Zenith of Western asymmetric warfare in Iran and Ukraine
By Drago Bosnic | June 16, 2025
Achieving strategic advantage over your opponents has been at the center of every conflict in human history. In modern times, this is accomplished with long-range strike systems and weapons of mass destruction. However, countries that are at a disadvantage in that regard can opt for asymmetric methods to achieve similar or sometimes even more efficient results. Ever since the advent of nuclear weapons, direct conflicts between global powers have been avoided, as all sides understand there would be no winners in such a war (or at least they did until recently).
Thus, the importance of intelligence services and other forms of non-kinetic warfare grew exponentially. The ability to infiltrate your opponent’s state apparatus is of the utmost importance, while maintaining plausible deniability adds to the strategic depth of defense, as the attacker can simply deny the involvement of its special services.
The political West has been at the forefront of such operations for years, targeting all of its opponents through asymmetric means, particularly through proxies. This is especially true for Russia, which still has major issues with the Kiev regime agents infiltrating the country and conducting operations of strategic importance. The latest attacks on Russian strategic aviation are a testament to that. It should be noted that Moscow’s services have been quite successful in detecting Western agents as they have decades of experience in doing so.
However, Ukrainian operatives are a different story. Namely, the vast majority of Ukrainians speak fluent Russian and can easily blend in virtually anywhere in the country. They can also obtain Russian citizenship, meaning they could be largely under the radar for years. It’s exceedingly difficult to uncover such plots, particularly if they’re being conducted over the course of several years.
This also holds true for other countries of the multipolar world, including Iran, which has been heavily infiltrated by foreign agents, as evidenced by the sheer number of assassinations and so-called decapitation strikes on top Iranian commanders. It’s still unclear how exactly Israel managed to create such a large network of its agents within Iran, but their operations have had a strategic impact on the ongoing conflict.
The Mossad had very close ties with the SAVAK, former Iranian secret police and intelligence service during the Shah era, so it’s quite possible that the Israelis maintained contacts with their Iranian associates even after 1979. They could’ve easily played the role of sleeper agents who were activated by Israel at the moment of the strike. In addition, new operatives could’ve infiltrated Iran from neighboring countries, particularly Azerbaijan which maintains a close partnership with Israel.
Apart from being a major client for the Israeli Military Industrial Complex (MIC), which was instrumental in Baku’s takeover of native Armenian lands in Artsakh (better known as Nagorno-Karabakh), Azerbaijan also has irredentist ambitions toward northwestern Iran, where a homonymous area has more ethnic Azeris than the South Caucasus country itself. The regime in Baku certainly sees the ongoing events as a perfect opportunity to achieve its goals, which could be a major factor in Israeli operations.
Numerous observers have also pointed out the many similarities between the actions of the Kiev regime and Israel, as both have been conducting these asymmetric hybrid attacks deep within Russia and Iran, respectively. The drones that were used in attacks on Moscow’s long-range aviation and Iranian air defenses operate in a virtually identical manner, targeting strategic assets from within.
There are two possibilities in this case. Either the Mossad is involved in training the SBU and/or GUR, or they’re all connected into a much larger network run from Washington DC and London. The latter is much likelier, as both SBU and GUR have strong ties with the CIA and MI6, respectively. In other words, the US-led political West is conducting these operations in an attempt to secure a strategic advantage over its rivals.
This is also done through so-called “international” organizations such as the UN, OSCE, IAEA, etc. For instance, after the start of the special military operation (SMO), Russian military intelligence uncovered that OSCE, which is supposed to be a neutral organization monitoring the ceasefire, was actually helping the Kiev regime target Russian forces by giving the former access to its cameras along the frontline. Moscow promptly ordered OSCE personnel to leave after this.
Some sources are reporting that the IAEA also did something similar in Iran, by giving Israel information on the identity of Iranian nuclear scientists. If true, this could explain how the Mossad was so effective in eliminating them virtually on the first day of the attack. In addition to scientists, a large number of high-ranking Iranian military officers were eliminated within the country. This is perfectly in line with the political West’s doctrine of so-called “decapitation” attacks that aim to paralyze the chain of command in a targeted country.
Many of the most prominent warmongers in Washington DC have been calling for such strikes, even against opponents like Russia. And indeed, in the last several years, there have been a number of assassination attempts against top-ranking Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin himself. Once again, this was done through proxies such as the Neo-Nazi junta.
In some cases, this could’ve also worked, as evidenced by disturbing revelations regarding the mysterious death of the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and his Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian. The aftermath of Raisi’s death has been disastrous for Iran and its Axis of Resistance. By the end of last year, Syria fell to NATO’s terrorist proxies, while Hezbollah’s long-time leader Hassan Nasrallah was assassinated, followed by a number of high-ranking Iranian and pro-Iranian figures at around a similar time.
The strategic consequences of these events cannot be overstated, meaning that the idea they were purely accidental is extremely unlikely, to put it mildly. By the time Israel attacked Iran, the geopolitical situation in the Middle East shifted dramatically in Israel’s favor. This made launching strategic attacks much easier, as it didn’t have to worry about Syrian air defenses.
Mossad operatives on the ground used not only drones, but also missiles (such as the “Spike NLOS”). Worse yet, it seems they didn’t even have to stay in the country to launch these strikes, as both drones and missiles were controlled remotely, which is yet another indicator of the same modus operandi used by the Kiev regime. Military sources indicate that Israel also used portable electronic warfare (EW) systems to disrupt Iranian air defenses, making it far easier for its missiles to reach targets within Iran.
As previously mentioned, this sort of deep infiltration also enabled Israel to assassinate top-ranking personnel. Reportedly, this includes General Mohammad Bagheri, the Chief of the Iranian General Staff; Hossein Salami, Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and David Sheikhian, commanding officer of the IRGC’s air defenses. Many other senior military leaders were also killed.
Although Israeli strikes were far more efficient than those launched by the Kiev regime, it’s impossible not to draw parallels with high-profile assassinations of numerous Russian public and military figures, including Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the late commander of Russian NBC Protection Troops, who was killed in a terrorist attack back in mid-December. It should be noted that he was investigating US involvement in biological warfare in NATO-occupied Ukraine and was in no way connected to military operations against the Neo-Nazi junta forces.
Thus, the only logical conclusion is that his assassination was certainly not conducted by the SBU of their own volition. Namely, such operations require significant resources that would be reserved for important operations to undermine the Russian military. The only thing that was undermined is the investigation into the Pentagon’s massive biowarfare program.
The Kiev regime conducted many similar attacks on Russian scientists, including Daniil Mikheev, a coordinator of new unmanned systems for the Ministry of Defense; Konstantin Ogarkov, an employee of a defense research institute in Voronezh; Igor Kolesnikov, an engineer at a design bureau in the Tula oblast (region); Sergei Potapov, a cybersecurity defense specialist from Nizhny Novgorod; Valery Smirnov, one of the leading experts in programs for radio-electronic protection of strategic facilities.
In January 2024, a car with officers from the electronic intelligence headquarters in the Bryansk oblast was blown up, while on the night of April 17-18, Evgeny Rytnikov, the head of the design bureau of the Bryansk Electromechanical Plant, the developer of the now legendary “Krasukha” EW systems, was also killed. Such assassinations are a testament to the terrorist nature of the Neo-Nazi junta, as all these people were non-combatants.
Among the prominent Iranian scientists killed by Mossad were Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, Dr. Ahmad Reza Zolfaghari, Dr. Abdolhamid Minuchehr, Dr. Amir Hosein Fekhi and Dr. Fereydoun Abbasi. Once again, it’s impossible not to draw parallels, despite the fact that Israeli strikes were far more strategically consequential.
Still, the main conclusion is that the political West continues to use its proxies to wage war on several countries simultaneously, while also maintaining plausible deniability.
The only way to counter such attacks is for the targeted countries to enforce tighter control over communications, as well as enlarge their intelligence apparatus. While these measures could be seen as “totalitarian” (and will no doubt be presented as such by the mainstream propaganda machine), there’s simply no other way to blunt the blade of the political West’s modern asymmetric hybrid warfare.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Seven Lies about Israel’s Attack on Iran
By Harrison Mann – Zeteo – June 14, 2025
“The first casualty of war is truth” is such a tired cliché – and one so self-evident to anyone who served in the US intelligence community – that I only dare to put it in writing because this week the lies literally did start flying before the bombs Israel dropped on Iran, in what we can now safely call the start of a full-scale war. If we want any hope of interrupting a disastrous cycle of escalation, we need to intercept the volley of lies that have already been launched out of Tel Aviv and Washington.
