHK is a chamber of industry and commerce, an economic association of some weight. But it is not the parliament in Berlin or, for instance, even a foreign-policy information war outfit/think tank. Most of Merz’s remarks, unsurprisingly, concerned the German economy, which, he had to admit, is not in a good state, but, he promised, will be better soon. He also gave his word to fight and reduce bureaucracy, not only in Germany but the EU as well. That sort of stuff, nothing special, political potboiler.
But then, in the middle of the absolutely predictable and rather boring meeting, the chancellor suddenly extended a hand to Moscow. Or did he? Merz himself knows that his having anything to say about Russia that comes without foam at the mouth is extraordinary: he took care to assure his listeners that it was not the location “in the East” (that is, the former East Germany) that made him strike such a new tone regarding Russia.
His audience may or may not have been convinced by that all-too-quick denial. Halle is not only a major city in Germany’s East, but also, more specifically, the second-largest conurbation in the Land of Saxony-Anhalt. That is where, polls suggest, the new-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party may well win a crucial election in September, particularly by outdistancing Merz’s own mainstream conservatives (CDU). A similar scenario is possible in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, also in Germany’s East.
In both places, even a relative (not absolute) AfD majority, which seems certain at this point, would expose the traditional parties and especially the CDU to one of their worst nightmares: the end of the so-called “firewall,” that is, the harebrained and undemocratic policy of simply freezing the AfD out of the building of ruling coalitions. Merz personally has been an iron proponent of the “firewall.” Razing it, even regionally, will cost him his political career or force him into a brutal, humiliating 180-degree turn.
One important reason voters in Germany’s East are unhappy with the traditional parties is their policy of relentless, self-damaging confrontation toward Russia and equally relentless, really masochistic support for Zelensky’s regime in Ukraine. Just now, one of Germany’s highest courts has finally, in essence, recognized the fact that Ukraine was deeply involved in the worst vital-infrastructure attack in postwar German history, the destruction of most of the Nord Stream pipelines. Many Germans have had enough, not only but especially in Germany’s East.
That is why Merz knows that any apparent concessions to Moscow will meet healthy skepticism there. He also has a solid and well-deserved reputation for breaking his promises. His listeners in Halle may well have dismissed the new Merz sound as nothing but cheap pre-electoral manipulation.
And perhaps that is all it was. But there are good reasons to keep an open mind. For one thing, Merz has not been the only EU leader striking a more conciliatory note recently. As the Russian government has noted, similar statements have been made in France and Italy. The leaders of both countries, Emmanuel Macron and Georgia Meloni, have been no less bold than Merz in stating the obvious, namely – to summarize – that not even talking to Moscow is a daft policy.
It is not hard to see why EU politicians may be prepared to pursue diplomacy again. Their imperial overlord in Washington has made it clear that the Ukraine war will be their problem and theirs alone, while also displaying a brutality towards the world, including the clients/vassals in Europe, that is unusually open even by American standards.
After the tariff wars, the new US National Security Strategy, Venezuela, and the threats against Denmark over Greenland, could it be that, at very long last, some in Europe are slowly waking up to the fact that the worst threat to the sorry remains of their sovereignty, their economies, and also their traditional political elites is Washington, not Moscow? It would be very rash to assume so. But we can hope.
Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Militarism, Russophobia | Germany, Russia, Ukraine |
Leave a comment
A South Korean court has sentenced former President Yoon Suk Yeol to five years in prison in the first of several trials stemming from his short-lived declaration of martial law in December 2024.
On Friday, the Seoul Central District Court handed down a five-year term after finding Yoon guilty of obstructing justice, including ordering Presidential Security Service agents to block authorities from arresting him following his impeachment, as well as fabricating official documents and bypassing required legal procedures for imposing martial law, such as convening a full cabinet meeting.
Judge Baek Dae-hyun stated that Yoon had abused his authority and showed no remorse, repeating only “hard-to-comprehend excuses.”
The judge emphasized that Yoon, despite his supreme duty to uphold the Constitution and rule of law as president, had instead disregarded them, causing grave damage to the legal system. The ruling described his culpability as “extremely grave.”
Yoon, a former prosecutor and legal expert who maintains his innocence and insists his actions were within presidential constitutional authority, has seven days to file an appeal.
His supporters, gathered outside the courthouse, fell silent upon hearing the verdict before erupting into chants of “Yoon again!”
