Barnes Against the Blackout
By Spencer J. Quinn | The Occidental Observer | January 2, 2026
In short, there is no unique or special case against Nazi barbarism and horrors unless one assumes that it is far more wicked to exterminate Jews than to massacre Gentiles. While this latter value judgment appears to have become rather generally accepted in the Western world since 1945, I am personally still quaint enough to hold it to be reprehensible to exterminate either Jews or Gentiles.”
—Harry Elmer Barnes
INTRODUCTION
Anyone still questioning the relevance of World War II revisionism to politics today should realize how often our liberal, globalist elites not only invoke World War II, but also ignore, suppress, or besmirch revisionism. Whenever a mainstream personality invites a revisionist on his program, he gets swiftly rebuked and called a Nazi not only by the Left but also by people presumably on the Right. Recently, Jewish commentator Mark Levin invoked the massacre of German civilians during World War II to justify the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Clearly, whenever someone questions the authority of our liberal elites, they fire back with World War II. Since Adolf Hitler and the Nazis represent the most extreme form of evil and since globalist liberalism is the ideological opposite of Nazism, any form of oppression and aggression by globalist liberals is justifiable—as long as it is aimed against so-called “Nazis.” And if you happen to be against liberalism or globalism these days, it’s only a matter of time before you get dubbed a “Nazi.”
Historian Harry Elmer Barnes understood this perfectly over seventy years ago and promoted revisionism in the face of eerily similar oppression and backlash. Nine of his most incisive essays on the topic—written between 1951 and 1962—are collected in Barnes Against the Blackout, which was published by the Institute for Historical Review in 1991. Several important themes run through these essays. First, Barnes wishes to proselytize revisionism, and does so by constantly referencing and summarizing the great American works of revisionism of his day. These include:
- American Foreign Policy in the Making, 1932-1940 (1946) and President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War, 1941 (1948) by Charles Beard
- America’s Second Crusade (1950) by William Chamberlin
- The Roosevelt Myth (1948) by John T. Flynn
- Pearl Harbor: The Story of the Secret War (1947) by George Morgenstern
- The Tragedy of Europe (1940-1945) and Makers of War (1950) by Francis Neilson
- Design for War (1951) by Frederic Sanborn
- Back Door to War: The Roosevelt Foreign Policy 1933-1941 (1952) by Charles Tansill
Given the suffocating interventionist hysteria of the time, major publishers declined to publish these volumes despite how many of them had been written by prominent, well-respected historians. Either the publishers were ardent interventionists themselves, or they feared backlash from anti-revisionists who wielded great power in America, just as they do today. Except for the Neilson volumes, which were self-published, these works found only two small publishing houses brave enough to publish them: Regnery and Devin-Adair.
Two later volumes which Barnes discusses often are The Origins of the Second World War (1961) by AJP Taylor and The Forced War (1961) by David Hoggan. (See part one of my three-part review of Hoggan here.) These prove to be slight exceptions to Barnes’ America-centric approach since Taylor was British, and, although Hoggan was American, his work was only available in German at the time.
Another crucial theme running through Barnes Against the Blackout is the presentation of the evidence for revisionism. How do we know the official war narratives are less correct than what the revisionists offer? Barnes is never shy about sharing this information—and there is a lot of it. As with many essay collections from a single author about a single topic, there’s much overlap. And that’s okay. It’s never too much of a good thing revealing how President Franklin Delano Roosevelt “lied the United States into war.”
Describing exactly how the establishment suppressed revisionism in Barnes’ day emerges as another important theme. Barnes focuses on it most in his first two essays, both published in 1953: “Revisionism and the Historical Blackout” (which also serves as the first chapter in his collection Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace from the same year) and “The Court Historians Versus Revisionism.”
Barnes’ final theme is also his most speculative: extending revisionism into the Cold War and postulating how it might avert a nuclear Armageddon. Here is where we find Barnes at his most stunningly prescient but also were he winds up, in spots, to be somewhat dated. Through it all, he utilizes George Orwell’s 1984, which never fails to produce a parallel for whatever point Barnes wishes to make. He explores this novel’s uncanny mirroring of reality in the book’s final essay, 1952’s “How ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ Trends Threaten American Peace, Freedom, and Prosperity.”
Barnes Against the Blackout is also interesting for its seemingly negligible treatment of the Jews. Barnes says very little about them directly. However, this amounts to what I call an anti-theme because any reader familiar with Jewish power and supremacy can fill in the blanks where Barnes could have opined about the Jews, but didn’t—or at least didn’t seem to. This adds an extra layer of meaning to Barnes Against the Blackout.
THE EVIDENCE
The evidence for World War II revisionism which Barnes compiles appears in two distinct yet related branches of history: Pearl Harbor revisionism and Western European revisionism. For the former, he relies greatly on Tansill, Sanborn, and Morgenstern, and demonstrates how the U.S. not only goaded the Japanese into attacking as a “back door to war” against Japan’s ally Nazi Germany, but also knew where the attack would occur and approximately when, thereby outraging the American public into supporting military intervention. Barnes believes this “constituted one of the major public crimes of human history.”
The major facts line up as so:
- Roosevelt floated war with the Japanese as early as 1933 during one of his first cabinet meetings.
- The U.S. aided and encouraged Chiang Kai Shek to fight against the Japanese in China during the 1930s.
- Days before the Pearl Harbor attack, Roosevelt ignored Japanese Prince Fumimaro Konoye’s peace overtures which proposed humiliating concessions for Japan in return for “a little time and a face-saving formula.”
- In early 1941 Ambassador Joseph Grew had clearly warned that Pearl Harbor would be the likeliest point of attack. Despite agreements from Washington, US forces at Pearl Harbor remained unprepared for it.
- Secretary of War Henry Stimson stated on November 25, 1941 that, “the question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without too much danger to ourselves.”
- The US had intercepted the “East Wind Rain” message three days before the attack, which clearly signaled Japanese intentions. Yet Admiral Husband Kimmel and Lieutenant General Walter Short, who were responsible for Pearl Harbor, were kept in the dark about it.
Barnes presents most of this information while piercing holes in the specious logic of pro-interventionist works written by what he calls “court historians.” The two most relevant to Pearl Harbor are Herbert Feis, who wrote The Road to Pearl Harbor (1950), and Basil Rouch, who wrote Roosevelt from Munich to Pearl Harbor (1950). Barnes demonstrates how these historians either ignored, distorted, or misconstrued the above evidence. His point is clear: if the notions of Pearl Harbor being a surprise attack and Roosevelt’s naïve innocence about it were lies, there’s no telling what other lies had been told. It turns out there were many.
As for Western Europe, the facts are equally damning, if perhaps more voluminous. All of them cannot be included a single review, but the points Barnes most often bangs home include:
- The diplomatic history of the 1930s, as collected by Taylor and Hoggan, shows that Adolf Hitler did not want war and did what he could to avoid it.
- The diplomatic history also reveals that Hitler had made reasonable requests to Poland regarding the “international” (yet very German) city of Danzig; yet Polish leaders refused to negotiate at the urging of Lord Halifax in England who had given Poland a “blank check” assurance of English military support against Germany.
- In his last report as Chief of Staff in 1945, General George Marshall had claimed that Hitler “far from having any plan of world domination, did not even have any well-worked-out plan for collaborating with his Axis allies in limited wars, to say nothing of the gigantic task of conquering Russia.”