1. Iran was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon
Before, during, and after the first wave of Israeli airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and military and nuclear leadership, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed Iran was about to produce nuclear bombs – which he’s been warning since the 90s. Setting aside the Iranian government’s own denial that it was pursuing nuclear weapons – Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei suspended Iran’s nuclear program in 2003 – both the International Atomic Energy Association and Trump’s Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have affirmed earlier this year that Iran was not trying to build a nuclear weapon.
2. Israel’s attack on Iran was a preemptive strike required for self-defense
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz called the strikes “preemptive.” To preempt what? Preparations for a large-scale military operation are very hard to hide, whether it’s Russia invading Ukraine, Israel bombing Iran, or a supposed Iranian offensive against the state of Israel. Had the Iranian military – which is monitored obsessively by multiple US intelligence agencies – actually been staging for an attack on Israel, the Trump administration would be well aware and offering much more muscular support than it has so far. If Thursday’s strikes were to preempt anything, it was progress on the US-Iran nuclear talks that the Iranian government (if not our own) appeared to be pursuing in good faith.
3. Israeli military operations will prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon
This is really two fallacies in one. First, a bombing campaign simply cannot reliably destroy a nuclear program composed of dispersed personnel (even though Israel has been able to assassinate some of them) and deep subterranean facilities whose conditions are difficult to verify from afar. As Israel’s National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi acknowledged Friday, destroying the program “cannot be done via kinetic means,” a conclusion consistent with my experience in the US intelligence community. The only way to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program with certainty is to have the Iranian government do it voluntarily, or through a ground invasion that would be needed to enter facilities by force.
This leads us to the second fallacy: That the purpose of Israel’s offensive is to dismantle the nuclear program. Knowing that airstrikes and covert operations can’t actually destroy Iran’s nuclear research and uranium enrichment capabilities, what does Netanyahu hope to achieve with his newest war? “Striking Iran’s nuclear program, striking its ballistic missile capabilities; attacking its capacity to destroy Israel via a ground attack,” Israeli media wrote, citing Tzachi Hanegbi. In other words, total pacification or de facto regime change, which is what the Israeli government has already demanded – and more or less helped achieve – in Lebanon and Syria over the past year. Given the strength and scale of the Iranian state, the only way Israel could realistically achieve this is through the US military.
4. The United States is not responsible for Israel’s attack
Shortly after Israel’s first strikes, Secretary of State Marco Rubio released a statement declaring, “We are not involved in strikes against Iran,” in an apparent attempt to distance the United States from the bombing and discourage reprisals from Iran against US troops in the region. He was quickly overruled by Trump, who cheered on the attacks and claimed he had full advance knowledge. No matter who knew what, and whether Trump explicitly gave Netanyahu a “green light” for the strikes, the United States literally fuels the Israeli war machine – the planes bombing Tehran this week use American jet fuel – and provides the munitions, repair parts, and other supplies needed to keep the Israeli military running day-to-day. Without that support – or without the hundreds of US troops manning air defense batteries in Israel right now – Israel would be unable to launch attacks in the region with impunity.
5. The attack will bring Iran to the table for a nuclear deal
Whether or not Trump actually believes in his post-strike appeal that “Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left,” reaching an agreement gets exponentially harder to do when Israel assassinates a top adviser on Iran’s nuclear negotiations. And the fact that Trump let Israel launch a massive attack while Washington and Tehran were in the middle of nuclear negotiations will prove to Tehran that it has nothing to gain from further talks. Plus, Netanyahu’s pledge for a long war against Iran means Tehran increasingly has little to lose by sprinting for a nuclear weapon.
6. Attacking the Iranian government will lead to a coup
Washington proponents of regime change in Iran have long hoped that weakening Iran’s rulers – whether through sanctions or now, a military blitz – would inspire Iranian people to rise up against their government. After this week’s attacks, this expectation has even less basis in reality than usual. However unpopular Khamenei may be in some sectors of Iranian society, he is not the one striking apartment buildings in Tehran.
7. Israel can “drag” the United States into a war against Iran*
Both opponents and supporters of war with Iran understand that Netanyahu needs the United States military to do most of the fighting and worry – or hope – that he will “drag” the US into a new conflict. But no matter what Israel does – and even no matter what Iran does – an American war on Iran remains a war of choice. If the Trump administration bombs or invades Iran, it’s because they wanted to, not because Netanyahu somehow forced them.
Given the disastrous regional consequences, which would likely dwarf the fallout from the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we should be clear that agency lies in Washington and nowhere else.
* ISRAEL – PALESTINE NEWS NOTES: Israel may not be able to drag the US into a war with Iran – but the Israel lobby can use its almost unlimited power to do almost anything.]
Harrison Mann is a former US Army major and executive officer of the Defense Intelligence Agency’s Middle East/Africa Regional Center who resigned in protest of his office’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza under the Biden administration. He is currently with Win Without War.
The Nova Music Festival Exhibit: An Exercise in Racist Porn Propaganda to Justify Genocide
By Karin Brothers | Global Research | June 12, 2025
The Nova Music Festival Exhibit now touring North America is described on its website as:
… an in-depth remembrance of the brutal massacre at The Nova Music Festival on October 7th, 2023. The installation sets out to recreate a festival dedicated to peace and love that was savagely cut short by a terrorist attack on that fateful day. The attack at The Nova Music Festival was the largest massacre in music history. This groundbreaking installation is presented as a way to empower visitors to responsibly explore & bear witness to the tragic events of October 7 and its aftermath. …
The exhibit, now in Toronto, has been shown in New York, Los Angeles, and Miami. Its purpose (besides raising money and membership “for the Nova community”) is implicitly to rationalize Israel’s extermination of Gazans by generating hatred of Palestinians as inhumane and terrorist. The Hamas breakout, presented with no context, portrays it as sex-fueled and wantonly destructive.
I was aware that independent investigators had discredited Israeli claims that on October 7th Hamas had committed rapes, “killed babies” or burned them, but I wanted to examine the legitimacy of this exhibit because the Toronto school board had sent students to it.
Tickets ranged in price from $28 to $360 with everything over $18 donated to “the Nova community”. I wondered about the exhibit’s requirement not to wear a face covering unless “medically essential”.
When I arrived at the venue with my ticket (which could only be purchased online, after providing my home address and e-mail address), I was met with a sign that said by entering the exhibit, I consented to having my photo taken. So one of the costs of this exhibit was being coerced into sacrificing facial recognition privacy: a facial biometric scan connected to key information. (Was it a coincidence that two e-mail accounts ceased to function due to a “system error” after I purchased the tickets? Days later, it’s not clear that they can ever be recovered.) On entering, visitors had to pass through metal-checking gates and searches similar to those in airports.
The exhibit venue is in a mammoth structure that appeared to have been a mall. Most of the space was devoted to the exhibit, with a gift shop and a large seated area for membership and donation pitches for “the Nova community” or “the Nova Tribe” at the end. The dark, cavernous exhibit space tried to recreate what it would have been like at the abandoned festival site, with signs and dozens of computer screens featuring witness accounts and other information. An introductory sign at the beginning claimed that on October 7, 2023, three thousand “Hamas terrorists” entered Israel, raping and burning people. An introductory film, probably a reenactment, showed a packed Nova crowd jumping up and down and waving their arms to music before a “red alert” at around 6:30 am.
The computer screens, along with written signs, included what were claimed to be witness reports of sexual abuse and rape. The first was from first responders “Zaka” and a Rami Davidian, who both made pornographic claims that they found abused women who were naked, tied to trees with legs “spreadeagled” [sic]. Another exhibit claimed that Hamas sexually abused “both sexes”.
Intensive investigations, including one by Max Blumenthal(1), found that there was no evidence to support the claims of rape, or of the burning or killing of “babies” (one child was killed by accident). An early UN report that seemed to echo the sexual abuse claims was presented with the admission that the Special Rapporteur had “gone dark”, implicitly questioning the discredited accounts.(2)
Continuing through the exhibit, visitors pass the computer screens while wandering through what looks like hastily abandoned campsites, mock- ups of concrete shelters and a few incinerated, deformed cars. A sign at the end claims that (despite virtually all captives’ reports) Hamas beats and starves the hostages. Handwritten cards were on display through the end of the exhibit that appear to be visitor feedback, which showed how emotionally affected many were by the exhibit.