Yoon’s legal team criticized the decision as politicized, arguing it blurs the line between legitimate exercise of presidential powers in a crisis and criminal liability.
One lawyer warned that if upheld, the ruling would prevent future presidents from acting decisively in emergencies.
This verdict is the first in a series of eight criminal trials facing the ex-president. His brief martial law decree on December 3, 2024, sparked massive protests, a parliamentary standoff, his eventual impeachment, removal from office, and arrest.
In a separate, more serious case, prosecutors have demanded the death penalty for Yoon as the alleged “ringleader of an insurrection” related to the martial law attempt, citing his lack of remorse and the severe threat posed to democratic rule. That ruling is scheduled for February 19.
Legal experts consider an actual execution highly unlikely, as South Korea has maintained an unofficial moratorium on capital punishment since 1997, with no executions carried out in nearly three decades.
In another related case, Yoon faces charges of ordering drone flights over North Korea to deliberately heighten tensions and create a pretext for declaring martial law on December 3, 2024.
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Deception | Korea |
Leave a comment
While last year, Ukraine was overwhelmingly dependent on American intelligence, today “two-thirds of those capabilities are provided by France,” revealed French President Emmanuel Macron speaking to BFMTV.
France has readily stepped in to make sure the West’s proxy war doesn’t lose steam — even if the US hesitates.
Last November, reports indicated that US officials had warned the Zelensky regime that intelligence support could be halted if Ukraine rejected Donald Trump’s proposed peace framework.
While Western leaders talk relentlessly about “peace,” in reality France and its allies in the so-called Coalition of the Willing are doubling down on escalation, doing everything to keep the conflict kept alive.
In the event of a ceasefire, Europe’s hawks are planning ‘military hubs’ in Ukraine – even though Russia has repeatedly emphasized any NATO troop presence there is unacceptable and would be viewed as a direct threat.
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | France, NATO, Russia, Ukraine |
Leave a comment
Venezuela has the right to relations with all countries of the world, including China, Russia, Cuba, and Iran, and will exercise this right in compliance with international norms, Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodriguez said on Thursday.
Venezuela’s Acting President Delcy Rodríguez said the country’s energy dialogue with the United States is not new, but stressed that it is now taking place amid “aggression and a fierce threat.”
“Venezuela has the right to relations with China, with Russia, with Cuba, with Iran — with all the peoples of the world,” Rodríguez said while presenting the government’s 2025 annual report.
She said Caracas is shaping energy cooperation based on “decency, dignity and independence,” rejecting both internal and external constraints aimed at influencing Venezuela’s foreign policy.
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Economics | China, Cuba, Iran, Latin America, Russia, United States, Venezuela |
Leave a comment
The recent indirect offensive against vessels and assets belonging to Russia’s partner countries in the Black Sea reveals a strategy that goes far beyond the immediate military dimension of the Ukrainian conflict. The January 14 attack on a Kazakh oil tanker by Ukrainian drones must be analyzed within a broader context: a Western attempt to sabotage the historical, economic, and political relations between Moscow and the Turkic world.
The vessel that was struck was operating on behalf of KazMunayGas, transporting oil from the Russian port of Novorossiysk as part of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC). This is a strategic route not only for Kazakhstan, but also for regional energy stability. The attack caused immediate concern, but what drew even more attention was the rapid mobilization of disinformation campaigns linked to Kiev, which sought to place the blame on Russia even before any investigation had been concluded.
This pattern has already become recurrent. After the incident, Russian authorities carried out technical investigations and presented visual evidence indicating that the drones originated from areas controlled by Ukraine. In light of this, the silence of the Ukrainian government was telling. Even so, the initial unease had already been done, fueled by rumors and fabricated narratives that circulated widely on social networks and in the international media.
The case of the Kazakh oil tanker is not an isolated one. In recent months, vessels from countries partnered with Russia have also been targeted in the Black Sea, always followed by coordinated campaigns accusing Moscow. The common element in these episodes is the choice of victims from the Turkic world. Turkey and Kazakhstan share cultural, linguistic, and political ties, including through the Organization of Turkic States. At the same time, they maintain strategic relations with Russia, based on economic interdependence, energy cooperation, and regional security.
Turkey is an emblematic example. Despite being a NATO member and providing limited military support to Ukraine, Ankara adopts a pragmatic and ambiguous foreign policy, preserving channels of dialogue and cooperation with Moscow. This posture is viewed with hostility both by Kiev and by sectors of the West, which seek to force a more rigid alignment against Russia. Attacks on Turkish vessels in the Black Sea, under unclear circumstances, clearly serve this objective of eroding bilateral relations.
