Ukraine wants EU to replace lost US aid
RT | January 30, 2025
Ukrainian lawmakers have appealed to non-US donors to fund local media outlets and NGOs following the suspension of Washington’s foreign assistance programs that has reportedly drastically impacted the sector.
Last week, President Donald Trump halted cash flows from the US and ordered a 90-day review of aid schemes. Many affected programs were run by USAID, Washington’s soft power agency that distributes billions of dollars each year for projects that promote US interests around the world, under the premise of humanitarian development. It spent over $60 billion in 2023 alone.
Ukrainian recipients of American grants were hit “worse than it may seem,” a statement by the parliamentary committee on humanitarian affairs said on Wednesday. Lawmakers anticipate that it will take up to six months for US funding to fully resume, and have urged EU donors to step in.
“Given the constraints on public funding, grants remain virtually the only way for cultural and media projects to function,” the statement said.
Oksana Romanyuk, executive director of a Kiev-based media research non-profit, warned that 90% of news outlets in Ukraine rely heavily on foreign grants. With USAID operations frozen, many of them are now soliciting emergency donations.
The Ukrainian MPs described foreign assistance as “an important part of our path to democratic development and sustainability”. They empathized that USAID was funding projects for children, with thousands of minors attending schools that depend on American taxpayer dollars.
According to media reports, senior officials in the Department of State have lobbied Secretary Marco Rubio to make exemptions for their preferred aid programs, arguing that they are essential for US interests. Meanwhile, at least 60 senior USAID officials reportedly have been placed on paid administrative leave.
Ukrainian media in funding crisis after US cash cut
RT | January 29, 2025
Multiple Ukrainian media outlets have issued appeals for emergency cash donations after US President Donald Trump suspended Washington’s foreign aid programs. USAID, the organization that funnels billions of dollars to international causes deemed worthy by Washington has been put on hold, pending reviews, and up to 60 senior staff have reportedly been suspended on full pay.
Nine out of every ten media outlets in Ukraine have been impacted by Washington’s decision, Oksana Romanyuk, executive director of the Institute of Mass Information in Kiev has claimed.
”Unfortunately, almost 90% of Ukrainian media outlets were surviving on grants,” the head of the media-focused NGO told Hromadske Radio. Romanyuk described Trump’s decision as a threat to democracy in Ukraine, claiming that “oligarchs” may seize control of a media landscape “weakened” by the halt in American funding.
Hromadske is among the outlets soliciting private donations in the wake of aid freeze. Established in November 2013, just before the Maidan protests started, Hromadske received its seed funding directly from the US embassy in Kiev and George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. The broadcaster played a pivotal role in criticizing the government during the violent coup that overthrew a democratically elected president and put Ukraine on course for division and conflict.
In a statement announcing the suspension of some of its projects, Hromadske praised the US Agency for International Development (USAID) as one of the most generous donors of “independent media” and NGOs in Ukraine. The investigative journalism organization Bihus.info also acknowledged that much of its work has been funded by the US.
The campaign for emergency funding also extends beyond traditional news outlets. Detector Media, a self-styled watchdog ‘combating online disinformation,’ has warned that hundreds of organizations are facing shutdown without USAID support, and urged private citizens and business owners to donate.
Irina Vereshchuk, the deputy chief of staff to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, has called the suspension of US non-military assistance “unexpected and unpleasant”. Kiev will hold “consultations with our American partners” to resume the flow of money while implementing measures to “stabilize the situation” in the interim, she promised on Tuesday.
NY Times, Again, Tries to Normalize Injecting Kids With Neurotoxins
By Jefferey Jaxen | January 26, 2025
Normalizing neurotoxic vaccine adjuvants has been a bread and butter staple for corporate media for over a decade. 15 years ago it was local KEYE TV CBS Austin who, with a straight face and The Science™-like authoritative tone, told you that injecting mercury ‘helps kids.’
Now, our friends at the New York Times just ran the headline, Yes, Some Vaccines Contain Aluminum. That’s a Good Thing.
In the article, the NY Times admits, “… aluminum adjuvants are found in 27 routine vaccines, and nearly half of those recommended for children under 5.”
Meanwhile, back in reality, aluminum adjuvants are literally toxic to the human body, causing cellular and nerve death. The corporate media and public health experts will tell you that the aluminum is just in the shots for a little bump… just to kick up the inflammation a notch.
Aluminum adjuvants also cause immune dysregulation, and are used in labs to induce autoimmunity in mice.
Yet aluminum adjuvants are included in 27 shots for children under 5 boasts the NY Times.
Harmful… helpful… or both?
To settle some of the controversy, attorneys representing the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) asked the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to produce the studies relied upon to claim injected aluminum is safe.
It took HHS (CDC’s parent agency) nearly three and a half years to come up with its final response in 2022, stating it could not locate a single study.
ICAN’s attorneys also sent the same request to the NIH, which responded the same way, conceding that no records were found.
If the science is ‘robust’ and ‘settled’… where is it?
As far as amounts, we know it’s just a small, precise amount of neurotoxin to kick off inflammation in the body… right?