The exhibit played on the self-serving stereotypes of Jewish victimhood and Palestinian “terrorism”, clearly designed to leave naive visitors with a hatred of Palestinians and a rationalization for their extermination. The pornographic rape accounts, which were discredited well before the exhibit was put together, are at the shocking heart of this show. I saw no pictures of the fleet of Israeli tanks or of the helicopter gunships that came out on that day, despite open publication in Israeli media. There was no explanation of how Hamas fighters with hand-held weapons were able to incinerate about 80 cars along with their festival occupants. I saw no mention of the Nova victims’ calls for help that went unheeded for over eight hours that day.
I did not see any mention in the exhibit that Israel had invoked its “Hannibal Directive”(3) — which allowed the killing of Israelis to prevent them taken as hostages. This directive was responsible for much of the day’s slaughter. Despite Israeli calls for their government to hold an independent investigation into what happened on October 7th, and how people were killed, none is scheduled.
No background to the October 7, 2023, event is provided: no mention of Gaza being under a brutal military occupation since 1967, no mention of Gazans being illegally incarcerated for over 20 years, no mention of Israel’s illegal blockade since 2006, its illegal takeover of one third of Gaza’s agricultural land, most of its fishing zone, and no mention of daily Israeli attacks on Gaza by land, sea and air. Or the fact that Gazans have been incarcerated with virtually no potable water on land that the UN claimed could not sustain life after 2020. Richard Falk, the former United Nations Special Rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, not only called the Hamas breakout on October 7th “entirely justifiable”, given the context, but “long overdue”.(4)
The Hamas suicide mission was not to kill Israelis but to capture hostages connected to the Israeli military bases around Gaza’s border to exchange for the thousands of Palestinians held by Israel. Soon after the hostages’ arrival in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar told the Israelis that they would be safe and returned in a hostage exchange within a day or two.(5) Hamas did not expect the presence of the Nova rave event; its placement near Gaza’s border had been named just two days earlier.(6)
School boards that encourage students to visit this exhibit demonstrate a political agenda and a lack of responsibility to both the students and the greater community. The Toronto District School Board (TDSB), the largest school board in Canada, sent students to this exhibit while banning the joint Israeli-Palestinian and Academy award-winning “No Other Land” as “political”. Palestinian children in at least one TDSB elementary school are already confronted with hate- filled jibes that “Kids in Gaza deserve what they get.” Exposing students (or anyone else) to this exhibit can be expected to turn them against any justice for Palestinians unless they come with an understanding of the historical context and are able to identify the exhibit’s lies, omissions and half-truths. Given this school board’s bias, that preparation is unlikely.
This exhibit moves to Washington, D.C. in late June, 2025.
Karin Brothers is a freelance writer. She is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Notes
1. “Mass rape by Hamas on Oct 7? NYT coverage questioned by Max Blumenthal: Rising debated”. The Hill. January 4, 2024. https://thehill.com/video/mass-rape-by-hamas-on-oct-7-nyt-coverage-questioned-by-max-blumenthal-rising-debated/9302297/
2 Feminist Solidarity Network for Palestine. “Here’s what Pramila Patten’s UN report on Oct 7 sexual violence actually said”. Mondoweiss. March 11, 2024.
https://mondoweiss.net/2024/03/heres-what-pramila-pattens-un-report-on-oct-7-sexual-violence-actually-said/
3. “Israeli army used Hannibal Directive during October 7 Hamas attack: Report”. Al Jazeera. July 7, 2024.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/7/israeli-army-used-hannibal-directive-during-october-7-hamas-attack-report
4. “Ex-UN Rapporteur: October 7 Attack By Hamas Was ‘Long Overdue’”. Matsav. April 7, 2025.
https://matzav.com/ex-un-rapporteur-october-7-attack-by-hamas-was-long-overdue/
5. Harel, Amos. “Hamas Leader Sinwar Met Israeli Hostages in Gaza Strip Tunnels Day After October 7 Massacre”. Ha’aretz. November 28, 2023.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-28/ty-article/.premium/hamas-leader-sinwar-met-israeli-hostages-in-gaza-strip-tunnels/0000018c-12d6-d65f-a7dd-f2d75b9f0000
6. Blumenthal, Max, Maté, Aaron. “Zero hour in Gaza – The Grayzone live.” Friday, October 13, 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-p2bjA2b4U
US President Trump Streamlined the National Endowment for Democracy, not Dismantled it
By Brian Berletic – New Eastern Outlook – June 11, 2025
While many believe that under the Trump administration the controversial National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was defunded, dismantled, or otherwise dissolved, the reality is far less dramatic and far more dangerous.
Despite President Donald Trump’s outspoken criticism of global entanglements and calls of “ending the era of endless wars,” stretching back all the way to his first term in office, the NED not only continues to receive taxpayer funding under his administration to facilitate instability and conflict worldwide, it has quietly expanded its reach behind a newly adopted policy that makes its activities less transparent than ever.
On its official website, the NED recently revealed what it calls a “duty to care” policy – an internal shift that effectively ends the organization’s long-standing practice of openly listing most of the foreign organizations and movements it finances. This change, framed as a protective measure for recipients in “high-risk environments,” marks a complete reversal of one of the few things that previously distinguished NED operations from covert CIA influence campaigns – the veneer of transparency.
A “Pro-Democracy” Front With Covert DNA
Founded in 1983, the NED was created to do overtly what the CIA used to do covertly, according to former NED co-founder Allen Weinstein. For decades, it served as the US arm of so-called “soft power,” funneling money to foreign political groups, media outlets, labor unions, and activist organizations deemed favorable to US interests – usually under the banner of “promoting democracy.”
But “democracy” in this context is indistinguishable from regime change. From Venezuela to Belarus, from Hong Kong to Myanmar, NED-funded groups have played central roles in political destabilization and even precipitating war, many of them advocating positions explicitly aligned with US foreign policy and done entirely at the cost of their own nation’s stability and best interests.
The obvious purpose of creating the NED wasn’t to end covert interference around the globe, but rather to continue the CIA’s work Americans and people worldwide were increasingly aware of and opposed to, by whitewashing it and repackaging it as transparently “promoting democracy.”
Since the NED’s founding, the Western media has intermittently admitted the NED has been involved in global-spanning regime change. In 2004, the London Guardian admitted the US government through the NED overthrew governments in Serbia in 2000 and Georgia in 2003, while unsuccessfully attempting to do so in Belarus and Ukraine.
The article described unrest taking place in Ukraine at the time as:
… an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavoury regimes.
Funded and organised by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organisations, the campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box.
Richard Miles, the US ambassador in Belgrade, played a key role. And by last year, as US ambassador in Tbilisi, he repeated the trick in Georgia, coaching Mikhail Saakashvili in how to bring down Eduard Shevardnadze.
Ten months after the success in Belgrade, the US ambassador in Minsk, Michael Kozak, a veteran of similar operations in central America, notably in Nicaragua, organised a near identical campaign to try to defeat the Belarus hardman, Alexander Lukashenko.
The article names the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI), and Freedom House by name, all three of which are subsidiaries of the NED.
In 2011, the NYT would admit the US government through the NED was behind the regional destabilization and regime change in 2011 referred to as the “Arab Spring.”
The article explained:
A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington, according to interviews in recent weeks and American diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks.
And that:
The Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department.
The US-engineered “Arab Spring” would precipitate multiple US-led wars across the region, ravaging Libya, Yemen, Syria, and affecting every nation in between.
US political interference continues up to and including today under the current Trump administration with attempts to once again destabilize the nation of Georgia along Russia’s borders, continued US-sponsored violence in Myanmar along China’s borders, attacks by US-backed militant groups in southwest Pakistan targeting China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and the continued operation of virtually every NED-funded organization operating elsewhere along China’s periphery including in Thailand and the Philippines.
Democracy as a Cover for Political Interference
Democracy, by definition, is a form of self-determination. If a political movement relies on, or is shaped by the funding and direction of a foreign government – especially one with a track record of overt military invasion, occupation, and conquest like the United States – it is not “promoting democracy,” but rather political interference.
Any nation whose internal political affairs are subject to the influence of the US government through the NED, its subsidiaries or adjacent organizations is not exercising democratic self-rule, but living under a subtler form of political occupation – one where ballots replace bullets, but the end result is the same – the replacement of sovereign leadership with a US-installed client regime.