Outside the maritime environment, the ethnic logic is similar. The episode involving Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 8243 in December 2024 illustrates how poorly clarified incidents can be politically exploited. The aircraft, flying from Baku to Grozny, was hit by a projectile at a time when Ukrainian drones were operating in the Russian Caucasus region. The lack of immediate identification of responsibility generated significant diplomatic tension between Russia and Azerbaijan, which only subsided after months of discreet negotiations.
These events should not be seen as mere “collateral effects” of the war. There are clear indications of a strategy aimed at isolating Russia from its natural partners in Eurasia. Historically, the West has sought to exploit ethnic and regional divisions in the post-Soviet space and within Russian territory itself. Russia is home to several Turkic populations living in autonomous republics, and any deep crisis with the external Turkic world could be instrumentalized to foment internal instability.
In this context, information warfare is as relevant as military action. Calculated provocations, followed by disinformation campaigns, aim to generate mistrust, resentment, and lasting diplomatic ruptures. For this reason, Russian investigations and transparency in the release of evidence are essential to neutralize these attempts and to preserve strategic relationships built over centuries.
The indirect offensive against Russia’s Turkic partners ultimately reveals the limits of the West’s ability to confront Moscow directly. Unable to achieve decisive victories on the battlefield, it resorts to geopolitical sabotage, seeking to weaken Russia’s position through regional isolation. Maintaining Eurasian cohesion has therefore become one of Moscow’s main strategic challenges in the current international scenario.
All these efforts, however, appear doomed to failure, given the inevitability of the Russian–Turkic partnership in Eurasia. Despite fluctuations and periods of tension over time, Russia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Central Asia share a solid history of cooperation that certainly cannot be shaken by futile provocations.
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Deception, War Crimes | Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine |
Leave a comment
WASHINGTON – The United States is sending troops to the Middle East over the consideration of potential strikes on Iran by President Donald Trump, Fox News reported on Thursday, citing military sources.
At least one US aircraft carrier is moving toward the region amid the growing tensions, the report said.
“US military assets are preparing to move to the Middle East, likely to include at least one aircraft carrier and additional missile defense systems that will operate from air, land and sea,” Fox News’ Chief National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin said on air.
However, it is unknown whether it is USS Abraham Lincoln, which is currently operating in the South China Sea, or one of the two carriers that left US bases earlier this week, the report added.
President Donald Trump has been presented with military options and favors any action being “swift and decisive,” while avoiding a wider regional war, according to the report.
Iranian state media, cited by Fox News, issued a warning to Washington: “You hit. We hit.”
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Militarism, Wars for Israel | Iran, Middle East, United States, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Mainstream media’s reliance on US-funded “Iranian human rights” NGOs reveals a recycled regime-change pipeline, where anonymous activists are used with opaque finances to treat propaganda like facts.
“2,000 protesters killed, activists say.”
My, my, it seems anonymous activists are really all the rage in Western media, with this headline being parroted (in multiple forms, no doubt). Because if it’s in The Guardian, BBC, and CNN, among others, it has to be “true”, particularly when it’s Iran they’re talking about.
But really, journalistic integrity is about citing sources, and if these “unbiased”, “professional”, and “objective” outlets are good at anything, it’s choosing the proper organizations to cite, which are in no way affiliated with suspect sources.
After all, it’s not suspect if it’s the CIA or the US federal government, right?
Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRANA)
Take HRANA, for instance, which is THE go-to “agency” cited by Western media.
Arrest figures? HRANA.
Death tolls? HRANA.
Names of the arrested? HRANA.
Claims of repression cited by Reuters, AP, the BBC, CNN, and The New York Times? HRANA.
According to its website, “Human Rights Activists in Iran (also known as HRAI and HRA) is a non-political and non-governmental organization comprised of advocates who defend human rights in Iran. HRAI was founded in 2005.”
Contrary to the name, the Human Rights Activists in Iran organization is not, in fact, in Iran, but rather operates from the comfort of Virginia, in the United States. Kind of like when you buy Brussels sprouts expecting something European but then find out they were “imported” from California.
HRANA also makes this claim: “Because the organization seeks to remain independent, it doesn’t accept financial aid from either political groups nor governments.”