Back in 2021, top aluminum researchers measured the aluminum content of thirteen infant vaccines and compared it to what the manufacturer’s data claimed was in the shots. The researchers found the following:
If researchers were able to independently verify the neurotoxic aluminum content in test samples, surly the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is actively monitoring them to ensure both efficacy and safety. Right?
In 2021, ICAN submitted a petition asking the FDA to:
“… publicly release documentation sufficient to establish that the aluminum content in each Subject Vaccine is consistent with amount provided in its labeling”
The FDA has yet to release said documentation.
Until manufactures are able to switch the current class of vaccine tech over to next- generation mRNA platforms, the aluminum-adjuvanted shots appear to need defending at all costs.
Disingenuous corporate media outlets and public health experts are using the public’s lack of understanding on this subject to construct hit-pieces in the run-up RFK Jr’s confirmation hearing this Wednesday and Thursday.
Meanwhile, another longtime staple of deceptive media has made a sudden comeback this week as the inaccurate and ignorant slur ‘anti-vax’ is being slung across headlines.
No real journalist would use that word… especially now post-pandemic in the wake of failed shot mandates and delayed compensation for harms caused by the COVID shots in the CICP.
The ‘anti-vax’ industry talking point has become an intellectually lazy attempt to neutralize opposition to greater inconvenient truths. No serious person uses it anymore and expects to not endure rightful scorn and ridicule. It most likely is having the opposite effect whenever it is floated.
They Think We Are Stupid, Volume 13
By Aaron Kheriaty, MD | Human Flourishing | January 27, 2025
Everything you need to know about our ruling class’s opinion of you. As always, these headlines are presented without commentary.
The CIA Report: Why a Low Confidence Finding is the Height of Hypocrisy
By Jonathan Turley | January 27, 2025
Every modern president seems to promise transparency during their campaigns, but few ever seem to get around to it. Once in power, the value of being opaque becomes evident. We will have to wait to see if President Donald Trump will fulfill his pledges, but so far this is proving the cellophane administration. Putting aside his constant press gaggles and conferences, the Administration has ordered wholesale disclosures of long-withheld files from everything from the JFK investigation to, most recently, the CIA COVID origins report. That report is particularly stinging for both the Biden Administration and its media allies.
Newly-confirmed CIA Director John Ratcliffe released the report, which details how it views the lab theory as the most likely explanation for the virus. Expressing “low confidence,” the agency still favored that theory over the natural origins theory, which was treated as sacrosanct by the media and favored by figures like Anthony Fauci. (Other recent reports have contradicted the equally orthodox view on the closing of schools, showing no material benefit in terms of slowing the transmission of COVID).
Even a low-confidence finding shows the height of hypocrisy in Washington where politicians and pundits savaged any scientist who even suggested the possibility that the virus was man-made and likely originated in the Wuhan lab near the site of the outbreak.
This follows a recent disclosure in the Wall Street Journal of a report on how the Biden administration may have suppressed dissenting views supporting the lab theory on the origin of the COVID-19 virus. Not only were the FBI and its top experts excluded from a critical briefing of President Biden, but government scientists were reportedly warned that they were “off the reservation” in supporting the lab theory.
As previously discussed, many journalists used the rejection of the lab theory to paint Trump as a bigot. By the time Biden became president, not only were certain government officials heavily invested in the zoonotic or natural origin theory, but so were many in the media.
Reporters used opposition to the lab theory as another opportunity to pound their chests and signal their virtue.
MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace mocked Trump and others for spreading one of his favorite “conspiracy theories.” MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt insisted that “we know it’s been debunked that this virus was manmade or modified,”
MSNBC’s Joy Reid also called the lab leak theory “debunked bunkum,” while CNN reporter Drew Griffin criticized spreading the “widely debunked” theory. CNN host Fareed Zakaria told viewers that “the far right has now found its own virus conspiracy theory” in the lab leak.
NBC News’s Janis Mackey Frayer described it as the “heart of conspiracy theories.”
The Washington Post was particularly dogmatic. When Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark) raised the theory, he was chastised for “repeat[ing] a fringe theory suggesting that the ongoing spread of a coronavirus is connected to research in the disease-ravaged epicenter of Wuhan, China.”
Likewise, after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) mentioned the lab theory, Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler mocked him: “I fear @tedcruz missed the scientific animation in the video that shows how it is virtually impossible for this virus jump from the lab. Or the many interviews with actual scientists. We deal in facts, and viewers can judge for themselves.”
As these efforts failed and more information emerged supporting the lab theory, many media figures just looked at their shoes and shrugged. Others became more ardent. In 2021, New York Times science and health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli was still calling on reporters not to mention the “racist” lab theory.
In Kessler’s case, he wrote that the lab theory was “suddenly credible” as if it had sprung from the head of Zeus rather than having been supported for years by scientists, many of whom had been canceled and banned.
As these figures were attacking reports, Biden officials were sitting on these reports. Figures like Fauci did nothing to support those academics being canceled or censored for raising the theory.
The very figures claiming to battle “disinformation” were suppressing opposing views that have now been vindicated as credible. It was not only the lab theory. In my recent book, I discuss how signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration were fired or disciplined by their schools or associations for questioning COVID-19 policies.
The suppression of the lab theory proves the ultimate fallacy of censorship. Throughout history, censorship has never succeeded. It has never stopped a single idea or a movement. It has a perfect failure rate. Ideas, like water, have a way of finding their way out in time.