- Hitler had allowed tens of thousands of British troops to escape at Dunkirk “to promote peace sentiments in Britain.”
- Hitler had excellent reasons to invade the Soviet Union since the Soviets had “practiced sabotage, terrorism, and espionage against Germany, had resisted German attempts to establish a stable order in Europe, had conspired with Great Britain in the Balkans, and had menaced the Third Reich with troop concentrations.”
- Documentary evidence, such as “The German White Paper” found by the Germans after their conquest of Poland, demonstrates the extent to which American ambassador William Bullitt had assured Poland of American military support in the event of war with Germany. This was corroborated by Czechoslovak president Eduard Benés who claimed in his autobiography that on May 29th, 1939 Roosevelt himself had assured him that if war broke out in Europe, America would join the fight against Germany.
- The Lend-Lease program, the “Destroyer Deal” between Britain and the United States, the secret Tyler Kent documents, and Roosevelt’s 1941 meeting with Winston Churchill in Newfoundland offer circumstantial evidence that Roosevelt had clear belligerent intentions well before war was declared.
As with Pearl Harbor, Barnes often presents this evidence while reviewing books written by court historians. The most prominent of these is The Struggle Against Isolation, 1937–1940 (1952) by William Langer and SE Gleason. Despite never proclaiming Hitler’s innocence, Barnes repeatedly stresses that the man’s sole responsibility for starting the war is a complete falsehood—a falsehood which is the foundation of all post-1945 politics. In his 1962 essay “Revisionism and Brainwashing,” he states with characteristic flourish:
It is unlikely that there has been any vested interest in dogma, opinion, and politics since the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ equal in intensity to that built up around the allegation that Hitler was solely responsible for the outbreak of war in 1939.
One interesting side note: Barnes implies more than once that it was Hitler’s actions in East Asia rather than Europe which truly antagonized Roosevelt. This contradicts some of Barnes’ other claims about Roosevelt’s opposition to Hitler vis-à-vis Europe. Take, for example, this paragraph from the essay “Rauch on Roosevelt”:
Indeed, it was only in 1938, when Hitler recalled his military mission from China, where Nazi officers had been directing the forces of Chiang Kai-shek against the Japanese, that Roosevelt became actually hostile to Hitler in his policies, whatever the previous rhetoric. Right down through the Spanish Civil War, Mr. Roosevelt condoned when he did not favor, most of Hitler’s policies. Even as late as August, 1939, it appears from the Nazi Soviet Relations that Roosevelt was inclined to put nothing in the way of Hitler if he abandoned support of Japan, sent his military back to help Chiang, and delivered arms to the Chinese.
This is an interesting conundrum considering that Barnes brings up Benés’ recollection from May 1939 in the same essay.
THE BLACKOUT
Barnes spills a lot of ink outlining the ways in which revisionism was suppressed and marginalized after 1945. This often resulted from mainstream historians either having vested professional interests in perpetuating the “good war” myth of World War II—since they themselves promoted it while it was happening—or they sought the wealth, fame, and opportunity afforded to academics who adhered to the official narrative of the war.
In “Revisionism and the Historical Blackout” Barnes enumerates the following methods of suppression:
- Excluding revisionists from official documents, while allowing state-approved court historians free access to them
Barnes describes how revisionist historians had been barred from viewing many sensitive documents and in some cases had had their own notes confiscated after viewing the ones they were allowed to see. Barnes concedes that Charles Tansill did ultimately view more documents than other revisionists, but Tansill did not enjoy the free reign of information afforded to court historians like Langer and Feis.
- Intimidating publishers into not publishing revisionism
Barnes describes how political pressure groups not only ensured that revisionist volumes would not sell, but made it clear that publishers releasing such material would face business-crippling backlash. Barnes recalls how a major publisher explained this to him despite his personal sympathies towards revisionism. Libraries, book clubs, and nationwide periodicals also contributed to this blackout. Barnes mordantly notes that the post-1945 “Blackout Boys” outdid the Nazis in suppressing honest intellectual inquiry.
- Ignoring revisionist works that do get published
Barnes demonstrates how the majority of revisionist works simply did not get reviewed in important mainstream publications—or when they did, as with the case of Charles Beard, they received either cursory attention or were maliciously panned. It almost goes without saying that this silent treatment was not afforded to court historians, whose works received ample praise everywhere. Barnes relays the following recollection from journalist Oswald Garrison Villard to illustrate his point:
I myself rang up a magazine which some months previously had asked me to review a book for them and asked if they would accept another review from me. The answer was, “Yes, of course. What book had you in mind?” I replied, “Morgenstern’s Pearl Harbor.”
“Oh, that’s that new book attacking F.D.R. and the war, isn’t it?”
“Yes.”
“Well, how do you stand on it?”
“I believe, since his book is based on the records of the Pearl Harbor inquiry, he is right.”
“Oh, we don’t handle books of that type. It is against our policy.”
- Smearing revisionists personally
Barnes offers several examples of ad hominem attacks upon revisionist historians by the “Smearbund,” as he calls them. Often “isolationism” itself became a slur, as if labeling a person thusly were reason enough to dismiss him. More often, however, reviewers would attempt to ruin a revisionist’s reputation by imputing some evil or underhanded motive rather than argue the facts. Barnes notes how reviewers used phrases such as “bitterly partisan” or “blind anger” when describing Morgenstern while ignoring their own partisan anger. He also notes how one reviewer attempted to discredit Beard because he was hard of hearing and lived on a farm. One reviewer freely admitted to lambasting The Forced War without having read a word of it.
THE COLD WAR AND BEYOND
In his 1954 essay “The Chickens of the Interventionist Liberals Have Come Home to Roost,” Harry Elmer Barnes introduces the idea of the “totalitarian liberal.” Such men (as exemplified by Arthur Schlessinger Jr.) distinguished themselves from pre-World-War-II liberals in their lust for power and abandonment of principled anti-interventionism. Such men make up James Burnham’s managerial elite as described in his 1941 work The Managerial Revolution, which Barnes discusses. Such people reject “the coexistence of conflicting political and economic systems,” and in so doing promote a “we or they psychosis” which enables elites to wage war in the name of “collective security,” a notion which Barnes finds utterly spurious. This is how it was during World War II and it was no different during the Cold War, according to Barnes, except that both sides were mutually deterred by nuclear weapons.
Barnes further extends revisionism into the Cold War in his 1958 essay “Revisionism and the Promotion of Peace.” He remembers how despite standing against World-War-II intervention, patriotic political organizations like America First later fell in line with Cold War intervention “because of the business advantages in industry, trade and finance which an extravagant armament program provided.” President Eisenhower’s “military industrial complex,” in other words. In light of this, Barnes’ passionate belief in the critical importance of revisionism becomes crystal clear. If standing against intervention in 1939 could have spared tens of millions of lives, standing against it during the Cold War could spare humanity a nuclear Armageddon. Indeed, the specter of World War III haunts much of Barnes Against the Blackout.