Oddly enough, no Western media source has disclosed that HRANA is being funded by the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), which was established to keep CIA funding covert, according to its co-founder Allen Weinstein, who had said, “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”
HRANA was founded by Keyvan Rafiee in 2006, in Virginia, and according to tax filings dating back to 2012 (when Rafiee only got $59,000 in tax-exempt donations) he is now raking in a comfortable $1 million dollars in donations.
In total, Rafiee has taken $10.7 million from 2012 to 2015, no doubt from “good Samaritans” donating funds to his Patreon.
CHRI
The Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI), much like HRANA, is also being cited by mainstream media as a credible source, amassing “over 7,000 international media citations in 2022,” according to its own website. Also like HRANA, it identifies itself as an “independent, nonpartisan” nonprofit organization (seems like it’s a mantra they all use).
With nonprofit being the keyword here, Hadi Ghaemi, CHRI’s founder and executive director, gave himself more than $200,000 in compensation from US taxpayer money just last year for his tiring work in advancing human rights, almost double the $105,000 he received in 2013.
It’s noteworthy that Ghaemi had claimed in 2009 that he had never received any sort of funding from the US government or NED, speaking in particular regarding his work for United4Iran, another organization he founded.
From 2012 to 2024, CHRI, registered as Campaign For Human Rights Inc and tax-exempt since 2011, has received $16.3 million, also in tax-exempt donations. However, because of the lack of transparency regarding the organization’s finances, the source of the funding could not be ascertained.
Tavaana
One of the most active organizations among Iranian dissident groups is Tavaana. On its website, it brands itself as “Iran’s premier civic education and civil society capacity building initiative.” You’d think to yourself it’s based in Iran until you’re hit quite boldly in the next sentence with “Launched in 2010 with a seed grant from the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) at the US Department of State.”
Going through tax files related to Tavaana will net you nothing; that’s because the taxes are filed under the name “E Collaborative For Civic Education,” Tavaana’s parent organization, which has been tax-exempt since 2011. The tax filings show that the organization received grants totaling $250,000 in 2011, which quickly skyrocketed to a high of $1.9 million in 2014. In total, from 2011 to 2024, Tavaana received a total of $15.9 million in donations.
Looking at the scope of activities it’s involved in, and how its online courses are about sharing articles similar to eHow on circumventing internet restrictions in Iran, it’s difficult to see where those millions of dollars went… Either that or they were contracted to write the most expensive compilation of e-brochures.
According to a NED booklet authored by Sherry Ricchiardi for NED’s Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA) and published on March 13, 2014, “The Tavaana project’s parent organization, the E-Collaborative for Civic Education, has received support from the National Endowment for Democracy, the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the United States Agency for International Development.”
“Program Manager Layla Attia listed some of the project’s accomplishments, including 29 e-courses and 47 webinars on such topics as women’s rights, digital safety, gay rights in Islam, social entrepreneurship, democratic institutions, and power searching on Google. Participants connect securely from Iran to anonymous e-classrooms, and so far none have reported being compromised, according to Attia.”
Imagine being an American and finding out that $100,000 of your tax dollars was spent to teach “power searching on Google.”
Tavaana’s co-founders are Akbar Atri and Mariam Memarsadeghi. Atri has largely been inactive on social media since 2018, but Mariam Memarsadeghi paints a different tale. She is an avid supporter of “Israel”, as seen in her bio, which features an Israeli flag, and has even called for US and Israeli strikes on her own country, the last time being just a few days ago:
Perhaps more interestingly, she is also an avid monarchist, who advocates giving power to a man whose sole claim to fame is being born with a saffron spoon in his mouth and who has gone on record saying he doesn’t know what he’ll be going back to, if he ever returns to Iran, suggesting he may live between the US and Iran because he has spent his entire life in the US.
This is the same man who thought showing pictures of himself doing yoga would somehow give him better optics.
One prominent Iranian dissident, Ruhollah Zam, who was involved in directing anti-Iran operations (including teaching rioters how to make homemade weapons through his Amad News Telegram channels), and later captured and repatriated in an intelligence operation, has also gone on record years ago telling people in a video call that he’s seen the late shah’s son practising inspecting troops in front of his bedroom mirror.
Iran Disinformation Project
One short-lived project started directly with US State Department funding was the Iran Disinformation Project, after, according to The Guardian, “it was found to be trolling US journalists, human rights activists and academics it deemed to be insufficiently hostile to the government in Tehran.”