Yet, as the last few years have shown, it does succeed in imposing costs on those with dissenting views. For years, figures like Bhattacharya (who was recently awarded the prestigious Intellectual Freedom Award by the American Academy of Sciences and Letters) were hounded and marginalized.
Others opposed Bhattacharya’s right to offer his scientific views, even under oath. For example, in one hearing, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) expressed disgust that Bhattacharya was even allowed to testify as “a purveyor of COVID-19 misinformation.”
Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik decried an event associated with Bhattacharya, writing that “we’re living in an upside-down world” because Stanford University allowed dissenting scientists to speak at a scientific forum. Hiltzik also wrote a column titled “The COVID lab leak claim isn’t just an attack on science, but a threat to public health.”
One of the saddest aspects of this story is that many of these figures in government, academia and the media were not necessarily trying to shield China. Some were motivated by their investment in the narrative while others were drawn by the political and personal benefits that came from joining the mob against a minority of scientists.
The CIA report does not resolve this debate, but it shows that there is a legitimate debate despite the overwhelming message of the media and the attacks on scientists. Of course, the same media and political figures responsible for this culture of intimidation have simply moved on. The value of an alliance with the media is that such embarrassing contradictions are not reported. At most, these figures shrug and turn to the next subject for groupthink and mob action.
Did Trump Halt Aid to Ukraine?
By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR 21 | January 24, 2025
Yesterday, there were a number of “headlines” in the US media claiming all foreign aid was stopped—except for Israel and Egypt. But the Pentagon weighed in today denying that it affects Ukraine:
“A Pentagon official confirmed that Trump’s executive order freezing foreign aid applies only to development programs, not security assistance to Ukraine.” -VOA
When I spoke with Judge Napolitano and Nima today, I had not seen these reports. However, while Trump’s order does not curtail security assistance (i.e., weapons, vehicles and ammunition) already in the pipeline, it does freeze the assistance funds that flow through State Department channels:
The Trump administration has reportedly frozen USAID projects as part of its foreign assistance audit
The Trump administration has frozen projects in Ukraine that were funded through the US Agency for International Development, Reuter reported on Friday, citing a USAID official.
The official told the news agency that USAID officers responsible for projects in Ukraine were told to stop all work. The projects that were frozen reportedly include support for schools and healthcare, including maternal care and the vaccination of children.
So part of the Ukrainian grift machine is shut down for the next three months. That is a start in the right direction.
Even if the US under the Trump administration continues to funnel weapons to Ukraine, this does not solve Ukraine’s fundamental weakness — i.e., the lack of trained soldiers. The New York Times published a bizarre piece of illogical nonsense today under the title, Ukraine Is Losing Fewer Soldiers Than Russia — but It’s Still Losing the War. This is simply a pile of fetid horse manure. I am not even going to waste time deconstructing the lies the permeate this piece of propaganda. Let’s deal with facts:
- Russia has at least an 8:1 advantage in artillery shells since 2022.
- Russia has air supremacy and is able to drop massive glide bombs on Ukrainian positions, while Ukraine has not comparable capability.
- Russia has more drones and has deployed drones guided by fiber optic cable and artificial intelligence. Ukraine has no such capability.
- Russia has more tanks and armored personnel carriers.
But we also have hard numbers from Ukrainian sources about a Ukrainian / Russian exchange of dead soldiers. Check out this graphic:
Yes, you are reading that correctly. Russia received the bodies of 49 soldiers and, in turn, delivered the remains of 757 Ukrainian troops. In other words, for every dead Russian soldier there were 15 dead Ukrainians. That data tells you everything you need to know about the true extent of Ukrainian losses and exposes the prevarication of the New York Times reporters.
However, the Times makes one damning admission:
Western intelligence agencies have been reluctant to disclose their internal calculations of Ukrainian casualties for fear of undermining an ally. American officials have previously said that Kyiv withholds this information from even the closest allies.
Yes, the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency are not reporting the real Ukrainian losses because of politics. Just one more example of the politicization of intelligence. … Full article
CNN to lay off hundreds of staff
RT | January 23, 2025
CNN is planning to axe hundreds of its 3,500 workforce as soon as Thursday, as the US media multinational eyes reorientation towards global digital audiences, people familiar with the matter have told CNBC.
The unit of Warner Bros Discovery is reportedly rearranging its TV production while expanding digital subscription offers. The layoffs are projected to help the news organization reduce production costs and consolidate teams, CNBC claimed on Wednesday, citing anonymous sources.
The cuts are not expected to affect the CNN’S most recognizable names, the sources said, adding that several shows that are currently produced in New York or Washington could move to Atlanta amid cost reduction.
The multinational introduced a digital paywall last October, when it began charging a monthly fee of $3.99 from its frequent users.
NBC News, owned by Comcast, the world’s fourth-largest broadcaster by revenue, is also planning job cuts this week, CNBC noted, citing sources familiar with the situation, who specified that the layoffs will be well under 50 staff.
CNBC noted that the current news media landscape is in transition as watching linear TV is becoming less popular, with more people consuming their news on streaming services and through social media.