The final essay in the collection, “How ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ Trends Threaten American Peace, Freedom, and Prosperity” takes the Cold War comparison even further. The “we or they psychosis” becomes the “war psychology,” which led to the absurdity of “perpetual war through perpetual peace.” This is straight out of Orwell’s 1984, which Barnes calls “the keenest and most penetrating work produced in this generation on the current trends in national policy and world affairs.” In the novel, Big Brother (whom Barnes considers a totalitarian liberal) manufactures phony outrages to prolong phony wars designed ultimately to consolidate very real power for himself and the elite classes. And the masses are either hypnotized enough by propaganda, intimidated enough by government, or distracted enough by entertainment to go along with it. Meanwhile, all reliable historical material is destroyed to disconnect the people from their past—just like what the Blackout Boys tried to do with revisionist accounts of World War II. Barnes sees 1984 as a direct mirror to reality.
And there is much truth to this, as shown by how Barnes uses his “Orwell Formula” to predict the Vietnam War as early as 1952:
The declining public interest in the Korean War has made President Truman and his associates the more willing to accept Churchill’s proposal to shift the main psychological impact of the cold war to Indochina, where it may both revive flagging American fear and excitement and also more directly protect adjacent British interests. The Orwell formula has been faithfully worked out in first directing fear and hatred against Nazi Germany, then against Soviet Russia, next shifting antagonism more toward Communist China, and then moving the chief center of interest in the struggle against the latter from Korea to Indochina.
Despite the clarity and prescience of this essay, Barnes makes a few questionable calls. In keeping with his aversion to the Orwellian doublethink of Cold War psychology and hysteria, he impugns the Truman Doctrine as a sham meant to “rehabilitate Mr. Truman’s fast-fading political prospects.” He also paints the USSR in a more benign light than it deserves—as if the United States were the aggressor during the Cold War and had no legitimate reason to employ deterrence or containment strategies against Communism. And in 1952, perhaps the Soviets did seem to some as unlikely to pose a real threat to American interests. But this was before they detonated their first hydrogen bomb in 1953. This was before their invasion of Hungary, and the Berlin Wall, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, and a host of other threatening actions. While Barnes makes excellent points about the injustice of blacking out revisionism, this was nothing compared to the psychological warfare the Soviets waged for decades against its own people which culminated in the terror famines, the Great Terror, and the gulags.
It seems that the Soviet Union during the Cold War made for a much more appropriate nemesis than did Nazi Germany. That Barnes seems to disagree, however, is not my bone of contention here. For all I know, Barnes is correct. However, the time he should have spent dispensing with counterarguments from seasoned cold warriors like George Kennan (who barely gets a mention in Barnes Against the Blackout) was instead spent admiring the life-imitating-art impact of 1984. Interesting and enlightening for sure, but hardly the final word on the subject.
THE JEWS
Direct treatment of the Jews in Barnes Against the Blackout rarely rises above incidental. Many of the “court historians” and “Blackout Boys” Barnes mentions do happen to be Jewish—Herbert Feis, Max Lerner, and Selig Adler are some obvious examples. However, just as many if not more are gentiles, such as William Langer, Samuel Eliot Morison, and Samuel Flagg Bemis. In his essays, Barnes never singles a person out as being Jewish. This certainly protects him from the charge of Jew-baiting, but it also prevents him from drawing conclusions from the fact that while a substantial proportion of anti-revisionists were Jews, none of the nine major revisionists mentioned in Part 1 were—clearly a meaningful data point.
When he does mention American Jews directly, it’s only to let them off the hook for pushing Roosevelt into war. In 1962’s “Blasting the Historical Blackout,” he states flatly that:
Roosevelt did not need any pressure from the Jews to create his interventionism and war policy. There is little evidence that he was deeply disturbed by Hitler’s anti-Jewish policy; he was much more annoyed by the fact that Hitler’s “New Deal” had succeeded in spectacular fashion while his own had failed to bring prosperity to the United States.
Maybe this is true, but it does not mean that influential Jews in media, finance, academia, and politics were not enthusiastic if not crucial facilitators of Roosevelt’s war policy. In his 2013 work How the Jews Defeated Hitler Benjamin Ginsburg describes how American Jews professed fierce loyalty to Roosevelt and did what they could to embroil the United States in a war with Germany. As I stated in my review:
Ginsburg describes how Jews in the private sector also war mongered during this time. The heavily Jewish Century Group called for a declaration of war against Germany following the surrender of France in 1940. The press also aided Jewish belligerence through its pro-Jewish bias. For example, when Lindbergh and the Century Group’s General John Pershing were giving speeches around the same time, the Jewish-owned New York Times gave Pershing front-page coverage and relegated Lindbergh to the back pages.
The Fight For Freedom Committee was more “all out” in its pro-war activities than the Century Group.
The FFF organized a nationwide effort –with the tacit support of the White House and the behind-the-scenes support of the British Embassy—to discredit isolationists and to mobilize public opinion against Germany and in support of American participation in the war.
And by “discredit,” of course, Ginsburg means ruthlessly slander and smear. The FFF thought nothing of labeling leading isolationists and America-Firsters like Lindbergh as Nazis, fascists, or dupes of the Axis. Ironically, they would often question the patriotism of such people as a form of intimidation which preceded the McCarthy era by over a decade. For example, because Senator Burton Wheeler wished to prevent the slaughter of American lives in an unnecessary war, the FFF declared that he was a “twentieth century Benedict Arnold.” The FFF also spied upon and collected compromising information on isolationists in Congress, such as Hamilton Fish. As it turned out, the FFF discovered that Fish’s people were distributing pro-German literature and were in contact with German agents. One of Fish’s secretaries went to prison for that. At the same time, however, Ginsburg informs us that the FFF was in constant contact with British agents. Just as insidiously, the FFF and other groups planted moles at isolationist rallies in order to disrupt them.
So perhaps President Roosevelt didn’t need Jews to change his mind, but he certainly needed them to change the minds of the millions of Americans he tried to deceive. Unfortunately, Barnes entirely avoids this point. His minimal treatment of the Jewish Holocaust in Barnes Versus the Black also deserves comment. He exerts almost no effort in placing it within his blackout vs. revisionists framework. Instead, he brushes it aside by saying that the Germans ultimately suffered more than the Jews did. He’s also skeptical that the Jewish Holocaust was the enormous atrocity it was purported to be:
There is little in the history of mankind more horrible than the sufferings of the Germans expelled from their eastern provinces, the Sudeten area, and other regions, some four to six millions perishing from butchery, starvation, exposure, and disease in the process. Their sufferings were obviously far more hideous and prolonged than those of the Jews said to have been exterminated in great numbers by the Nazis. The tragedy of Lidice was re-enacted by the Czechs hundreds of times at the expense of the Sudeten Germans during the expulsion. The Morgenthau Plan, which was inspired by Stalin and his associates and passed on to Henry Morgenthau by Harry Dexter White and other Soviet sympathizers, envisaged the starvation of between twenty and thirty million Germans in the process of turning Germany into a purely agricultural and pastoral nation.
Barnes never voices any support or approval of Adolf Hitler. He admits the man was at times cruel and erratic; then again so were Churchill and Roosevelt. As far as honest statesmanship goes, however, Hitler was actually on a higher plane than any of the Allied leaders. This is a demonstrable fact, one that is borne out by the diplomatic history of the 1930s as revealed by Hoggan. One does not have to love or even like Hitler to see that of all the major world leaders of the time, he was the least responsible for war. Barnes also refuses to demonize Hitler, and actually gives space for arguments claiming that Hitler had been too soft while conducting the war. To Hitler haters, this may sound like apologism, but it really isn’t. In “Blasting the Historical Blackout” Barnes dismisses Hitler’s Jewish policy as “folly” and correctly notes that it was this, rather than any foreign policy, which engendered anti-German hatred in Allied countries. He also recalls proudly how Rabbi Stephen Wise—the rabid, Hitler-hating Jew who led the worldwide Jewish boycott against Nazi Germany—once reprinted articles by him decrying Hitler’s anti-Semitism. Barnes even states that for a decade after 1945—which is smack dab in the middle of the Barnes Against the Blackout timeline—he had wished that Hitler had been assassinated in 1938 or early 1939, which would have avoided the catastrophe of a second world war.