In many cases, US NED-funded and directed instability takes the form of armed-violence amid which “activists” rather than invading US troops seize critical government buildings, attack critical infrastructure, and carry out other objectives an invading US military force would seek to achieve including the destruction of specific infrastructure and the ousting of ruling governments.
The End of “Transparency”
The NED’s decision to stop publishing the identities of the groups it funds represents more than just an administrative shift. It is a turning point, following years of growing public awareness both in the US and worldwide of what the NED is really doing and why.
In the past, critics were at least able to track and expose how NED money was flowing into particular movements – from opposition parties in Nicaragua to protest organizers in Hong Kong. That visibility, however minimal, imposed some form of political pressure and constraint on the US.
With the “duty to care” policy, even that has now been eliminated.
Today, the NED operates with the same impunity as any covert intelligence operation – only without the oversight, legal restrictions, or classification protocols typically associated with CIA activity.
In practice, this allows the US to wage political war under the pretense of “promoting democracy,” while overall leaving fewer fingerprints behind.
And while the shift within the NED and across US foreign policy as a whole should prompt nations to respond with stricter scrutiny and regulation of the organizations still likely receiving US support, even when US interference was more transparent, many nations failed categorically to protect national security from it. Now that US interference is being done more covertly, it will be even more difficult for advocates of greater national security regarding foreign-funded NGOs to spur governments around the world into action.
Under Trump, Business as Usual
Despite the perception among some that the Trump administration intended to dismantle or defund the NED, no such action occurred. In fact, NED funding is continuing after only a brief pause, with the majority of NED operations continuing uninterrupted.
Much like the US military-industrial complex which continues expanding despite President Trump’s rhetorical opposition to “forever wars” – the regime change-industrial-complex led by the NED, its affiliates, and subsidiaries, have likewise not only continued, but are enhancing their menace to peace and stability worldwide.
Some may argue that recent attention placed on the NED and adjacent organizations like USAID is positive progress in the right direction. In reality, this recent attention has more in common with what is known as a “limited hangout,” a method of perception management used when state secrecy has been compromised, and “limited” information is either admitted to or even volunteered, while central information is still withheld from the public. The public is often distracted by or satisfied with this limited admission and fails to pursue the issue further.
In the case of NED and USAID funding, after many years of growing awareness of and opposition to both, many Americans believe both organizations have now been dismantled, oblivious to the fact that both are still operational and the global network of political subversion they facilitate continues operating uninterrupted.
A Hidden Hand With Open Consequences
The NED’s new era of covert funding and hidden recipients marks a dangerous evolution in US foreign policy. Under the guise of care and caution, the organization has closed the one window that allowed even limited public scrutiny of its global interference.
Regardless of whether the CIA or NED fund and direct foreign interference worldwide and regardless of the degree of transparency involved, the outcome remains the same – a world where real decisions are not made by people on the ground in any one of the many nations targeted by US interference, but by politicians in Washington and policymakers at corporate-funded think tanks.
While American voters and many around the globe held hope that the incoming Trump administration would make good on its promises to roll back US interference abroad and focus instead on the best interests of Americans in America, the administration has instead continued US wars and proxy wars in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia together with sharpening and streamlining the military and non-military means with which to expand them even further.
Despite the illusions of reform or even “revolution” under the Trump administration, the truth is the NED (and USAID) remains as active as ever, more unaccountable than ever, and continue to serve as a sophisticated instrument of political manipulation for the very special interests of the “deep state” many Americans voted President Trump into office to oppose.
Legacy media has a meltdown after RFK Jr fires the CDC’s vaccine panel
By Maryanne Demasi, PhD | June 10, 2025
Yesterday, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired every single member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—the influential group of experts that decides which vaccines are added to the childhood schedule.
Today, he set fire to the media’s hysterical reaction.
Within 24 hours, legacy outlets and public health institutions lost their collective minds. Former CDC directors, industry-funded doctors, and conflicted public health groups lined up to denounce Kennedy’s move as reckless, anti-scientific, even deadly.
“This is a dangerous and unprecedented action that makes our families less safe,” said former CDC director Dr Tom Frieden.
“Unilaterally removing the entire panel of experts is reckless,” said paediatrician Dr Tina Tan to The New York Times.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) said it was “deeply troubled and alarmed.” It claimed the move would “stoke distrust in lifesaving vaccines”—this from the same organisation that has spent decades pushing the childhood vaccine schedule while taking money from the very companies that profit from it.
Others framed it as a political purge, a blow to science, or a “coup” that would bring back measles and polio.
But within hours, Kennedy hit back—and this time, he wasn’t the outsider being easily dismissed. He was the Secretary of Health and Human Services. And he came armed with evidence, receipts, and a brutal takedown of the media’s favourite falsehoods.
In a searing post on X, Kennedy explained the decision.
He said the clean sweep was necessary because ACIP had demonstrated its “stubborn unwillingness to demand adequate safety trials before recommending new vaccines for our children.”
And despite the media’s insistence otherwise, Kennedy argued that no routine injected childhood vaccine on the CDC’s schedule had ever been approved based on a placebo-controlled trial using an inert substance.
CNN had tried to prove him wrong last week—claiming it had found “257 placebo-controlled studies” of vaccines on the schedule.
Kennedy dismantled it in forensic detail.
“CNN is wrong,” he wrote. “No routine injected vaccine on CDC’s schedule was licensed for children based on a placebo-controlled trial. That is not conjecture. It is a fact based on FDA’s clinical trial data.”
Then came the body blows.
He pointed out that most of the 257 studies used active substances like aluminium, antibiotics, or other vaccines—not inert placebos.
He linked directly to FDA definitions of “placebo” and to official clinical trial records. Of the few studies that may have used saline controls, none were relied on by the FDA to license a single routine vaccine for American children.
Some studied products that were never approved in the US. Some occurred after licensure. Others involved discontinued vaccines. “CNN’s list ironically proves the lack of adequate safety trials,” Kennedy wrote in a stinging rebuke.
The post was devastating.
It was a clinical takedown of an industry riddled with deception—and it landed—because this time, Kennedy wasn’t being filtered through a hostile press.
He was speaking directly to the public, as a government official, with all the links to back it up. And the media couldn’t handle it.
Predictably, the media rolled out the same tired “experts” to recycle the same tired script—Paul Offit quotes, panic about “undermining trust,” warnings that children would die.
But Kennedy turned the whole thing inside out.
“We’ve gone from three routine injections by age one in 1986 to 25 in 2025,” he wrote. “And not one of them was licensed using a placebo-controlled trial.”
He said it plainly for the cameras: “That is just malpractice. So the people who are in charge of that are now gone.”
For years, the press had written Kennedy off as an anti-vaxxer and moved on. Now, they’ve thrown everything at him—and he threw it right back. Only now, he has the authority, data, and reach.
Kennedy told his followers he’d be announcing replacements in the coming days—no “ideological anti-vaxxers” just “highly credentialed physicians and scientists” committed to evidence, objectivity, and common sense.
Legacy media may still control the headlines, but they can no longer suppress the debate.
And perhaps that’s what really has them rattled.
They’re not defending science. They’re defending a regime of experts who signed off on decades of vaccine approvals without ever insisting on rigorous, inert-placebo safety trials.
When Kennedy calls them out, their only defence is to scream “danger!”—and hope no one checks the fine print.
Yesterday, he fired the gatekeepers. Today, he exposed the game.
Who’s behind LA Anti-ICE Riots?
Sputnik – 09.06.2025
President Donald Trump called the Los Angeles protests “paid”, but who could be behind the havoc?
Soros in the shadows
“Allegations of funding links to [Soros’] Open Society Foundations have been raised,” Dr. Marco Marsili, researcher at Cà Foscari University of Venice, tells Sputnik.
The protests aren’t spontaneous, there’s “a structured strategy” behind them, he claims.
The color revolution playbook
Marsili outlines hallmarks of a Soros-style uprising:
*Protesters linked to well-funded, Democrat-aligned NGOs
*Liberal media frame riots as “moral resistance”
*Symbolic activism—hashtags, slogans—spreads rapidly
*Federal agencies portrayed as “oppressive”
Your tax dollars at work
One group behind the LA unrest, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA) got $34M in US government grants in 2023 alone.
It’s also linked to Soros-funded programs like the Soros Justice Fellowships.
‘Fake protests’ go viral
US author Scott Adams denounced the LA protests as “fake” and “paid” by wealthy Democrats and Soros-linked organizations in a video post on X.