The Washington Post announced earlier this month that it would dismiss around 4% of its workforce, or fewer than 100 employees, in an effort to reduce costs, as the newspaper struggles with increasing losses. In November, the Associated Press announced plans to slash some 8% of its workforce as the news agency seeks to update operations and products.
The Budapest Memorandum: The Fake Narrative Supporting a Long War in Ukraine
By Professor Glenn Diesen | January 21, 2025
Narratives have been constructed to support a long war in Ukraine. For example, the narrative of an “unprovoked invasion” was important to criminalise diplomacy as the premise suggests negotiations would reward Russian military adventurism and embolden further Russian aggression. Meanwhile, NATO escalating the war creates costs that outweigh the benefits to Russia.
Russia’s violation of the Budapest Memorandum is a key narrative that supports a long war. It is constantly referenced as a reason why Russia cannot be trusted to abide by a peace agreement, and why the war must keep going. The argument is that Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in return for security guarantees for its territorial integrity. Russia’s breach of this agreement suggests it cannot be trusted and that the only reliable security guarantees must come from NATO membership. Furthermore, the West must continue to send weapons to Ukraine to honour the security guarantees of the Budapest Memorandum.
In February 2022, a few days before the Russian invasion, Zelensky referred to the Budapest Memorandum: “Ukraine has received security guarantees for abandoning the world’s third nuclear capability. We don’t have that weapon. We also have no security.” The Budapest Memorandum was again used by Zelensky in October 2024 to support the argument that Ukraine must either have NATO or nukes: “Either Ukraine will have nuclear weapons, and then it will be a defence for us, or Ukraine will be in NATO”.
This article presents facts and arguments that challenge the false narrative of the Budapest Memorandum, which aims to delegitimise diplomacy. Criticising the narrative of the Budapest Memorandum does not entail “legitimising” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which is a common tactic to smear and censor criticism against the narratives supporting a long war.
No Security Guarantees and No Ukrainian Nuclear Weapons
The Budapest Memorandum does not offer any security “guarantees”, rather it provides “assurances”. Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer, who was part of the US negotiation team in 1994, argues the US was explicit that “guarantees” should not be confused with “assurances”. Pifer also confirms this was understood by both the Ukrainians and the Russians:
“American officials decided the assurances would have to be packaged in a document that was not legally-binding. Neither the Bush nor Clinton administrations wanted a legal treaty that would have to be submitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification. State Department lawyers thus took careful interest in the actual language, in order to keep the commitments of a political nature. U.S. officials also continually used the term “assurances” instead of “guarantees,” as the latter implied a deeper, even legally-binding commitment of the kind that the United States extended to its NATO allies”.[1]
Ukraine also did not have any nuclear weapons. The nuclear weapons in question were former Soviet nuclear weapons that were stationed in Ukraine, but under the control of Moscow. Kiev did not and could not operate or maintain these weapons, which is usually left out of the narrative. Furthermore, in the Minsk agreement of 1991, Ukraine had already committed itself to the “destruction of nuclear weapons” on its territory.[2]
The Not-So-Sacred Memorandum
In December 1994, the US, UK, and Russia met in the Hungarian capital and offered security commitments in three separate agreements with Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. These three countries agreed to relinquish the nuclear weapons that had been left on their territory after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and in return, the US, UK and Russia offered commitments to not undermine their security. The Budapest Memorandum outlined key principles such as “to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind”, and to “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine”. In a display of cherry-picking, NATO countries constantly ignore the first commitment but constantly refer to the second commitment.
The US claims its use of economic coercion and violation of Ukrainian sovereignty was in support of democracy and human rights as opposed to advancing its own interests. Thus, the US freed itself from its commitments under the Budapest Memorandum. Under the so-called rules-based international order, the US and its allies claim the prerogative to exempt themselves from international law, norms and agreements under the guise of supporting humanitarian law and liberal democratic norms.[3]
When the US imposed sanctions on Belarus in 2013, Washington explicitly stated that the Budapest Memorandum was not legally binding and that US actions were exempted as the US was allegedly promoting human rights:
“Although the Memorandum is not legally binding, we take these political commitments seriously and do not believe any U.S. sanctions, whether imposed because of human rights or non-proliferation concerns, are inconsistent with our commitments to Belarus under the Memorandum or undermine them. Rather, sanctions are aimed at securing the human rights of Belarusians and combating the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and other illicit activities, not at gaining any advantage for the United States”.[4]
The Western-backed coup in 2014 had been an even more blatant violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. The West interfered in the domestic affairs of Ukraine, imposed economic sanctions, and finally toppled the Ukrainian president to pull the country into NATO’s orbit. The commitments under the Budapest Memorandum were cast aside as the West claimed to support a “democratic revolution”, despite being an unconstitutional coup that did not even enjoy majority support from the Ukrainians and only a small minority of Ukrainians supported NATO membership.