In light of this, it cannot be said that within the pages of Barnes Against the Blackout Harry Elmer Barnes is anti-Semitic. He’s not philo-Semitic either. Instead, like any true historian, he’s anti-Falsehood and pro-Truth. Of course, he may be right or wrong, but never does he relinquish the discipline and objectivity required of great historians to keep civilization tethered to its past so it cannot go astray in its future.
CONCLUSION
There are many minor themes running through Barnes Against the Blackout which contribute to its value. Most notable is the topic of World War I revisionism, for which Barnes was an outright champion. His 1926 work Genesis of World War made him famous in this regard. Barnes often compares and contrasts revisionism from both World Wars and demonstrates how suppression and groupthink after the latter was much more insidious and comprehensive. He also offers examples of revisionism going back to antiquity.
Like Orwell, Barnes likes to invent neologisms and slogans. My favorites are “perpetual war for perpetual peace,” “globaloney,” the “Blackout Boys,” and the “Smearbund.” His 1962 essay “Revisionism and Brainwashing” is especially poignant in its descriptions of how modern Germans had been brainwashed into accepting their own culpability and shame. Some of the most ardent anti-revisionists of Barnes’ day were post-war Germans themselves, whom, Barnes suspects, feared the equivalent of a third Punic War. Barnes also drops historical Easter eggs everywhere. Did you know that the Roman theologian Paulus Orosius smeared the ancient pagans just as outrageously as court historian Herbert Feis smeared the Japanese? Or how about how Renaissance Scholar Lorenzo Valla proved that the 4th-century Donation of Constantine decree, which solidified the secular power of the Pope, was in fact an 8th-century forgery? It took Europe 350 years to come around to this fact. Barnes hopes it won’t take Europeans nearly as long to come around to the forged history of World War II.
If Harry Elmer Barnes has any personal bias in Barnes Against the Blackout it’s one that favors peace and an honest accounting of history. Because the so-called leaders of the free world gave us neither in the 1930s and 1940s, tens of millions needlessly perished. And with globalist liberalism still supreme today, being the root cause for mass third-world immigration into America and Europe, we continue to suffer from the effects of the catastrophe of World War II. Barnes himself said it best: “Revisionism is not only the major issue in the field of historical writing today but also the supreme moral and intellectual concern of our era.”
January 3, 2026 Posted by aletho | Book Review, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | UK, United States | Leave a comment
Blood Passover, English Version (Free Book)
The Bloody Satanic Sacrifice Rituals of the Jewish Race
Ariel Toaff | 2016
The following translation was performed free of charge to protest an injustice: the destruction by the ADL of Ariel Toaff’s Blood Passover on Jewish ritual murder. The author is the son of the Chief Rabbi of Rome, and a professor of Jewish Renaissance and Medieval History at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, just outside Tel Aviv.
Dr. Toaff is uniquely qualified to write this book, being thoroughly familiar with the derivative literature in English, French, German and Italian, as well as the original documentary sources in Latin, Medieval Italian, Hebrew and Yiddish. This is not something he worked on in secret. On the contrary, he worked on it openly with his university students and colleagues in Israel for several years; one of his students was even going to publish a paper on the subject. The author is extremely careful about what he says, and his conclusions must be taken seriously. It reads like a detective story.
If it had been published in Israel, in Hebrew, no one would have cared. There are large bodies of literature in Hebrew that Jews do not wish Gentiles to know about. But Dr. Toaff’s announcement of its publication in Italy, in Italian, raised a worldwide firestorm of fury.
Under unbearable pressure, the book was withdrawn from publication. Come in out of the darkness, and strike a blow for the light.
January 1, 2026 Posted by aletho | Book Review, Supremacism, Social Darwinism, Timeless or most popular | Zionism | Leave a comment
How Intelligence, Politics, and Foreign Interests Shaped America’s Religious Movements
By Freddie Ponton | 21st Century Wire | December 30, 2025
Christianity is back at the centre of American life, but not necessarily in the way most believers imagine. Churches are fuller, Christian language saturates politics, and faith-based identity has become a mobilising force once again. Yet beneath this revival lies a more unsettling reality: for decades, U.S. government agencies have treated religion not as sacred ground, but as strategic terrain.
This is not theory. During the Cold War, the U.S. State Department and intelligence agencies, most notably the CIA, recognised theology, doctrine, and religious institutions as instruments of influence. Faith was studied, guided, and at times quietly reshaped to serve geopolitical aims. The goal was rarely to destroy belief outright; rather, it was to domesticate it, align it, and render it strategically useful.
DOCUMENT: CIA’s use of journalists and clergy in intelligence operations – Select Committee On Intelligence Of The United States Senate One Hundred Fourth Congress, Second Session, July 17, 1996 (Source to download full pdf: US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence)
Initiatives like the Doctrinal Warfare Program illustrate the scale of this engagement. Churches with mass followings, moral authority, and transnational reach were not simply tolerated; they were targeted for influence. Orthodox congregations in the U.S. and abroad were monitored to ensure alignment with Western interests. Catholic seminaries became conduits for doctrinal shaping, funding networks, and leadership development favourable to U.S. objectives. Even Protestant and Evangelical movements, decentralised and spontaneous, were quietly steered through cultural engagement, philanthropic networks, and selective amplification of certain voices.
Sincere people seeking truth, purpose, and transcendence found themselves caught in influence systems they neither designed nor understood. Their worship, community, and faith became tools in a broader psychological and cultural battle they never consented to.
Doctrinal Warfare: When Theology Became a Battlefield
The CIA’s Doctrinal Warfare Program, particularly its work with Roman Catholic institutions, offers a rare glimpse into how intelligence agencies approach faith. Unlike cinematic portrayals of spies manipulating events, this program operated through subtler, more effective channels.
Influence was exerted via:
- Funding pipelines and philanthropic foundations, directing resources to seminaries, clergy travel, and publications
- Theological conferences and academic exchanges, creating opportunities to propagate ideas aligned with U.S. interests
- Publishing houses, journals, and media networks, shaping what doctrines and interpretations were elevated
- Selected intermediaries, often clergy or theologians, who could subtly shift discourse without appearing coerced
The program’s goal was not to dictate belief directly but to frame the boundaries of acceptable belief. Anti-communism, Western liberal ideals, and American exceptionalism were integrated into theological narratives. Over time, certain interpretations were elevated while others, particularly liberationist, socialist, or anti-Western emphases, were sidelined.
This structural influence was not limited to Catholics. Orthodox churches in the diaspora, particularly in Eastern Europe and North America, were monitored for political alignment. Protestant and Evangelical networks, decentralised and emotionally charged, presented different challenges. Leaders resisted hierarchical oversight, yet strategic use of media, donor support, and conferences quietly aligned these movements with larger political and global objectives.