He believes the real goal is to create chaos and undermine Trump.
Who dropped the bricks?
Conservative X influencers spotlighted pallets of bricks conveniently dropped at protest sites across Los Angeles.
Bricks, rocks and Molotov cocktails are used against law enforcement.
Organized?
LA Council Member Eunisses Hernandez: “When they show up, we got to show up even stronger.”
Conservatives say she all but admits on camera that the ICE riots are Democrat-organized.
BLM 2.0 with a twist
Observers say it’s the repetition of the 2020 BLM riots.
Conservative blogger Andy Ngo notes Antifa’s back in the mix too.
Desperate move to stop Trump?
Zero Hedge alleges the LA protests are a last-ditch Democrat effort to sabotage Trump after their DOGE-fueled unrest flopped. The goal? Spark a fresh national riot wave.
Gaza refutes Israel’s claim of tunnel under European Hospital
MEMO | June 9, 2025
The Government Media Office in Gaza (GMO) yesterday denied Israeli claims that a tunnel was found beneath the European Hospital in southern Gaza.
In an official statement, the GMO said the Israeli occupation continues its systematic campaign to mislead the public and justify its crimes against health facilities by promoting blatant lies, the latest of which is its claim that Palestinian resistance fighters used a tunnel under the European Hospital in the southern Gaza Strip.
It stressed that the Israeli claim is “fabricated, flawed, and full of holes and does not stand up to even the slightest scrutiny and logic.”
According to the statement, the video published by the Israeli occupation army shows a narrow metal pipe that cannot fit a person, has no stairs or equipment and is located in an area used for rainwater drainage.
The GMO accused the Israeli army of digging the site and placing the pipe before filming a scene near the hospital’s emergency room, which was crowded with patients and visitors.
The GMO referred to previous Israeli allegations of the existence of tunnels under Al-Shifa Hospital and Hamad Hospital, which turned out to be old water wells.
The GMO concluded its statement saying Israel has previously announced its intention to destroy the health system in Gaza and admitted to using bunker-busting bombs totaling more than 40 tonnes to destroy the infrastructure of the European Hospital.
“So how could intact, unburned bodies be displayed at a site that the occupation claims to have bombed with such ferocity?” it added
The Silence of the Bears
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 9, 2025
Russia’s leadership is in ‘conclave’ determining its riposte.
Trump has been silent for two days. Unprecedented. In the last days, Ukraine and its facilitators attempted a massive attack on Russia’s strategic nuclear bomber-force; succeeded in collapsing two bridges onto civilian trains heading to Moscow; attacking the Kerch Bridge; and assassinating a Russian general via explosive body bomb.
As Clausewitz noted two centuries ago, the point of military force is to compel an outcome: i.e. that an adversary finally does what is wanted of him. Thus, in respect to military adventures there is need for clarity of thought from the outset. It must have a realisable political objective that has a prospect to be implemented.
What then, was the objective behind these Ukrainian ‘irregular’ attacks? One certainly was demonstrative – PR exercises to say that Ukraine and allied services are still capable of mounting special forces style, innovative operations. And are therefore worthy of continued support. As Colonel Doug Macgregor cautions:
“For the most part it was a PR stunt to try and convey the impression that Ukraine is capable of carrying on the war. Anything you hear from the Western outlets … are probably untrue or at least grossly exaggerated … We damaged ourselves and our relationship – what there is left of it – with Moscow … that’s the real fallout from this”.
Okay. But PR stunts are no strategy, nor do the attacks hold any prospect for a shift in the overall strategic military paradigm. It doesn’t say that the West or Ukraine has suddenly discovered a political strategy towards Russia per se. That doesn’t exist. For the most part, the innumerable western declarations come as a hodge-podge of fantasies.
The second objective however, may indeed have had a clear strategic end-state – and has demonstrated feasibility and the possibility to compel a desired outcome: The various attacks have imposed on Trump the uncomfortable reality that he, as President, does not control U.S. foreign policy. The collective Deep State has just made that plain.
As General Mike Flynn has warned:
“The Deep State is now acting outside of the control of the elected leadership of our nation … These persons in our Deep State are engaged in a deliberate effort to provoke Russia into a major confrontation with the West, including the United States”.
In effect, the likes of Generals Keith Kellogg and Jack Keane, with their adolescent narratives that only through pressure, more pressure and pain will compel Putin (always presumed to be weak) to accept a frozen conflict in the hope that it can obvert from an American defeat in Ukraine.
The British during WW2 similarly believed that the Nazi regime was not strong, and could be overthrown by strategic bombing, intended to bring about the collapse of German society. Today, General Kellogg advocates ‘bombing’ Russia with sanctions – mirroring the British conviction that such tactics ‘must be bad for morale’.
Trump’s advice from his Generals either did not meet the criterion of political realism – because it was based on fantasies of incipient Russian collapse and a hopeless misreading of Russia and its Army. Or perhaps his Advisers, either inadvertently or deliberately, ‘shafted’ Trump and his agenda of normalising relations with Russia.
What will Trump say now to Putin? That he was indeed forewarned (recall his writing just days ago that “bad things – if it were not for me – I mean REALLY BAD things would already have happened to Russia” ) and claim that his advisers did not give him the full details; or will he candidly admit that they deceived him? Alternatively, will he take the line that the CIA was merely operating to an old Presidential ‘Finding’ that authorised attacks into the depth of the Russian hinterland?
All such putative answers would spell one thing – that Trump is not in control. That he and his European allies (such as Britain) cannot be trusted.
Either way, Trump’s advisers will have understood that Zelensky and by extension his NATO enablers, were exploiting the SALT/START Treaties’ vulnerability – in order to use concealed drones, hidden in civilian containers, to attack the very bombers covered by USA-Russia treaties: Article XII of the START treaty specifically requires “a display in the open of all heavy bombers within the airbase”. This provision was a confidence building act (visible monitoring) to guard against a surprise ‘first strike’ nuclear attack.
START 1 cut long-range or strategic nuclear arsenals by 30-40 percent. New START slashed accountable deployed strategic arms by another three-quarters. In 2021, Presidents Biden and Putin extended New START until February 2026.
Of course, these unidentified enablers understood the gravity of striking the strategic nuclear force of a major rival nuclear weapons power.
How would the U.S. respond if an adversary (perhaps a non-state actor) launched a strike against strategic long-range nuclear capable bombers in the USA using cheap and easily available drones hidden in containers? We are in a new era of risk – one in which pagers and cell phones can be weaponised as bombs – and of ‘sleeper’ drones that can be remotely activated to attack airfields, either civilian or military.
Larry Johnson has observed that after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941, intended to destroy the U.S. aircraft carriers berthed there, the Japanese Admiral Yamamoto reportedly said the following in the aftermath of Japan’s great victory at Pearl Harbour: “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve … We have won a great tactical victory at Pearl Harbour and thereby lost the war”.
The silence of the bears will soon be ended and we will know more about Russian resolve; but a relationship in which Trump is understood to ‘mean what he says, and does what he says’ likely is over. The Russians are furious.
What happens next is unknown.
Jury Hears Conflicting Testimony in Trial Alleging Hospital’s Actions — Not COVID — Caused Teen’s Death
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | June 6, 2025
The parents of Grace Schara, a 19-year-old with Down syndrome who died in a Wisconsin hospital days after being admitted for a COVID-19 infection, testified this week in court that their daughter died as a result of a lethal combination of drugs and a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order the hospital implemented without their consent.
Grace’s family sued Ascension St. Elizabeth Hospital in April 2023 and filed an amended complaint in July 2023, alleging the hospital’s COVID-19 treatment protocols directly resulted in Grace’s death in October 2021, a week after admission.
The trial began Tuesday at the State of Wisconsin Circuit Court for Outagamie County.
“This isn’t about failing to provide information. This is about providing treatment with no consent whatsoever,” Scott Schara, Grace’s father, testified on Wednesday. “Her passing was a result of combining Precedex, lorazepam and morphine in a 26-minute window and putting an illegal do-not-resuscitate order on her chart.”
The lawsuit names 14 defendants, including Ascension Health, five medical doctors and four John Doe medical providers, two registered nurses, and the Wisconsin Injured Patients and Family Compensation Fund.
The defendants argued that Schara may have died due to “a naturally progressing disease, a pre-existing condition, or a superseding or intervening cause,” Green Bay-based CBS affiliate WFRV reported.