International law imposes rules and mutual constraints that limit foreign policy flexibility, but in return deliver reciprocity and thus predictability. Once the West freed itself from mutual constraints in the Budapest Memorandum, Russia also abandoned it. US Ambassador Jack Matlock who participated in negotiating an end to the Cold War, questions the validity of the Budapest Memorandum after the coup in 2014. According to Matlock, the principle in international law of rebus sic stantibus means that agreements should be upheld “provided things remain the same”. Matlock argues that Russia “strictly observed its obligations in the Budapest Memorandum for 13 years” even as NATO expanded towards its borders, although the coup of 2014 created “a radically different international situation”. Matlock thus concludes that Russia was “entitled to ignore the earlier agreement”.[5]
Learning the right lessons
An honest assessment of why the Budapest Memorandum collapsed is important to assess how new agreements can be improved. NATO’s demand for hegemony in Europe and rejection of a common European security architecture inevitably led to the collapse of common agreements as the West would no longer accept the principle of mutual constraints and obligations. Liberal hegemony entailed that the West could exempt itself from international law and agreements, while Russia would still abide by them. The narrative of Ukrainian nuclear weapons, security guarantees, and ignoring the US and UK violation of the Budapest Memorandum serves the purpose of sowing distrust in any future security agreements with Russia. A mutually beneficial peace is possible if we first return to the truth.
[1] S. Pifer, 2011. The Trilater Proce The United States, Ukraine, Russia and Nuclear Weapons, Foreign Policy at Brookings, Arms Control Series, Paper 6, May 2011, p.17. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/05_trilateral_process_pifer.pdf
[2] Agreement on Strategic Forces Concluded between the 11 members of the Commonwealth of Independent States on December 30, 1991. https://www.bits.de/NRANEU/START/documents/strategicforces91.htm
[3] G. Diesen, ‘The Case for Dismantling the Rules-Based International Order, Substack, 23 December 2024.
[4] US Embassy in Belarus, ‘Belarus: Budapest Memorandum’, U.S. Embassy in Minsk, 12 April 2013.
[5] J. Matlock, ‘Ambassador Jack Matlock on Ukraine, Russia, and the West’s Mistakes’, Nuova Rivista Storica
Failed State America. Joe Biden’s absolute destruction of freedom of speech
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 20, 2025
Sometimes the internet seems to be overbrimming with video clips showing hilarious examples of what a failed state actually looks like. One of the most common is MPs, or ‘deputies’ actually fighting in their own parliaments against one another. The irony of these clips is that they are usually uploaded by westerners who use to them as a tool to boost or gentrify the reality of western countries’ democratic models.
But no more.
Thanks to Joe Biden’s genocidal maniacs club, the last days of his rule gave us a gem in the form of a press conference where the limit of just how America is anything but a functioning democracy was stretched to breaking point in what appeared to both be deeply sad yet comical at the same time.
As the odious Anthony Blinken gave his patronizing speech to the so-called journalists amassed before him which felt a little like an aristocrat who had gathered the servants in the library to congratulate them on finding an item of lost jewelry of her ladyship’s, we witnessed in real time what America and what these State Department’s press briefings really are: a fraud.
Blinken thanked those present for asking difficult questions, when in fact, none had really been asked in 4 years. Why? Because that is not part of the unwritten rules of how these press briefings work. But the moment he had mentioned the “difficult questions” he was, perhaps appropriately, delivered a series of difficult questions by the Jewish American journalist Max Blumenthal. What was not so surprising was how none of those questions were answered as Blinken, being a smart operator, knew if he kept composed and didn’t rise to the bait it would probably anger Blumenthal even more allowing the tirade to look on camera at least like a rant which had got out of control. Seconds passed and Blumenthal was ushered away by officials which he didn’t offer any resistance to. Moments passed before the veteran Arab journalist Sam Husseini also asked more difficult questions to an increasingly startled Blinken before we see the extent of how far America has abandoned its own free speech doctrine which it used to espouse to the rest of the world: Husseini was actually physically removed by overweight, armed police officers who you can see quite clearly feel uncomfortable about what they are doing, which most people would associate with a tin pot West African country’s ruling junta and not the American government at a press conference.
But the really shocking part of this story was yet to come: the absolute refusal by colleagues in the press room to even verbally object will have stunned journalists all over the world. It provokes many questions about journalism and what these individuals in the room think they are actually doing. We were given though a clue to quite how far journalism has died in the West and been replaced by a cheaper, easy wipe brand called ‘pseudo journalism’ – where actors take one function of journalists but who effectively work for the ruling elite rather than previously for the masses who used to fund the model by buying the actual publications. CNN reporting of the fiasco was very telling. They lost no time putting the boot into Blumenthal, who, naturally they must despise as he functions as a real journalist and they have long forgotten what this entails years ago, opting for the new model of fake news operator. They referred to Blumenthal as an “activist” – a typical slur from big media to individual journalists who carry out stellar work.
The truth about this incident is that such press conferences at the state department or indeed in the European Commission in Brussels are entirely staged. They are a theatre concocted by the elite and the press themselves as part of a dirty deal whereby the journalists ask the softball questions which allow the top figures to deliver the prepared spiel. The so-called journalists sign up to this and in return get access to individuals and scoops – although it’s important to note that the scoops are nearly always new items which serve the state’s purpose. It’s a game which has been going on for a long time and the humble masses don’t understand how they are being taken for a ride by the magicians’ allusion of something which might look credible. In these press gatherings some journalists are even asked to present certain questions which are even suggested by those holding the conference, something I witnessed myself a lot in Brussels.