The CIA and allied agencies like the Israeli MOSSAD also monitored global religious developments, from Latin America to Africa, mapping networks of clergy, seminaries, and youth movements. Influence became a form of psychological warfare: it did not coerce, but conditioned; it did not command, but subtly steered. And it thrived where people least expected manipulation, within trusted communities, sacred spaces, and moral authority.
VIDEO: David Wemhoff discusses his book John Courtney Murray, Time/Life, and the American Proposition: How the CIA’s Doctrinal Warfare Changed the Catholic Church. (Source: thkelly67 | Youtube)
Calvary Chapel, Charismatic Leaders, and the Power of Movements
Few movements illustrate both the promise and vulnerability of modern American Christianity like Calvary Chapel.
Founded in the mid‑1960s by Chuck Smith in Costa Mesa, California, Calvary Chapel emerged amidst the counterculture and the Jesus Movement. Smith welcomed surfers, hippies, and spiritual seekers alienated by both secular culture and institutional religion. Informal, emotionally open, culturally adaptive—and extraordinarily successful—it grew from a small congregation into a network of more than 1,800 churches worldwide.
Despite the ongoing debate about whether Calvary Chapel was created by individuals controlled by intelligence agencies or by charismatic individuals, the movement demonstrates a lesson intelligence agencies recognised decades ago: youth-driven religious networks are powerful instruments of social, political and cultural influence.
Figures like Lonnie Frisbee, a magnetic and unconventional evangelist, helped ignite the Jesus Movement and played a decisive role in Calvary Chapel’s early expansion. Frisbee’s countercultural persona, preaching on beaches, leading communal outreaches, and drawing thousands of young converts, was a force institutions could admire, attempt to understand, but never fully control.
Similarly, Paul Cain, a prophetic figure in charismatic networks, influenced theological subcultures with a focus on vision, revelation, and spiritual authority. According to reports, Cain was also a consultant to the Paranormal Division of the Central Intelligence Agency and the FBI. Like Frisbee, Cain became controversial, not because he was a confirmed intelligence operative, but because charismatic authority challenges hierarchical control, making it both influential and unsettling.
Calvary Chapel and these figures illustrate a key pattern: movements can grow organically, capture attention, and mobilise communities, making them valuable, and sometimes threatening, to political and intelligence structures. While the direct manipulation claims and the CIA militant connection remain debatable, historical examples like the Doctrinal Warfare Program prove that states do seek to shape religious institutions at scale, often through indirect methods rather than overt control, hence the lack of evidence thereof.
From Pews to Power: Evangelical Politics, Israel, TPUSA, and the Cost of Capture
By the late 20th century, Evangelical Christianity had evolved into a political powerhouse. Networks that began as spiritual awakenings now functioned as engines of political mobilisation, with youth-oriented, media-savvy outreach bridging the gap between churches and the political arena.
TPUSA and Charlie Kirk
Organisations like Turning Point USA (TPUSA) drew from these ecosystems, churches, conferences, campus ministries, and donor networks that had been shaped by decades of cultural, doctrinal, and ideological influence. Faith-language blended seamlessly with nationalism, free-market rhetoric, and civilizational anxiety, mobilising millions of voters.
The 2024 U.S. presidential election highlighted the real-world impact: Evangelical networks were decisive in returning Donald Trump to the White House. For believers, this was framed as a moral imperative or spiritual duty. For observers, it revealed how religious movements could be strategically leveraged within political frameworks.
The assassination of Charlie Kirk, co-founder of TPUSA, shocked the nation and intensified national reflection. While there is no direct evidence ( at least not yet), linking churches or religious movements to the attack, the public reaction underscores a critical truth: powerful social networks rooted in faith become conduits of influence, whether intended or incidental.
As unsettling as it may be for the US government, it is worth noting that an intense social-media rift has emerged between TPUSA and podcaster Candace Owens, with competing narratives and accusations fueling distrust of official accounts surrounding the Charlie Kirk killing at UVU. Interestingly, some critics, Candace Owens among them, contend that the assassination of Charlie Kirk carries the hallmarks of a sophisticated intelligence-style operation, raising uncomfortable questions about whether certain figures within TPUSA may have been more deeply entangled in the events than the public has been led to believe. A decentralised, global network of self-styled citizen journalists is currently crowdsourcing footage, timelines, and open-source data, arguing that gaps and inconsistencies warrant deeper scrutiny beyond mainstream reporting. This phenomenon has amplified public pressure on agencies such as the FBI and on TPUSA to clarify unanswered questions and reconcile discrepancies in their account of the events of September 10, 2022.
Much like the unresolved shadows that followed the JFK assassination, Charlie Kirk’s killing has placed intelligence agencies, the military, the FBI, and even foreign actors like Israel at the center of a fraught public controversy, not through proven culpability (at least not yet), but through the swirl of suspicion and unanswered questions that inevitably surround the death of a defining religious and political figure in the American conservative sphere, leaving many to ask whether this is coincidence or something more troubling left unexplained.
Christian Zionism and Israeli Influence
No discussion of modern Evangelical power is complete without considering the strategic relationship between U.S. Evangelicals and the State of Israel.
This alliance is public and well-documented. Evangelical Christians, especially in the United States, became one of the most reliable pro-Israel voting blocs, influenced not just by policy arguments but by theological frameworks, Christian Zionism, which frames Israel as divinely central to biblical prophecy.
Israeli political leaders and advocacy organisations have cultivated this alignment via:
- Pastors’ conferences in Israel
- Evangelical media networks and tours
- Donor networks and lobbying partnerships
Organisations such as Christians United for Israel (CUFI) mobilise millions of voters, influence Congressional votes, and amplify foreign policy priorities. During the Trump administration, these networks helped drive decisions like the Jerusalem embassy relocation, Iran policy shifts, and strengthened U.S.-Israel alignment.
Yet this partnership is not uncontested. Younger conservatives and Evangelicals, particularly those aligned with independent thinkers like Charlie Kirk, increasingly question whether faith-based loyalty to foreign policy interests undermines America-first priorities. This generational tension highlights a growing divergence within conservative Christianity: between inherited religious-political alliances and emerging calls for national sovereignty, prudence, and domestic priority.
Moreover, the case of Turning Point USA illustrates how foreign influence can intersect with faith-based movements to shape political power. TPUSA’s open alignment with pro-Israel advocacy networks, from educational trips and conferences to donor engagement, demonstrates how theological and ideological commitments can be leveraged to advance strategic interests. This organisational alignment and associated messaging reveal a clear pattern of external actors using popular religious and political networks to sway domestic policy and voter priorities in the United States. This dynamic mirrors broader trends seen in movements like Calvary Chapel, where charismatic leaders and faith communities, intentionally or not, become conduits for shaping societal and political behaviour, highlighting how belief can be instrumentalised as a tool of influence. Believers are constantly reminded by pastors such as Garid Beeler, of VISION Calvary Chapel in Irvine, CA, that they need to unconditionally embrace the so-called God’s plan for Israel, which in their eyes legitimises Israel’s occupation of Palestine, and the subsequent genocide, on the basis that the Lord specifically gave the Hebrews the land thousands of years ago.
Believers as Collateral in the Machinery of Influence
The story of institutional capture is not about disloyal Christians or malign churches. It is about power exploiting vulnerability.
The State Department, CIA, and allied actors like Israel did not invent faith crises, but they mastered the art of steering movements. They understood that belief motivates action, doctrine shapes identity, and institutions built on trust are uniquely vulnerable to manipulation.