According to the Journal Sentinel, the hospital also argued that the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) provided it and its doctors and staff immunity from liability during the COVID-19 pandemic.
At times during the first three days of the trial, hospital doctors and nurses who testified appeared to contradict themselves over whether Grace had been oversedated and whether her family consented to a DNR order.
Green Bay, Wisconsin-based ABC affiliate WBAY reported, “This is the first wrongful death jury trial in the country for a death listed as COVID-19 on the death certificate.” WFRV reported that “this landmark case could have far-reaching implications for how medical decisions are made, especially during a public health crisis.”
The trial could last up to three weeks. Up to 22 witnesses may testify, WFRV reported, adding that the case may draw attention “to critical issues surrounding informed consent and the rights of patients and their families in the healthcare system.”
Scharas allege lack of informed consent, violation of standards of care
During opening statements Tuesday, Warner Mendenhall, the Schara family’s attorney, said the hospital violated standards of care in their treatment of Grace.
“Instead of recognizing the life-threatening situation and reducing the medications causing the problems, this medical team did the opposite,” Mendenhall said.
Jason Franckowiak and Randall Guse, attorneys for the defendants, said hospital staff provided an appropriate standard of care, which did not lead to Grace’s death. Instead, they argued that a worsening COVID-19 infection led to her death.
Her parents testified that they became concerned after their daughter displayed allergy symptoms in late September 2021, days after the family attended a concert, and that they took her for treatment as a precautionary measure.
“We were just hoping that we would just get some supplemental oxygen,” Cindy Schara, Grace’s mother, testified Tuesday.
Scott Schara told the court that Grace “was not having any trouble breathing,” and that “it wasn’t an emergency, so there was no need to have Grace in the hospital.”
But the hospital told the family they were keeping Grace overnight “for observation” and that they would put her on a steroid “for two to three days,” after which she would be discharged. “But that’s not what happened,” Cindy Schara testified.
Instead, hospital staff gave Grace Precedex, lorazepam and morphine. Mendenhall said that Precedex “dangerously lowered” Grace’s blood pressure and pulse, and that her condition improved after its dosage was lowered.
According to Scott Schara, after Grace’s first oversedation event, Dr. Gavin Shokar, a defendant who was the primary physician in charge of Grace’s care, gave an order to stop administering Precedex, but nursing staff waited 22 minutes to do so.
Shokar testified Thursday that he was uncertain whether his order was immediately implemented. Hospital staff also provided contradictory testimony in response to the Scharas’ claims that Grace had been oversedated with these medications.
Shokar testified that he “was aware” that Grace had been oversedated at least once. Samuel Haines, a nurse at the hospital, said Grace had been oversedated “only for a brief period.”
However, Hollee McInnis, another defendant, said Grace was “not oversedated.”
A witness for the Schara family, Dr. Gilbert Berdine, an associate professor of medicine at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, said Grace was oversedated three times during her hospital stay.
According to Grace’s parents, the family did not consent to the medications and did not find out they were administered until later.
“If they would’ve asked me for consent with those, of course, I would’ve asked a lot of questions,” Scott Schara testified. He said the hospital also didn’t tell him that they reclassified Grace’s hospital room as an ICU room.
McInnis testified that she “personally did not witness” hospital doctors obtaining consent to administer the drugs in question.
Grace’s father removed from hospital after ‘pushing to get her fed’
During his testimony, Scott Schara also recounted a “heated conversation” he had with hospital staff who rejected his request to feed Grace because she was on a BiPAP (Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure) machine — a type of non-invasive ventilation.
The confrontation led the hospital to order Scott removed from the hospital, and send an armed guard to Grace’s room to escort him out.
“That’s one of the reasons I was kicked out. I was pushing to get her fed,” Scott Schara testified. “That was the last time I saw Grace alive physically.”
Hospital staff testified that Scott Schara was removed because some nurses did not want him in the room, because he was shutting off alarms from Grace’s medical equipment at night. Staff said they also suspected he had COVID-19.
But Mendenhall said Scott’s questioning of medical staff was “exactly what he was supposed to do as a dad and power of attorney for healthcare.”
According to the Scharas’ legal team, Shokar could have overruled the order to eject Scott from the hospital. But Shokar testified that his “primary responsibility was to Grace” and that “these things are non-pertinent to her particular care.”
In subsequent days, Grace’s family was able to communicate with her solely through FaceTime calls — until the hospital took Grace’s phone away.
“Cindy and I had no opportunity to communicate with Grace unless it was initiated by the hospital,” Scott Schara testified.
Hospital repeatedly pressured family to ‘pre-authorize’ a ventilator for Grace
The Scharas also testified that hospital staff repeatedly pressured them to “pre-authorize” a ventilator for Grace, even though, according to Mendenhall, “there was no need for a ventilator.”
Cindy Schara testified that she received several calls from the hospital “asking us for a pre-authorization to put Grace on a vent if something would’ve happened in the middle of the night — that is how it was always presented.”
“There was family there, so there was no need for a pre-authorization,” she added.
Scott Schara testified that Dr. Karl Baum, one of the defendants in the case, told him that “a 20% chance” of saving Grace’s life was “better than no chance” in his efforts to convince the family to pre-approve a ventilator.
“Asking for Grace to be with a pre-authorization for a ventilator at that point was the equivalent of asking somebody for a pre-authorization for a leg amputation when they just have a sprained ankle,” Scott Schara testified.
Grace’s father also testified that Shokar acknowledged during a phone call that placing Grace on a ventilator would not have saved her life.
Shokar also had separate phone calls with Grace’s parents, purportedly to make amends after Scott was removed from the hospital. But the parents testified that the conversation transitioned to renewed efforts to get them to pre-authorize a ventilator for Grace, which they again rejected.
‘We watched her die’
Grace’s parents also testified that they repeatedly told hospital staff that they did not consent to a DNR order.
Hospital staff provided contradictory testimony as to whether Grace’s family provided consent. According to Shokar, Grace’s family ultimately agreed to a DNI — a “Do Not Intubate” order.
“We started to talk about goals of care, what you guys want to do in the worst case scenario, which would be if she were to crash, essentially cardiopulmonary arrest,” Shokar testified Thursday. “I was very confident that we came to a resolution to say, ‘This is what we want to do and this is what the family wants.’”
But according to Mendenhall, Grace’s family later learned that Shokar documented that Grace had both a DNI and DNR order, adding that they did not find out about the DNR until hours before her death. The hospital did not honor their subsequent request to remove the DNR from Grace’s chart.
Cindy Shara said they would not have agreed to a DNR order on their own, without the participation of Grace’s primary care physician, an attorney, their pastor and other family members. “It would be a terrible thing to have to decide,” she testified.
As a result of the DNR, hospital staff did not intervene during Grace’s final moments of life, Grace’s parents said. “We watched her die,” Scott Schara testified.
During her testimony, McInnis acknowledged that she was responsible for placing a wristband on Grace’s arm that would have indicated her DNR status, but could not recall whether she had placed such a wristband on Grace. “If she didn’t have one on, it would be because I had not put it on,” McInnis testified.
“I believe that denying Grace any assistance to help her in her final moments was just horrific,” Cindy Schara testified.
CHD.TV is livestreaming the trial daily.
The family’s lawsuit alleges medical negligence, violations of informed consent, and medical battery — a standard of intentional harm beyond medical negligence by doctors and other providers that, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, is rarely invoked in such legal cases.
According to the complaint, the hospital was financially incentivized to implement COVID-19 protocols that allegedly caused Grace’s death.
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.
NIH Shuts Down Research Center Founded by Fauci, as DOJ Scrutinizes Key Researchers
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | June 5, 2025
Officials at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) plan to shut down a research center established by Dr. Anthony Fauci that issued grants to embattled researchers who promoted the “zoonotic origin” theory that COVID-19 emerged from wildlife, The Disinformation Chronicle reported today.
Fauci established the Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Diseases (CREID) in 2020 to conduct “investigations into how and where viruses and other pathogens emerge from wildlife and spill over to cause disease in people.”
According to The Disinformation Chronicle, when CREID launched, it issued 11 grants worth $17 million, with an additional $82 million in expected funding over five years. It’s unclear how much of the money has already been spent.
Two CREID grantees have been the focus of intense scrutiny: Peter Daszak, Ph.D., of the EcoHealth Alliance and Kristian Andersen, Ph.D., of Scripps Research Institute. Both played key roles in publicly promoting the theory that SARS-CoV-2, which led to the COVID-19 pandemic, originated in wildlife.