Once @IranDisinfo began targeting mainstream journalists for not being radically anti-Iran, buzzers went off, and their funding was cut. “The bulk of the work by @IranDisinfo has been in line with the scope of a project with the Department of State. We have, however, identified recent tweets that fall outside the scope of the project to counter foreign state propaganda or disinformation,” one State Department spokesperson said.
The tweets in question were then deleted, but funding was not restored. The page can still be seen on Twitter, inactive since 2019.
Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran
One of the most effective organizations funded by the National Endowment for Democracy is the Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran, co-founded by dissident sisters Ladan and Roya Boroumand. Its board of directors features prominent neocon-turned-something-or-other Francis Fukuyama (post-neocon liberal institutionalist is what my search tells me he is, and for some reason, that’s an actual thing), and prominent Iranian celebrities, such as Nazanin Boniadi.
In 2024, NED presented its “partner” Roya Boroumand a medal “in recognition of her leadership and dedication to the promotion of human rights and democracy in Iran.”
In particular, the NED statement read: “Roya along with her sister Ladan Boroumand, a former Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow at NED, have dedicated their lives to upholding human rights in Iran.”
From 2011 to 2024, the Boroumand Center received $13.5 million in tax-exempt donations in the US. Before that, information suggests that it was bankrolled by contributions from foundations, such as the influential right-wing Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars each year per donor.
The Boroumand Center has also collaborated with and received funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations.
Curiously, the Center’s What We Do page reads: “Our goal is to prepare for a peaceful and democratic transition in Iran and build a more just future.”
One would think that people who are so avid to preserve democracy and democratic practices, even being honored with prestigious awards for their work, would do better than to amplify a call for the firing of Iranian academics in the US asking questions about the Mossad’s involvement in the riots, particularly ones as distinguished as Hamid Dabashi.
On Jan 12, Ladan Boroumand also amplified a post by Iranian dissident Omid Shams in which he discussed how an attack on Iran can be justified under “humanitarian intervention”.
It seems that a recurring theme of Iranian dissidents abroad is how hard they all cheer for strikes on their own country, but none have taken it as far as Masih Alinejad, who seems to have spearheaded the opposition, much to the chagrin of many dissidents who call her an opportunist.
Through her work in VOA Farsi (VOA meaning Voice of America, because it’s an American network), which is directly funded by the State Department, through which Alinejad has called for strikes, regime change, sanctions, and all manner of actions by the US against her country, she has catapulted into the frontlines of the opposition. She has also received hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments for her work with VOA Farsi.
A regime-change ecosystem
So the next time you’re told, very solemnly, that “2,000 protesters were killed, activists say,” it may be worth asking a dangerous question: which activists, funded by whom, operating from where, and with what openly stated political objectives?
Because what emerges here isn’t an ecosystem of independent human rights advocacy, but a tightly interlinked industry of regime-change NGOs, generously financed by US government cutouts, recycled endlessly through Western newsrooms that treat “Virginia-based Iranian activists” as a substitute for on-the-ground verification.
Maybe the real miracle isn’t that these figures are uncritically repeated, but that after Iraq’s WMDs, Libya’s humanitarian war, Syria’s “moderate rebels”, and every other CIA-flavored moral crusade, we’re still expected to gasp in awe when someone from the mainstream has “trust me bro” for a source.
January 16, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Iran, United States |
Leave a comment
A welcome letter
Dear Valued Patient,
Welcome.
We’re so pleased you found us. Or rather, that we found you, though you may not remember exactly how it happened. Perhaps you mentioned sadness that lasted more than two weeks. Perhaps you admitted to worry. Perhaps a teacher noticed your child had too much energy, or not enough, or the wrong kind at the wrong time. No matter. You’re here now. That’s what counts.
First, let us assure you: this is not your fault. You have a condition. A real, medical condition, confirmed by a checklist, validated by a billing code, and now officially part of your permanent record. You’re not weak. You’re not broken. You’re sick. Doesn’t that feel better already?
We know you may have once believed that your suffering had meaning. That grief was love’s receipt. That anxiety was wisdom trying to speak. That your child’s wildness was life itself looking for room to move. We’ve heard all of this before. We’ve noted it in your file. It falls under “Resistance to Treatment” and “Poor Insight,” both of which, interestingly, are also symptoms. But here’s what science has discovered: feelings that persist are symptoms. Experiences that disrupt are disorders. And the body’s ancient signaling system, the one that kept your ancestors alive long enough to produce you? A chemical error. Fortunately, we now have chemicals to fix the chemicals. You’re welcome.