Jay Dyer’s analysis, which we are featuring today, frames this landscape without demonising believers: faith itself is not the enemy, but it has been treated as a resource, managed, redirected, and at times hollowed out by forces whose goals are strategic, political and financial, rather than spiritual.
If Christianity is to withstand this era with integrity intact, it will require discernment, humility, vigilance, and, of course, the ability to separate the Gospel from the machinery of power. The war was never against believers, but belief, as an institution, has been under attack all the same.

Jay Dyer writes about the historical and geopolitical factors of state and private interference in ecclesial and religious affairs…
Institutional Capture Explained: The State Dept, CIA & Orthodox, Roman Catholic & Protestant Churches
The notion of state interference in the life of the Church is well known to students of Church history: Arian Emperors, Imperial support for iconoclasm, the Frankish and Germanic control of the papacy, as well as the investiture controversy should all come to mind. These famous scandals demonstrate the persistent cunning on the part of the state to install, influence and control religiosity in the realm, and to students of geopolitics this should also come as no surprise. What is odd, however, is that when this concept arises in modern discussions, it is relegated immediately to the domain of “conspiracy theory,” unless of course you are talking about the KGB and NKVD relationship to Russian clerics in the 20th century.
It only turns out to be a “conspiracy theory” when one points to the US State Department, the CIA, various foundations, NGOS and academic institutions (often closely linked to the intelligence apparatus) – all of whom openly seek to alter and change Orthodox theology, as well as the theological positions of the Roman Catholic and Protestant communions. First, it is worth noting that missionary work is a classic espionage cover: Obviously, I don’t mean all missionaries are spies, but that it has famously been a useful cover for espionage work, which is precisely why Russia has recently banned groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Scientology. These entities can be used as a form of soft power or even more covert intelligence operations. Similarly, classic cover for foreign operations of this sort has used aid organisation cover, such as the Red Cross or USAID.
In fact, even mainline publications regularly report this fact, though it seems to be lost on so many, especially among the intelligentsia who pride themselves on grasping the practicality of realpolitik. Christianity Today writes:
“Many of America’s first spies were missionaries or came from missionary backgrounds. Often enough, they were the only Americans who had lived abroad—not just among locals but as locals. While other American spies learned about the world through books and couldn’t really grasp its full range of quirks and complexities—“like tourists who put ketchup on their tacos,” as Sutton puts it—missionaries spoke several languages and knew the subtle differences between local dialects. They understood local cultures and faiths from the ground up and knew intuitively how to navigate between them. They knew, in short, “how to totally immerse themselves in alien societies.” But they always identified first and foremost as Christians and as Americans, and when they were called to serve the nation, they did not hesitate to do so.”
This was not unique or new; Orthodox monastic spies were also used by British intelligence in the infamous case of “Father Dimitrios”:
“The story of Father Dimitrios, or David Balfour, who turned out to be a British spy in pre-World War II Greece, is a fascinating yet relatively little-known chapter in modern Greek history.”
Father Dimitrios, the monk with the voice of an angel, turned out to be a spy for the British Intelligence Service. That’s a shame because the mission and wartime actions of the British priest could make a nail-biting spy novel or film.
From 1937 to 1939, the English spy, wearing his priest’s robes and his long, bifurcated beard, performed his ecclesiastical duties close to Greece’s royal family. His relations with King George II, the successor to King Paul and Princess Frederica, were especially close. His access to the royal palace undoubtedly gave him access to valuable information.
British Intelligence must have learned a great deal about the Greek royal family during these crucial prewar years. King George II was a paternal first cousin of Queen Elizabeth’s husband, Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh.
Members of the royal family often confessed to their beloved priest. At the same time, Balfour, under the cover of Father Demetrios, forged important acquaintances with high-ranking military officers and politicians with the blessings of the palace.
During World War 2, for example, dozens of missionaries were using their clerical cloaks as their espionage cloak, spying for the Allies. Time Magazine explains:
“His [Protestant Missionary Alfred Eddy] most audacious undertaking included a plot to “kill,” as he described it, “all members of the German and Italian Armistice Commission in Morocco and in Algeria the moment the landing takes place.” In a straightforward and matter-of-fact memo, he told OSS head William Donovan that he was targeting dozens of people. He additionally ordered the executions of “all known agents of German and Italian nationality.” Never one to mince words, he called the proposal an “assassination program.”
To orchestrate his bloodthirsty plot, Eddy hired a team of Frenchmen. He planned to frame the executions as a “French revolt against Axis domination.” “In other words,” he explained to Donovan, “it should appear that the dead Germans and Italians were ‘the victims’ of a French ‘reprisal against the shooting of hostages by the Germans and other acts of German terror,” and not an OSS operation.
At about the same time that he was recruiting French hitmen, he wrote to his family about the sacrifices he was making for Lent. He described the Easter season as “abnormal” this year. “I am certainly abstaining from wickedness of the flesh,” he confessed. With his wife thousands of miles away, that was not too difficult. “I haven’t even been to a movie since Lisbon, I don’t overeat anymore, and I allow myself a cocktail at night, but never before work is all done.”
And,
“American intelligence leaders had stumbled upon the fact that missionaries make great spies. They have excellent language skills, they know how to disappear into foreign cultures, and they are masters at effecting change abroad. But while missionary spooks believed that their wartime work was necessary, they also wrestled with the moral ambiguities inherent in their actions.”
This is just one example among countless, but it serves to illustrate the point – in this case, the supposed man of the cloth is engaged in assassination missions. A fortiori, the US Government would also see the power in utilising religion for the promotion of Americanism. During the Cold War this was ramped up to extreme degrees as CIA operatives and strategists like C.D. Jackson allied with media magnate and Skull & Bonesman Henry Luce – of Time Magazine, to recruit various prominent academics and Jesuits like John Courtenay Murray to help ensure the Vatican and in particular the Second Vatican Council, would include in its dogmatic degrees new doctrinal statements that were amenable to Americanism. This unique style of interference was even highlighted by a congressional investigation in 1996 into the CIA’s use of ministers and journalists here (including Peace Corps Volunteers).
This was combined with separate operations from Helliwell, Angleton, Donovan & Colby to utilise Opus Dei, the Vatican Bank and drug running for black operations funding in the now infamous Operation Gladio, which also saw the See of Rome aligning itself with organised crime to supposedly “save the world from communism.” However, as Catholic lawyer David Wemhoff has demonstrated in his masterful and unparalleled 800-page, vastly sourced tome, John Courtney Murray, Time/Life Magazine and the American Proposition, Jackson’s now declassified “Doctrinal Warfare Program” led the Roman Church into the hands of new masters at the US State Department and the CIA.
Indeed, this is precisely why Pre and Post-Vatican 2 popes, from Pius XII to Paul VI to John Paul 2 were meeting with Colby, Kissinger and William Casey on a consistent basis during the Cold War. And, if you are a perceptive reader, you can already piece together the blackmail and compromise operations that the world has seen through the Epstein saga were simply a window into how these institutions were similarly blackmailed and compromised, which is why there have been so many scandals in the Roman Church concerning pedo crimes, and likely relates to why Benedict resigned.