The U.S. Department of Justice has launched “initial inquiries” into one of the CREID grants Anderson received. Last year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) suspended all government funding for EcoHealth Alliance.
The Disinformation Chronicle quoted an NIH spokesperson, who confirmed the agency has terminated all outstanding CREID grants.
“Strengthening overall health through proactive disease prevention offers a more resilient foundation for responding to future health threats — beyond reliance on vaccines or treatments for yet-unknown pathogens,” the spokesperson said.
Andersen received a CREID grant after co-authoring zoonotic origin paper
In March 2020, Andersen co-authored “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” published in Nature Medicine. The paper — widely known as the “Proximal Origin” paper — concluded that COVID-19 had a zoonotic origin. It became one of that year’s most-cited papers, accessed over 6 million times.
Government officials, including Fauci, and mainstream media outlets later cited the paper as part of efforts to discredit proponents of the theory that COVID-19 originated in and escaped from a lab.
The Trump administration is investigating whether the authors and publisher of “Proximal Origin” allowed Fauci and other key public health officials to influence the paper’s conclusions in exchange for funding — a possible quid pro quo.
According to The Disinformation Chronicle, two months after “Proximal Origin” was published, Andersen received a CREID grant.
In testimony to Congress in July 2023, Andersen said, “There is no connection between the grant and the conclusions we reached about the origin of the pandemic.” Later that month, The Intercept published documents showing that Andersen “knew that was false.”
Andersen and other virologists were initially skeptical about dismissing the lab-leak theory. But emails and documents revealed through a congressional investigation and some media outlets revealed that, under pressure from Fauci and other public health officials, Andersen endorsed the zoonotic theory in “Proximal Origin.”
During a Feb. 1, 2020, email and call between Fauci and several virologists, including Andersen, the participants expressed concern that COVID-19 might have been manipulated instead of originating in nature.
Transcripts revealed by The Nation in July 2023 showed that, in a February 2020 Slack thread, Andersen wrote to other virologists that “the main issue is that accidental release is in fact highly likely — it’s not some fringe theory.”
And on April 16, 2020, Andersen sent a Slack message to his “Proximal Origin” co-authors, stating, “I’m still not fully convinced that no culture was involved. We also can’t fully rule out engineering (for basic research).”
Andersen may have misled intelligence agencies on COVID’s origins
Andersen privately questioned the true origins of COVID-19. However, in March 2020 — one week after “Proximal Origin” was published — he participated in a U.S. Department of State briefing with other non-government scientists, where he dismissed the possibility that COVID-19 emerged from a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
According to The Disinformation Chronicle, the briefing led the State Department to issue a report concluding there was no evidence that COVID-19 was developed in a lab. In 2023, Andersen testified during a sworn congressional deposition that he also briefed the CIA and FBI regarding COVID-19’s origins.
The DOJ is now likely to examine Andersen’s role in misleading U.S. intelligence agencies, The Disinformation Chronicle reported, quoting a State Department official, who said, “I don’t see how this not a criminal misleading and counterintelligence matter. This is way beyond the threshold needed for a grand jury.”
In April, the Trump administration launched a new version of the government’s official COVID-19 website, presenting evidence that COVID-19 emerged due to a leak at the Wuhan lab. The CIA, FBI, U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Congress and other intelligence agencies have endorsed this theory.
Daszak has also been under scrutiny for possible improprieties involving his research. According to The Disinformation Chronicle, Daszak was found to have undisclosed ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology — including issuing a subaward to a researcher at that laboratory, Shi Zhengli, Ph.D., widely known as the “Bat Lady.”
In issuing its decision to bar Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance from receiving further federal funds, HHS cited the organization’s lack of response “to NIH’s multiple safety-related requests” relating to research performed at the Wuhan lab.
Journalist Paul D. Thacker, a former U.S. Senate investigator and publisher of The Disinformation Chronicle, said that congressional investigations involving Andersen and others have been problematic.
“The congressional investigations into these matters were not well managed. A lot of people are still shocked at how little got done,” Thacker said.
Last month, the NIH introduced a new policy prohibiting NIH grantees from outsourcing parts of their research to foreign entities through subawards.
Facing investigation, is Andersen looking to flee the U.S.?
Andersen, a Danish citizen, is now looking to leave the U.S. “as the noose continues to tighten,” The Disinformation Chronicle reported. He is said to be considering a position at the University of Oslo in Norway.
Sigrid Bratlie, a molecular biologist and senior adviser at Norway’s Langsikt Policy Centre, told The Disinformation Chronicle that “there is an ongoing effort from a group of scientists at the University of Oslo to recruit Andersen, and that this might be finalized in the near future.”
In October 2024, Andersen delivered a lecture at the University of Oslo on the “facts and the fiction” of the COVID-19 pandemic, claiming that critiques of his research were political attacks spread by conspiracy theorists.
The Norwegian Society for Immunology, which sponsored the lecture, later issued an apology. According to The Disinformation Chronicle, the apology stated, “In retrospect, unfortunately, it seems the purpose of his lecture was just as much about stopping the free debate in Norway on this topic.”
Thacker said that Andersen’s possible move to Norway is part of a broader trend where many scientists are expressing public dissent at the Trump administration’s policies.
“The majority of scientists I see complaining are all entrenched in liberal politics. Pretty much every one of them has a large account on [social media platform] Bluesky where allied reporters hang out to find quotes,” Thacker said.
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.
IAEA Board of Governors is 100% under control of collective West, Rosatom chief says
Press TV – June 7, 2025
Rosatom, Russia’s state atomic energy corporation, has voiced strong criticism over the subjective approach employed by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Board of Governors in its nuclear-related reports, stating that the decision-making body’s impartiality is heavily influenced by Western interests.
Rosatom’s CEO Alexey Likhachev said on Friday that the corporation’s relations with the UN nuclear watchdog have not been trouble-free as its reports contain signs of “double standards.”
“Certainly, I must say that we do not have smooth relations with the IAEA on the whole, to put it mildly. Of course, we often see double standards among a number of IAEA documents,” Likhachev told journalists following talks with an IAEA delegation in Kaliningrad.
Stressing that there are “several camps” within the IAEA, Likhachev said only representatives from two European countries, Hungary and Switzerland, as well as IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, were being “objective” on nuclear issues.
“There is the Board of Governors, where the controlling stake, as we say, by almost 100% belongs to the collective West, and completely different opinions are expressed there. And therein lies the problem,” the Rosatom CEO said.
“Hungary and Switzerland assess the security situation objectively and say that strikes on nuclear infrastructure are inadmissible regardless of their origin. But the lion’s share of the board’s members criticize only purported strikes in the direction of Ukrainian facilities,” he added.
According to a report by the Russian news agency TASS, Iran’s nuclear program as well as ensuring the safety of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) amid ongoing Ukrainian shelling, and the work of the IAEA mission at the plant were the central topics at the talks between Grossi and Likhachev in Kaliningrad.
ZNPP, Europe’s largest power plant, has been controlled by Russian troops since late February 2022, after Moscow launched its special military operation in Ukraine partly to prevent NATO’s eastward expansion.
Since then, Ukraine has targeted the power plant using drones, heavy artillery, and multiple launch rocket systems, raising concerns of a potential Chernobyl-style nuclear incident.
Moscow has announced that it is ready to work with the IAEA to agree on “non-politicized” solutions to problems at the facility.
According to Likhachev, the situation regarding nuclear and radiation safety at the ZNPP remains “totally manageable and stable,” but the military threat is worsening as Ukraine has intensified its shelling of civilian infrastructure and provocations.
“Unfortunately, this has affected the situation at the Zaporozhye NPP and the city of Energodar. The power system has sustained damage literally every night over the last four days.”
The Rosatom CEO underlined that the presence of IAEA specialists at the ZNPP is crucial for keeping the international community informed about the situation.
Cooperation with Iran
Rosatom confirmed at the meeting its readiness to resolve any technical aspects of the Iranian nuclear issue provided that political decisions are made and multilateral agreements are reached.
Earlier this month, the IAEA claimed in a confidential report to member states that Iran had failed to report its nuclear activities at three undeclared locations and raised concerns about the country’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% purity.
The agency has over the past years levied multiple politically-tainted accusations against the Islamic Republic’s nuclear file despite its own reports that have on numerous occasions attested to the peacefulness of Tehran’s nuclear program.