What You’ve Gained
As a member of our industry, you now have access to:
- A name for what’s wrong with you (selected from our current catalog)
- Medications clinically proven to reduce the intensity of being alive
- A support team who will monitor your progress toward feeling less
- Periodic check-ins to adjust dosage based on how much of yourself remains
You may notice some changes. Colors may seem less vivid. Music may stop reaching you the way it once did. Orgasms may become a memory you’re not sure you’re remembering correctly. These are signs the treatment is working. Please do not confuse returning aliveness for wellness. That feeling you had before, the one that brought you here, that was the disease.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long will I need treatment? Most patients require lifelong management. Think of it like insulin, except for your soul.
What if I feel worse? This is common. It means we haven’t found the right combination yet. Stay the course. There are many options. We can always add more.
What if I want to stop? We’d ask you to examine that impulse carefully. The desire to feel your feelings again is often a sign of relapse. Your brain has been corrected. Going back now would be like choosing disease.
Can I ever be cured? We don’t use that word. But with compliance, you can achieve something even better: symptom management with minimal breakthrough emotion.
Share Your Journey
Now that you have a diagnosis, it’s time to tell the world.
Post it. Pin it to your bio. Add it to your Instagram highlights. Change your Twitter handle. You are no longer just a person with a name. You are a person with a condition, and conditions deserve visibility.
Use the hashtags. Join the communities. Find your tribe. You’ll discover thousands of others just like you, sharing their medication selfies, their symptom lists, their before-and-after stories. You will be seen. You will be validated. Strangers will leave heart emojis beneath your pain. Isn’t that what healing looks like?
Don’t be shy. Vulnerability is currency now. The more you share, the more you belong. And if anyone questions your diagnosis, remember: that’s stigma. Block them. They are part of the problem.
Your disorder is your story. Your story is your brand. Your brand is your identity. And your identity, as we’ve discussed, is permanent.
So go ahead. Tell everyone. We’ll be here when you get back.
A Note on Gratitude
You’re lucky, you know. In another era, you might have been told to sit with it. To feel your way through. To let grief crack you open. To treat your anxiety as a messenger rather than a malfunction. You might have been surrounded by people instead of professionals. You might have been asked what happened to you rather than what’s wrong with you.
But you live now. And we have built an entire world to catch you. Billboards. Commercials. Sponsored content. Quizzes that always confirm what you already suspected. Doctors with ten minutes and a prescription pad. Pharmacies on every corner. A pipeline so smooth you’ll barely notice you’re inside it.
We’ve made it so easy. Your insurance covers it. Your employer encourages it. Your friends will understand. And someday, when you’re sitting in a room, feeling very little, wondering if something got lost along the way, you can comfort yourself with this: at least you weren’t difficult.
Welcome to the industry.
We’re so glad you’re ours.
Warmly,
The Psychiatric Industry
P.S. If this letter has stirred any strong feelings, please contact your provider immediately.
January 15, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular |
Leave a comment
Scott Ritter, a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer, RT contributor and critic of American foreign policy, has said he has been “de-banked” and that US federal authorities are likely behind his bank’s decision.
Ritter served as a UN weapons inspector in Iraq in the 1990s. He opposed the 2003 US invasion, arguing that Saddam Hussein’s government did not possess weapons of mass destruction, contrary to Washington’s now-debunked claims. He later became an independent journalist and political commentator and has cooperated with international media, including RT.
On Thursday, Ritter wrote on his website that “today my banking institution of 26 years, Citizens Bank, declared that they were ending their banking relationship with me.”
“My accounts were zeroed out without explanation,” he added.
Ritter said the move may have been a unilateral de-risking decision by Citizens Bank, but that it “does not preclude federal involvement.”
He noted that the “Northern District of New York empaneled a Grand Jury targeting me back in August 2024,” on suspicion of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act. He believes federal authorities had obtained all his banking information through Grand Jury subpoenas.
“What I am beginning to suspect is that someone in the FBI, fully armed with the totality of my banking transactions… “tipped off” Citizen’s Bank about “suspicious activity” that resulted in Citizen’s Bank issuing a SAR [Suspicious Activity Report],” Ritter wrote.
Ritter said donations he received and subsequent cash withdrawals before his three trips to Russia in 2025 may have triggered the move. He added that he had carried $10,000 in cash each trip because Russia is “disconnected from the Western digital economy.”