In regard to the Protestant Churches, the Rockefeller family is quite proud of, and openly brags about their influence and dominance of the Protestant religious world, through their donations and tax-free foundation offerings. These offerings, of course, come with strings attached, such as the decision to push the newly formed “social gospel” concept of the early 20th century. Eventually, the Rockefellers were creating entire seminaries and universities dedicated to the promotion of David’s influences from Keynesian/Fabian and Austrian economic theory, as well as Malthusianism and eventually technocracy, through the recruitment of Zbigniew Brzezinski after the publication of his seminal 1970 text, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era.
Few know David Rockefeller himself spent time in intelligence work and transferred this knowledge of networking and banking operations into his business ventures, as he discusses in his Memoirs. In fact, Brzezinski’s book also includes chapters discussing the role of the Post-Vatican 2 Roman Catholic Church in the promotion of Americanism and technocratic hegemony. It should also be noted that the Rockefellers didn’t merely have an interest in steering the Protestant and evangelical churches into liberalism and modernism, but also set their sights on Rome and Orthodoxy, as Wemhoff notes.
For the Orthodox World, the price of siding between two thieves came at a high cost, as the Orthodox England blog notes, concerning the place of the Russian Orthodox Church between the KGB and the CIA. Similarly, it has recently been declassified that the OSS placed pressure on the Patriarch of Constantinople, as the CIA said:
“In an OSS interoffice memo dated March 26, 1942, an intelligence agent named Ulius L. Amoss wrote this to a fellow OSS agent named David Burns:
The Archbishop was extremely pleased at having met and lunched with you. He has told me that the entire facilities of his organisation are at our disposal. He put it in these words: “I have three Bishops, three hundred priests and a large and far-flung organisation. Everyone under my order is under yours. You may command them for any service you require. There will be no questions asked, and your directions will be executed faithfully. Please tell Mr Burns for me that this is so.”
A month later, on April 25, the 56-year-old Greek Archbishop attempted to enlist in the U.S. Army. He was turned down.
A few weeks after that, on May 14, Ulias Amoss, the same intelligence agent who wrote the March 26 memorandum, wrote a letter to Athenagoras, thanking him for the Greek Archdiocese’s ongoing cooperation, saying, in part, “The care with which your Bishops and Priests have cooperated has impressed everyone and the report that, perhaps, as many as a hundred thousand names will be returned to us is astounding.” On the same day, William J. Donovan himself — the head of the OSS — also wrote to Athenagoras, “The reports and descriptions of Greek-American youth of military age so kindly undertaken by you are coming in in splendid volume. The care with which Your Grace has managed this important service is of great interest to our armed services, and I wish to express my deep appreciation for your loyal and patriotic assistance.”
This special relationship with US intelligence never ended and continues to this day as the backdrop to the actions of the Phanar and GOARCH in the US:
“Archbishop Elpidophoros, the head of the Patriarchate of Constantinople’s Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, was the honoured guest at the National Intelligence University in Maryland earlier this week, where he delivered an address to the U.S. intelligence community.
The university brings together faculty and students from all 18 of the nation’s intelligence communities.
As the Greek Archdiocese notes, the Archbishop’s talk on “Russia’s Weaponisation of Religion in the Ukraine Conflict” was the first-ever address from a GOARCH leader to the U.S. intelligence community. At the same time, the Patriarchate of Constantinople has a long history of cooperation with the U.S. intelligence community, as detailed in documents released by the CIA.”
While it may seem like a far-off footnote in a dusty history book on Byzantium or the Borgia Papacy, the reality of state and private interference (and control!) in religion is a stark reality. The goal of the state is the maintenance and projection of power, simply put. Religion is a tremendous force for control and power in the world, both good and evil, but for the state, religion is simply another domain of human culture for the projection of power, and in today’s world, that is most often projected as soft power.
If you have not read Joseph Nye’s famous essay on Soft Power, I recommend it here. Understanding soft power gives a window into the attitude of the power elite and their perspective on religions and sects as tools – pawns on the grand chessboard, to use Brzezinski’s terminology. One need only think of Brzezinski’s own recruitment and usage of what would become Al Qaeda in the Soviet War in Afghanistan in Operation Cyclone – the usage of a radical religious sect for US objectives – as a classic example.
SEE MORE: Honduras: The Making of a Controlled Democracy
December 31, 2025 Posted by aletho | Book Review, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | CIA, FBI, Israel, Latin America, UK, United States, Zionism | 1 Comment
Gaza races to preserve what remains of its 5,000-year-old archaeological legacy
Under constant Israeli bombardment, Palestinians dig through rubble to prevent the erasure of a history thousands of years in the making.

Volunteers carry an antique pillar from the ruins of the Guerrara Museum after it was damaged in Israeli bombing [TRT World] / TRT World
By Doaa Shaheen | TRT World | December 29, 2025
For more than five millennia, Gaza has stood at the crossroads of civilisations, an ancient port on the Mediterranean linking Egypt, the Levant, and Mesopotamia.
Long before it became synonymous with siege and war, the narrow coastal strip was a passageway for empires, armies, pilgrims, and traders, each leaving traces still buried beneath its soil.
Today, as Gaza’s cities are reduced to rubble from Israel’s brutal assault, another, quieter destruction is unfolding: the systematic loss of cultural memory embedded in museums, artefacts, textiles, and archives that document thousands of years of human history.
Across the devastated enclave, historians, volunteers, and museum founders are risking their lives to rescue what remains, often with bare hands and improvised tools, believing that preserving heritage is inseparable from preserving identity.
Amid the rubble of bombardment and beneath the ominous hum of drones in the so-called Zero Line area east of Khan Younis in southern Gaza, Mohammed Abu Lahia and his companions risk their lives.
Their mission is to rescue archaeological and heritage artefacts from the ruins of the Al-Qarara Cultural Heritage Museum, in a desperate attempt to prevent the erasure of Palestinian cultural memory after Israeli forces destroyed the museum during the war.
![Historical artefacts displayed at a Gaza museum before Israel launched its war on the enclave in October 2023 [TRT World]](https://d2udx5iz3h7s4h.cloudfront.net/2025/12/29/673300eacfcbfe8e438b6a7c/image/7a5d28d8c8a428a2c55e5e7b306ce95fd39c83a17770c17f4280cfc7150d3ff0.webp)
Historical artefacts displayed at a Gaza museum before Israel launched its war on the enclave in October 2023 [TRT World]
The urgency reflects Gaza’s extraordinary historical density. Over centuries, Canaanites, Philistines, Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Mamluks, and Ottomans all ruled or passed through the territory.
Legendary figures such as Alexander the Great and Napoleon Bonaparte once stood on its soil. Each era left behind material traces – pottery, mosaics, inscriptions, textiles – many of which ended up in local museums like Al-Qarara.
“The Al-Qarara Cultural Heritage Museum was founded in 2016 in response to the community’s need for a cultural institution to preserve Palestinian heritage from being lost,” says Abu Lahia, the 30-year-old founder.
From its inception, the museum relied on donations from local families who entrusted it with heirlooms and antiquities meant to testify to Palestine’s long history and everyday life across generations.
Before its destruction, “the museum housed about 3,500 pieces narrating 5,000 years of Palestinian history, from Roman, Byzantine, and Mamluk eras to traditional jewellery,” Abu Lahia adds.
“Only about 1,000 pieces have been saved from the destruction through arduous manual search, due to the lack of specialised excavation machinery.”
Gaza’s antiquities are dispersed across public institutions and private museums established by enthusiasts driven by a desire to protect what they see as shared inheritance.