Rosatom also said nuclear cooperation between Moscow and Tehran will continue in multiple areas, including the construction of nuclear power units and fuel supply for the first unit of the Bushehr plant.
It added that it was engaged in joint research and development with Iran in the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
Ukraine’s most reckless attack: Was NATO behind it?
RT | June 6, 2025
While Western headlines celebrated Operation Spider’s Web as a daring feat of Ukrainian ingenuity, a closer look reveals something far more calculated – and far less Ukrainian. This wasn’t just a strike on Russian airfields. It was a test – one that blended high-tech sabotage, covert infiltration, and satellite-guided timing with the kind of precision that only the world’s most advanced intelligence networks can deliver. And it begs the question: who was really pulling the strings?
Let’s be honest. Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence didn’t act alone. It couldn’t have.
Even if no Western agency was directly involved in the operation itself, the broader picture is clear: Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence, its military, and even its top political leadership rely heavily on Western intelligence feeds. Ukraine is deeply embedded within NATO’s intelligence-sharing architecture. The idea of a self-contained Ukrainian intel ecosystem is largely a thing of the past. These days, Kiev draws primarily on NATO-provided data, supplementing it with its own domestic sources where it can.
That’s the backdrop – a hybrid model that’s become standard over the past two years. Now, let’s look more closely at Operation Spider’s Web itself. We know the planning took roughly 18 months and involved moving drones covertly into Russian territory, hiding them, and then orchestrating coordinated attacks on key airfields. So how likely is it that Western intelligence agencies had a hand in such a complex operation?
Start with logistics. It’s been reported that 117 drones were prepped for launch inside Russia. Given that numerous private companies in Russia currently manufacture drones for the war effort, it wouldn’t have been difficult to assemble the necessary devices under that cover. That’s almost certainly what happened. Components were likely purchased domestically under the guise of supplying the “Special Military Operation.” Still, it’s hard to believe Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence could have pulled off this mass procurement and assembly alone. It’s highly likely Western intelligence agencies played a quiet but crucial role – especially in securing specialized components.
Then there’s the explosives. If the operation’s command center was located in the Ural region, as some suggest, it’s plausible that explosives or components were smuggled in via neighboring CIS countries. That kind of border-hopping precision doesn’t happen without outside help. In fact, it mirrors tactics long perfected by intelligence services in both the US and Western Europe.
Because make no mistake: this wasn’t just the CIA’s playground. European services – particularly those in the UK, France, and Germany – possess the same capabilities to execute and conceal such an operation. The NATO intelligence community may have different national flags, but it speaks with one voice in the field.
The real giveaway, however, lies in the timing of the strikes. These weren’t blind attacks on static targets. Russia’s strategic bombers frequently rotate bases. Commercial satellite imagery – updated every few days at best – simply can’t track aircraft on the move. And yet these drones struck with exquisite timing. That points to a steady flow of real-time surveillance, likely derived from signals intelligence, radar tracking, and live satellite feeds – all tools in the Western intelligence toolbox.
Could Ukraine, on its own, have mustered that kind of persistent, multidomain awareness? Not a chance. That level of situational intelligence is the domain of NATO’s most capable agencies – particularly those tasked with monitoring Russian military infrastructure as part of their day job.
For years now, Ukraine has been described in Western media as a plucky underdog using low-cost tactics to take on a larger foe. But beneath the David vs. Goliath narrative lies a more uncomfortable truth: Ukraine’s intelligence ecosystem is now deeply embedded within NATO’s operational architecture. Real-time feeds from US and European satellites, intercepts from British SIGINT stations, operational planning consultations with Western handlers – this is the new normal.
Ukraine still has its own sources, but it’s no longer running a self-contained intelligence operation. That era ended with the first HIMARS launch.
Western officials, of course, deny direct involvement. But Russian investigators are already analyzing mobile traffic around the impact sites. If it turns out that these drones weren’t connected to commercial mobile networks – if, instead, they were guided through encrypted, military-grade links – it will be damning. Not only would that confirm foreign operational input, it would expose the full extent of how Western assets operated inside Russia without detection.
At that point, no amount of plausible deniability will cover the truth. The question will no longer be whether NATO participated – but how deep that participation ran.
Featured Video
NEW FAUCI EMAILS EXPOSE ATTACK ON NATURAL IMMUNITY
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Fourteen Incredible Facts About 9/11
By Kevin Ryan | Dig Within | August 8, 2015
… What is known about 9/11 is that there are many incredible facts that continue to be ignored by the government and the mainstream media. Here are fourteen.
- An outline of what was to become the 9/11 Commission Report was produced before the investigation began. The outline was kept secret from the Commission’s staff and appears to have determined the outcome of the investigation.
- The 9/11 Commission claimed sixty-three (63) times in its Report that it could find “no evidence” related to important aspects of the crimes.
- One person, Shayna Steiger, issued 12 visas to the alleged hijackers in Saudi Arabia. Steiger issued some of the visas without interviewing the applicants and fought with another employee at the embassy who tried to prevent her lax approach.
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Bill Francis on European leaders’ shift in the… seversonebcfb985d9 on Villains of Judea: Philip Esfo… loongtip on Report warns that ‘Jewish terr… Craig Nelms on New study shows that toxic gas… loongtip on A Funny Thing Happened on the… loongtip on EU free trade pact on hold as… John Edward Kendrick on Regime Change In Iran Is The F… Bill Francis on Australia Passes New Hate Spee… seversonebcfb985d9 on Australia Passes New Hate Spee… Bill Francis on Britain’s AI Policing Plan Tur… loongtip on Miami Beach Resident Questione… loongtip on Israeli agricultural export co…
Aletho News- Trump aims to create new UN and own it, Brazil’s Lula warns
- UN rapporteur says Israeli demolition of UNRWA compound reflects broader attack on UN system
- From Proxy to Disposable: The US Betrayal of the Syrian Kurds
- Six injured in stabbing spree at Kurdish rally in Antwerp, victims stabbed ‘indiscriminately’
- US pledges to ‘starve’ Iraq of oil revenue if pro-Iran parties join new government
- Is China a threat to Greenland?
- South Korea’s Prime Minister Proposes US Send Special Envoy to North Korea — Report
- Pentagon downgrades China threat, shifts focus to homeland, hemisphere
- Ireland Moves to Legalize Spyware Use by Police
- NEW FAUCI EMAILS EXPOSE ATTACK ON NATURAL IMMUNITY
- If Americans Knew
- Another Gaza baby freezes to death on Netanyahu’s watch – Not a ceasefire Day 106
- Oppose Israel’s Abuses While You Still Can
- UNRWA Heads Tell Ha’aretz: ‘We Don’t Radicalize Palestinians – Their Lived Existence Does’
- Plans Call for “New Rafah” Built in Israel’s Image — Without Palestinians
- Posing as priest, reporter is spat at many times, highlighting anti-Christian sentiment in Israel
- Leaked Documents: “Planned Community” in Rafah Would Force Palestinians Into Israeli Panopticon
- ‘Permits of Humiliation’: How Israel Strangles Christian Education in Jerusalem
- “The world sees death, destruction and injustice – and they see dollar signs” – Not a ceasefire Day 105
- War criminal Netanyahu kills 11 in Gaza, joins Board of Peace – Not a ceasefire Day 104
- Another baby dies of cold in Gaza, as Rafah crossing remains locked down – Not a ceasefire Day 103
- No Tricks Zone
- Polar Colding…Antarctica Saw Its Coldest October In 44 Years!
- New Study: Sea Levels Rose 20 Times The Modern Rate During The Roman Warm Period
- As German Gas Storage Dips Dangerously Low…Shortage Hardly Avoidable
- New Study: Brazil’s Relative Sea Level Was 2+ Meters Higher And SSTs 3-4°C Warmer 6000 Years Ago
- Philosopher Schopenhauer: Climate Science Certainty Stems From Stupidity, Ignorance
- New Study: Species Extinction Rates Declining Since 1980 – ‘Climate Change Is Not An Important Threat’
- Denmark Places Climate Protection Above Animal Welfare, Poisoning And Culling Cows
- New Study: Greenland Was 3-7°C Warmer And Far Less Glaciated Than Today 6000-8000 Years Ago
- German Media Report That Current Frigid Weather Can Be Explained By Arctic Warming!
- Berlin Blackout Shows Germany’s $5 Trillion Green Scheme Is “Left-Green Ideological Pipe Dream”
Aletho News 