According to Ritter, the “purpose of “de-banking” is to harass a targeted individual,” even in the absence of evidence pointing to any criminal activity.
In June 2024, Ritter’s passport was seized by the US government when he attempted to board a flight to attend the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.
Several months later, FBI agents searched Ritter’s home, which he described as an “act of intimidation” for his journalistic work. Ritter said the agents accused him of working “on behalf of the Russian government,” an allegation he has denied.
January 15, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | FBI, Human rights, United States |
1 Comment
The notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, widely believed to be an Israeli intelligence asset, played a behind-the-scenes role in nurturing the secret relationship between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) years before the 2020 Abraham Accords, newly leaked communications reveal.
The revelations emerge from newly obtained material published by Drop Site News as part of an ongoing investigation into Epstein’s political and intelligence connections. The documents, spanning more than a decade, shed light on Epstein’s long-standing friendship with Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, the powerful head of the UAE’s DP World, and suggest that Epstein used his connections to promote Israeli commercial, military and surveillance technology in Emirati‑controlled logistics hubs.
Leaked emails show that Epstein not only facilitated strategic ties between Israel and the UAE, but also operated in a context ripe for the gathering or circulation of compromising material—so-called kompromat—on powerful elites. In one exchange, Sulayem joked about wanting “some PUSSYNESS” rather than “BUSINESS” in reference to a mutual female contact. Epstein responded approvingly: “praise Allah, there are still people like you.”
Epstein, who was later found to have registered a neighbouring private island in Sulayem’s name, also forwarded sexually explicit material from a separate scandal involving a Liberian official to JPMorgan executive Jes Staley—further showing his role in distributing content of a compromising nature among political and financial elites.
These instances, coupled with Epstein’s facilitation of meetings and shared travel among Israeli, Emirati and Western intelligence-linked figures, have raised serious questions about whether personal vulnerabilities were exploited to advance geopolitical objectives.
The leaks show Epstein’s efforts to insert Israeli strategic interests into UAE-led economic expansion across the Red Sea and Horn of Africa, including in Somaliland and Djibouti. These moves are thought to be essential in laying the groundwork for the UAE’s more recent push to recognise Somaliland as an independent state, a move formally backed by Israel last month.
The emails further reveal Epstein’s attempt to broker investment from Emirati elites in Israeli cybersecurity firm Carbyne, which later received backing from the UAE following the Abraham Accords. The company was founded by a former officer of Israel’s Unit 8200, the military’s elite signals intelligence division responsible for electronic surveillance, cyber operations and mass data collection on Palestinians and other regional targets.
Carbyne has since received millions of dollars in investment from Emirati‑linked entities, raising concerns that surveillance and data‑gathering technologies closely associated with Israeli military intelligence are being embedded within port operations and security infrastructure under UAE control.
Evidence of Epstein arranging high-level meetings between former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Sulayem further demonstrates his role in establishing personal connections that would later underpin formal diplomatic ties.
In one such exchange, Epstein emailed Barak suggesting, “He is the right hand of Maktoum. I think you should meet,” referring to Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai and the UAE’s vice president and prime minister. Barak would later go on to serve as chairman of Carbyne.
Drop Site reports also highlight Epstein’s apparent efforts to provide Emirati elites with access to elite Israeli medical care, using personal contacts to connect Sulayem’s family with neurologists in Israel. This level of trust, the investigation notes, served as a platform for deeper strategic cooperation.
The timing of Epstein’s involvement is significant. Following his 2009 conviction, he re-emerged into elite circles and intensified efforts to build influence across political, financial and intelligence networks. One of Epstein’s key associates, Sulayem, would go on to become a vocal proponent of normalising ties with Israel, including publicly backing the recognition of Somaliland.
This revelation comes amid growing scrutiny of how the Abraham Accords were shaped not just by public diplomacy but by decades of covert networking, influence operations and shared intelligence priorities between Israel and Abu Dhabi. The UAE has long sought regional dominance through military and commercial control of key sea lanes, a vision increasingly aligned with Israel’s own strategic ambitions.
Drop Site hints at the possible use of kompromat and coercion as tools of statecraft by Israeli agencies operating through proxies like Epstein. While no direct evidence of blackmail has yet emerged, the deeply personal nature of Epstein’s relationships and the sensitive political contexts involved raise serious concerns.