It was not that the questions put to Blinken were so harsh, or even unconventional. The point is that both Blumenthal and Husseini broke the house rules when they went rogue and did what most people would view to be the role of real journalists: ask unscripted questions. Look what happens when journalist do this. We are treated to a debacle which we would expect to see in the global south, or certainly in Nazi Germany in the 30s. And this is America?
The cat is out of the bag. The whole world can see now how America has lost all its links with the democratic model and become and autocracy, run, financed and ruled by Israel’s cash. Netanyahu and his cronies must have had a really good laugh watching those journalists being removed like that. Presumably their press accreditations will be removed and certainly the worry that both of them will have is that they now mysteriously find themselves being investigated for tax irregularities, theft, fraud or even having child porn on their computers. Journalists like Blumenthal are the biggest threat to the deep state as they will never be part of the establishment and therefore will always be the most dangerous guy to tackle. The one who has nothing to lose is your biggest threat. I don’t imagine Trump and his cabal will be any kinder to him despite The Grayzone taking a more grown-up approach to Russia and how the Ukraine war is reported, as opposed to CNN’s stenographic reproduction of the State Department’s narrative, seasoned by fake news on occasion.
The real enemy for western elites is the feral truth. All pretense of a functioning democracy were eradicated in a matter of minutes with this press conference calamity which has now replaced those MPs in that central European country throwing chairs at one another in their own parliament. Great job, Joe.
The whitewashing of Western crimes in Syria
By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 18, 2025
After the fall of Syria and the partial collapse of the Axis of Resistance, a predictable smear campaign has been launched in Western media, which, like for Russia, is based on distortion and lies.
It is a well-oiled Western psyops campaign to make the public believe that after Hitler, Bashar al-Assad was a feared dictator, just like they do with Putin and, before that, Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.
The world was surprised when, on December 8, 2024, the most feared terrorists took over the old Syria, a semi-secular state form, and immediately turned it into a caliphate.
But for the American imperial planners, their European allies, and their terrorist proxies, including those in Ukraine, there was no surprise. They knew about it. The NATO-sponsored terrorist militia was trained by the CIA in Idlib, and provided with drones by Ukraine, drones that are produced in Ukraine, from semi-finished products from a company in the Netherlands called Metinvest B.V.
Large parts of the Syrian army did not defect, as the Western media and so-called experts claim. About 9,000 soldiers are still held captive in the Syrian desert, or in the Sednaya prison, held by the terrorists.
Not only the terrorists but the American army is in charge everywhere in Syria. American rulers secretly prepared for the occupation of Syria, as they did with Iraq. They primed the terrorists in Idlib for the final offensive with Operation Dawn of Freedom.
The operation included the Turkish-financed and supported so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA), which falls under the umbrella of the U.S., also known as the Syrian National Army. As early as 2016, Turkey began to assemble a new coalition of so-called Syrian rebel groups, including many former FSA fighters, in an attempt to create a more cohesive and effective opposition force. This coalition consists of the terrorists most feared by the Syrian people, who have been massacring civilians since 2011. Among others, the Syrian National Army includes Chinese Uyghurs, notorious for their brutality among head-choppers.
Little known by the Western public is that the so-called Syrian National Army was active in Karabakh during the 2020 war between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Turkey provided military support to Azerbaijan by supplying the terrorists of the Syrian National Army. This proxy army of international mercenaries, controlled by the U.S. and Turkey, has been fighting in Ukraine for the NATO-backed Kiev regime. The most brutal of its senior members is Abu al Shishani, who has been hiding in Ukraine for years – despite his U.S. handlers declaring him dead in 2017.
Of course, the Western terrorist sponsors wash their hands of blood. After all, there are supposed to be no real U.S. “boots on the ground” in Syria, they will argue, but there is an army base coordinating the terrorists who fight for them. The same applies to Turkey.
Turkey has two faces: it is a member of NATO while trying to realize, under Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a political aspiration for a great Ottoman empire based on Islam. Some say it is utopian or a lie, but it is not. The Syrian people know this very well; for 14 years, this has been going on and, unfortunately, has come true.
Then there is the other “superpower” in the region, the tiny Zionist apartheid project called Israel. No one, not even the International Atomic Energy Agency, knows what its nuclear weapons arsenal is, and it has never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Since 2022, Israel has become a fully-fledged fascist regime, the most ultra-right government in the history of the colonialist project, which carries out the agenda of the settlers. These settlers are dangerous terrorists and, like ISIS (Daesh), use religion, racism and murder as weapons against all other beliefs and opinions. Yet the United States and its European lackeys continue to brazenly back the Zionist rogue state. The U.S. has supplied it with $20 billion in military aid over the past year despite the genocide in Gaza.
One of the seven political parties that govern Israel is the Otzma Yehudit Party. This party advocates for the deportation of those they consider to be the “enemies of Israel”, such as the Arabs. The party has been described in the international press and also in Israel itself as an extremist, ultra-nationalist, fascist, and racist organization.
One of the supporters of this party is Daniella Weiss, who watched with her extremist settler friends as “Gazans” were murdered on a boat off the coast of Gaza and cheered. She and her group are invited to the inauguration of Donald Trump, who himself is a Zionist and his entire incoming administration consists of nothing but Zionists.
After the attack of the U.S. and Turkish-sponsored terrorists in the north of Syria, Israel attacked the south, in Dara’a, which was agreed upon, planned and coordinated with the U.S. and Turkey. Dams and bridges were blown up, and large-scale bombardments on the Syrian army were carried out. Large parts of the army were captured and imprisoned, left in the desert, or the former prison Sednaya. They surrendered; the superior force was too great. Remnant army forces, mainly from the “Tiger Forces”, are fighting the terrorists in the hills around Hama and Latakia.
The Western media was there suspiciously quickly, after a day or so, visiting Sednaya for photo-ops. All kinds of so-called Western journalists arrived in Syria, mainly to promote the narrative that the terrible regime was gone, Syria was “free”, and Assad had turned the former Sednaya prison into a “human slaughterhouse”.
Many fake stories, especially by CNN, about so-called prisoners who were hung on ropes, photos were distributed, which later turned out to be photos from a museum in Iraq. There were also stories about prisoners in underground dungeons, yet no proof of this has ever been found.
Certainly, everything was prepared for the “journalists”; they were already waiting in Jordan, primed to cross into Syria when the “surprise fall” happened.
Years ago, there was a report made by Amnesty International called the “Slaughter House”, but now, in 2025, no evidence has been found for this fake report. What has become clear is that a large number of the prisoners were ISIS (Daesh) members, who have now been released and are imposing a terror regime on minorities such as the Alawites, Christians, and Kurds.
The West is now professing innocence and wants good relations with what they call the new government. All kinds of Western politicians have visited the terrorist leader Abu Mohammed al-Golani. He is dressed up in a new suit and his beard is trimmed. The West wants to send the Syrian refugees back from Europe. There are also flight connections again. The airport of Damascus is changed into a mosque. Is the new caliphate going to send its terrorists on holiday? To do what? Commit attacks, perhaps? Russia, in particular, must be careful, especially after the mass murder at the Crocus City shopping complex last March when 145 people were killed by Daesh-linked terrorists. Many terrorists in the new Syria are from the Caucasus and have years of experience.
Transferring terrorists to Idlib after the fall of Aleppo in 2016 was never a good idea. History has proven it.
The U.S. and its European partners want to freeze the conflict in Donbass, which can result in the same problem as in Syria. That was the biggest mistake by Assad and the former government, which took too humane a position on terrorists.
Pharma Spends Billions on Drug Ads, Fears Trump Administration Will Try to Ban Them
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 16, 2025
Drug companies report their biggest concern with the incoming Trump administration is the fear that the government will try to ban direct-to-consumer drug ads, according to a new report from The Lever that examines the industry practice.
Companies said such a ban would “almost certainly” lead to a drop in drug sales, according to a recent report by industry research firm Intron Health, which claims the return on investment for drug ads is as high as 100%-500%, depending on the drug.
The U.S. and New Zealand are the only two countries that allow drug companies to advertise directly to consumers.
When President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.), was running as a presidential candidate, he promised to ban the ads through an executive order on his first day in office.
When he tapped Kennedy, founder and former chairman of Children’s Health Defense, to lead HHS, Trump criticized drugmakers and Big Food companies, saying they “have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation.”
If confirmed, Kennedy would oversee the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which sets policies on direct-to-consumer advertising by pharma.
“We see this as the biggest imminent threat from RFK and the new Trump administration,” the Intron report’s authors wrote.
The Lever predicted the chances the administration can successfully ban these ads are “slim,” but said Big Pharma’s reaction shows how dependent the industry — and the media conglomerates it supports — has become on advertising drugs to consumers.
Critics say the ads “misinform patients and underemphasize treatment risks,” in part because they don’t provide all the information a patient needs to make an informed decision.
The ads also lead to unnecessary drug prescriptions, which The Lever said raises healthcare costs for consumers and taxpayers.
Most heavily advertised drugs don’t provide meaningful therapeutic benefit
Direct-to-consumer marketing in the U.S. began in 1981, with limited success at first because the FDA required drugmakers to list all possible side effects in the ads, according to The Lever’s short history of the practice.
Under the Clinton administration in 1997, the FDA relaxed its policies, allowing drugmakers to list only “major risks” in their ads, paving the way for a new and massive wave of television advertising for prescription drugs.
Spending on ads shot up 330% between 1996 and 2005, reaching $4.2 billion by 2004, and continued to grow after that.
Between 2016 and 2018, drugmakers spent $17.8 billion on ads for more than 550 drugs. Most of these drugs treat chronic medical conditions like arthritis, diabetes and depression.
According to a 2021 report by the congressional watchdog Government Accountability Office, 60% of the $560 billion that Medicare and its beneficiaries spent on drugs went to the advertised drugs.
The Lever claimed there are benefits to such advertising. Citing a paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research, it suggested that advertising can “somewhat” educate consumers and extend drug care to “undertreated patients.”
However, the report said advertising also increases the number of patients that request an advertised medication and the likelihood their prescriber will give it to them, whether they need it or not.
The ads also lead to greater use of higher-cost drugs over generics, even when those drugs offer no greater benefit.
The Lever cites a 2023 study in JAMA Network Open that assessed the “therapeutic value” — whether a drug led to improved clinical outcomes — of the top 73 most heavily advertised drugs. The study found that only 1 in 4 advertised drugs had a high therapeutic value.