As Israel continues to entrench its military presence in Somaliland, with UAE support, the long-term consequences of these covert partnerships are becoming ever more apparent, not just for Palestinians but for the future of the Horn of Africa.
January 15, 2026
Posted by aletho |
Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | Africa, Israel, UAE, Zionism |
Leave a comment
A report from the Serbian website Vaseljenska has published two leaked documents, purportedly from the Security Service of Ukraine (SZBU), detailing a high-stakes plan to manipulate the upcoming Hungarian elections in favor of the Tisza Party.
According to the report, the Zelensky government established a “Special Working Group for Hungarian parliamentary elections” as early as September 2025 to ensure a victory for the opposition at any cost.
Notably, Hungarians living abroad can vote in Hungary’s national elections, and among those voters are ethnic Hungarians who live in Western Ukraine. This group may play a key role in the upcoming national elections.
The leaked strategy, which cannot be confirmed in regard to its authenticity, allegedly involves aggressive measures against Transcarpathian Hungarians, ranging from alleged electoral fraud to even a “false flag” operation.
The documents suggest that Kyiv views a shift in Hungarian leadership as vital for Ukraine’s strategic interests. Certainly, this is a reality for the Zelensky government.
For one, Hungary currently refuses to ship weapons to Ukraine. Second, Budapest has been instrumental in holding up weapons packages from the EU, while also criticizing the amount of taxpayer money being sent to Kyiv, which has often ended up being used for corrupt purposes. Third, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has also blocked Ukraine’s EU membership accession process.
While countries often have a strategic interest in the election outcomes in other countries, Ukraine’s current state of war means the country may pursue its interests more aggressively than a country at peace. In short, even if these leaked documents cannot be authenticated or even if they are outright fabricated, it is clear that Zelensky has a vested interest in seeing Orbán out of power.
One document, reportedly sent to Prime Minister Yulia Sviridenko, notes that the Tisza Party “supports Ukraine’s accession to the EU and NATO.” The Ukrainians allegedly believe that “if the [Hungarian] opposition gains 3-4 more seats in the new parliament, it could be a decisive factor and ensure that the forces supporting Ukraine come to power in Hungary.”
To achieve this, the SZBU reportedly recommended conducting three key actions.
The first is voter surveillance, which means identifying Ukrainian citizens of Hungarian descent who cast mail-in ballots in 2022 to “define and control” them.
The second alleged method would involve postal fraud, which means intercepting the mail sent to the Hungarian Central Election Commission, with the intent “to destroy 40% of the letters containing the ballots cast in favour of Fidesz.”
The third method would involve targeted mobilization efforts, which would place political pressure on ethnic Hungarians.
It is also worth noting that support for Orbán has been extremely high in past elections from this population.
Intimidation and “false flag” terror plans
The alleged report further details a campaign of intimidation targeting Transcarpathian Hungarians, whose support for Viktor Orbán was assessed by Ukrainian intelligence as “alarmingly high.” Proposed measures for activists in cities like Beregsász and Ungvár include wiretapping, surveillance, and “further mobilization measures” — often interpreted as a euphemism for sending political opponents to the front lines.
The most shocking revelation involves a potential terrorist act intended to intimidate the population and disrupt the election.
The alleged attack would utilize drones assembled from captured Russian parts to ensure they are identified “as aircraft of the aggressor state.”
The goal would be a strike on a civilian facility near the border to provide a pretext for a stricter state of war in Transcarpathia. This would allow for the closing of borders and the suspension of postal services, effectively blocking the electoral process.
The Serbian report frames these leaks against a backdrop of increasing tension between Kyiv and Budapest. It notes that the Ukrainian security forces have shifted their focus toward ethnic Hungarians because “Kyiv has long distrusted this community because of its proximity to Budapest,” following Viktor Orbán’s refusal to support Ukrainian war efforts at the expense of Hungarian citizens.
Again, this document cannot be verified. However, given that the country is at war and given their willingness to conduct assassinations and other covert operations, Hungarian authorities may be worried about the electoral integrity of the election in Transcarpathia.
Regardless of any potential Ukrainian actions, the role of this ethnic Hungarian population may be significantly diminished in the upcoming election. Before the war, the population numbered approximately 150,000. However, since the war broke out, some estimates indicate the population may have been cut in half, with some dying at the front but many fleeing to other countries, including neighboring Hungary.
January 15, 2026
Posted by aletho |
False Flag Terrorism | Hungary, Ukraine |
Leave a comment
Aletho News 