Study author Neeraj Patel told The Lever :
“Many consumers might assume that the drugs they see all the time on TV are for cutting-edge therapies that are groundbreaking advances over the other treatment options on the market …
“Our study suggests that assumption is usually wrong: Heavily advertised drugs often do not necessarily provide meaningful therapeutic benefits as opposed to other therapeutic options.”
Obstacles to ending direct-to-consumer ads
The Lever said it is “relatively unlikely” Kennedy will be able to ban the ads, partly because efforts to merely restrict drug advertising have been defeated in courts on First Amendment grounds.
The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal made similar predictions. However, The Defender reported that a wider field of experts disagree on whether such a ban is legally or constitutionally feasible.
During Trump’s first administration, a federal judge blocked an HHS rule requiring drugmakers to include prices in their TV commercials, saying it exceeded the agency’s statutory authority.
“Kennedy could continue to push for cost transparency or require FDA review of all drug ads,” The Lever noted, “but any such reform attempts would likely be slow-going and challenged by the industry.”
Big Pharma’s lobbying arm, which spent $294 million lobbying last year on issues like drug ads, is also an obstacle.
TV and radio broadcasters are also expected to fight a drug ad ban because Big Pharma is one of the top advertising spenders. Last year, the National Association of Broadcaster industry lobbying group spent $8.8 million lobbying on issues including direct-to-consumer advertising, according to lobbying records.
Prescription drugs accounted for 30.7% of ad minutes across evening news programs on ABC, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and NBC last year through Dec. 15, according to the WSJ.
The Lever proposed less drastic measures to “mitigate” some of the negative impacts of this advertising rather than banning it altogether.
For example, the FDA could require pharmaceutical companies to include disclaimers about the effectiveness of the drugs versus other drugs already on the market. Or drug companies could offer a “Drug Facts Box” label, that would provide one-page summaries of the risks and benefits of new drugs.
The agency could also extend its requirement, instituted in 2023, that TV and radio drug ads use “consumer-friendly” and “understandable” language to disclose potential side effects, applying it to over-the-counter medicines, dietary supplements or other products, which also account for hundreds of millions of advertising dollars.
“Even if all of those drug ads filling the TV and computer screens aren’t likely to go away soon, advocates hold out hope that regulators could at least require them to be more informative and comprehensible,” The Lever reported.
Related articles in The Defender:
- Can the Trump Administration Ban Big Pharma Advertising? Experts Weigh In
- ‘Ask Your Doctor’: Can’t Someone in Congress Make These Endless Drug Ads Disappear?
- ‘Dangerous’: Global PR Giant Launches Provocative HPV Vaccine Ads Targeting Gen Zers
- ‘Brought to You by Pfizer’: Pharma Giant Spends More on Ads, News Sponsorships, Than Research
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.
Featured Video
US Blockade on Iran Just Triggered Iran’s HARSHEST Response Yet
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Guatemala: A Test Tube of Repression
By Robert Parry | Consortium News | October 3, 2010
Last week’s grotesque revelation about American public health doctors infecting nearly 700 Guatemalans with venereal disease to test penicillin from 1946-48 marked just the start of the U.S. government’s post-World War II abuse of that Central American country.
Indeed, as troubling as the VD experiments were, U.S. administrations from Dwight Eisenhower to Ronald Reagan would do much worse, treating Guatemala as a test tube for Cold War counterinsurgency experiments that led to the slaughter of some 200,000 people, including genocide against Mayan Indian tribes. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Arms industry given direct influence over university courses
- Another Trump Flip Flop: From ‘Kill FISA’ to ‘Clean Renewal’
- AIPAC ‘slimeball’ Eric Swalwell leaves the stage
- UAE to close its flagship Burj Al Arab hotel for 1.5 years after Iranian strikes
- US-Israeli Mideast war damage to energy infrastructure may cost $58bln
- ‘Normalization Talks’: Lebanon No Longer Has A Government
- US Navy Confirms ‘mishap’ to $250 million spy drone downed by Iran
- Students, professors martyred in US-Israeli war of terror targeting universities and research institutes
- We Are the Barbarians
- The Iranian knot needs to be untangled, not cut – Lavrov
- If Americans Knew
- Declassified Files Expose Jewish Pre-state Underground Militia’s Contacts With Nazi Germany
- No diapers, no relief: Gaza’s infants face growing hygiene crisis because of Israeli restrictions
- More US troops head into harm’s way, as cost of (Israel’s) war climbs – Daily Update
- ‘Not Acceptable’: President of Iran Condemns Trump For His ‘Desecration of Jesus, the Prophet of Peace’
- We Are the Barbarians
- Netanyahu Says the Trump Administration Gives Him Reports on Iran Talks Every Day
- Second Contractor Steps Forward to Blow the Whistle on Israeli Attacks at Gaza Aid Site
- Mighty Israel wants all of its neighbors to be defenseless – Daily Update
- Emergency waivers move arms for Israel, UAE to speed lane
- Caitlin Johnstone: Nobody’s “Obsessed” With Israel — It’s Just A Uniquely Horrible Country
- No Tricks Zone
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
Aletho News 