The Israeli war machine has impacted all museums, causing varying degrees of damage and the loss or theft of parts of their collections.
UNESCO has verified damage to at least 110 sites of cultural, historical, and religious significance across Gaza since the war began, including mosques, churches, archaeological sites, museums, and historic buildings, figures that continue to rise as access remains limited.
Abu Lahia explains the rudimentary salvage operation: “We are racing against time to pull out archaeological pieces. Every passing moment is from the lifespan of Palestinian history and these antiquities. We don’t want to lose what remains.”
With no access to modern tools, the team wraps artefacts in cloth and blankets, pads them with plastic and sponge, and stores them in vegetable crates, fruit boxes, or discarded humanitarian aid cartons. Heavy stone columns are dragged out using strong ropes and moved to safer locations.
Twenty-five volunteers, young men and women trained in history, archaeology, architecture, and fine arts, are participating in the effort. They view their work not as cultural preservation alone, but as resistance to erasure.
Alongside physical rescue efforts, the team is building a digital archive, recognising that memory must survive even when objects cannot.
Using a makeshift mobile studio, salvaged items are photographed, catalogued, assigned serial numbers, and uploaded under the museum’s name, ensuring that even if the artefacts are lost, their documentation endures.
![Mohammed Abu Lahia sorting artefacts after they were retrieved from under the rubble of Al-Qarara Museum [TRT World]](https://d2udx5iz3h7s4h.cloudfront.net/2025/12/29/673300eacfcbfe8e438b6a7c/image/09d39a5f38a4bb205b72586e60c012ee03e9e3259922a7283c4d3f1189d39fe4.webp)
Mohammed Abu Lahia sorting artefacts after they were retrieved from under the rubble of Al-Qarara Museum [TRT World]
Abu Lahia emphasises, “The museum has not ended despite the destruction. What survived under the rubble and what was documented digitally confirms that Palestinian memory is still alive.”
Saving the Palestinian Thobe
In another corner of Gaza, Suhaila Shaheen is fighting a parallel battle to preserve a different form of heritage: embroidered Palestinian dress.
The Palestinian thobe, known for its colourful stitches, encodes geography, social history, and identity—distinguishing villages, cities, and even family lineages.
For many Palestinians, it functions as a textile archive passed from one generation to the next.
Founded in December 2022, the Palestinian Thobe Museum in Rafah was both a personal dream and a cultural statement for Dr Shaheen. The university professor specialising in art and technology views safeguarding embroidered dress as preserving stories often excluded from official archives.
The museum, funded entirely by Shaheen and her fundraising efforts, became the first Palestinian museum dedicated to embroidered thobes founded by a woman.
Its collection grew to more than 5,600 heritage items, including around 340 hand-embroidered Palestinian thobes representing villages of the Gaza district, alongside original historical documents, rare photographs, agricultural tools, and a Bedouin tent.
Israeli bombardment on October 10, 2023, erased the museum entirely.
From beneath the rubble, Shaheen was able to recover only 64 thobes, some intact, others torn or eroded by the bombing.
“These are what remain of the museum’s memory,” she says. “I carry them with me wherever I go.”
Unable to save most of the collection physically, Shaheen turned to digital preservation, compiling photographs and records taken by herself, journalists and visitors.
“I’m working on gathering everything available digitally, so the story isn’t completely lost,” she explains.
Looting Gaza’s antiquities
Gaza-based Palestinian heritage expert Hammoud Al-Dahdhar describes the current situation as catastrophic.
In Gaza City’s Old Quarter, the iconic Great Omari Mosque, one of the oldest mosques in the Strip, has been left partially destroyed, its distinctive minaret reduced to a broken stump.
Nearby, the 700-year-old Qasr al-Basha, once a Mamluk palace and later the National Museum, has been struck and bulldozed. Thousands of artefacts it housed are now missing or unaccounted for.
![A broken plaque is all that remains of the Al-Qarara Museum [TRT World]](https://d2udx5iz3h7s4h.cloudfront.net/2025/12/29/673300eacfcbfe8e438b6a7c/image/f7395cc9d21597d1f1cbc9436ef97861991255a41a2a97f9eec0f63a3d7baf02.webp)
A broken plaque is all that remains of the Al-Qarara Museum [TRT World]
Al-Dahdhar points an accusatory finger at the Israeli occupation for looting thousands of archaeological pieces from Gaza’s historical sites, citing the disappearance of more than 17,000 artefacts from Qasr al-Basha alone.
Manual rescue efforts, he says, are carried out amid unexploded ordnance, shortages of equipment, and ongoing bombardment. Digital documentation faces its own risks, including cyberattacks aimed at erasing records.
“These are emergency first-aid operations. We document what is missing, what is looted, and what is destroyed, under impossible conditions,” Al-Dahdhar tells TRT World.
International institutions have also sounded the alarm.
During the war, the French Biblical and Archaeological School of Jerusalem reported that tens of thousands of archaeological artefacts from Gaza, including material excavated from the UNESCO-listed Byzantine monastery of Saint Hilarion, had been stored in a facility in Gaza City for safekeeping.
The site was managed and secured by Premiere Urgence Internationale, a humanitarian organisation that has worked for years on the protection of Gaza’s historical heritage while providing vocational training and livelihoods for young Palestinians.
Despite the facility’s protected status under the UN’s deconfliction system, the Israeli military ordered its evacuation ahead of an air strike.
![A mannequin on display at the Palestinian Dress Museum before its destruction [TRT World]](https://d2udx5iz3h7s4h.cloudfront.net/2025/12/29/673300eacfcbfe8e438b6a7c/image/ae1e5b20d835c73edd4acb9aaed3aa1913cbfd4c24c1db9b8cfbd1b21812a978.webp)
A mannequin on display at the Palestinian Dress Museum before its destruction [TRT World]
Under sustained risk of bombardment and amid severe shortages of time and resources, 70 percent of the collection, representing more than 25 years of archaeological research, was moved before the Israeli attack. The rest, destroyed.
Scholars and heritage experts have warned that the destruction of such material constitutes an irreparable loss, not only to Palestinians but to global understanding of early Christian and ancient Middle Eastern history.
Al-Dahdhar stresses that the stakes extend beyond preservation for its own sake.
“This is about protecting collective memory. Without it, identity itself is endangered.”
December 30, 2025 Posted by aletho | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Gaza, Israel, Palestine | Leave a comment
Guy Mettan: Russophobia Made War Inevitable
Glenn Diesen | December 29, 2025
Guy Mettan is a Swiss journalist, politician and author. We discuss his book “Russophobia”.
Creating Russophobia: From the Great Religious Schism to Anti-Putin Hysteria: https://www.amazon.com/Creating-Russophobia-Religious-Anti-Putin-Hysteria/dp/0997896523
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:
PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenndiesen
Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng
Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
December 29, 2025 Posted by aletho | Book Review, Russophobia, Timeless or most popular, Video | European Union, NATO, Russia | Leave a comment
Arms, silence, and alignment: The moral and geopolitical cost of India-Israel military ties
By Ranjan Solomon | MEMO | December 29, 2025
India’s emergence as one of Israel’s most reliable arms partners is not merely a story of defence procurement or strategic pragmatism. It marks a deeper moral and geopolitical shift—one that signals how India’s foreign policy has moved away from ethical positioning and non-alignment toward transactional power alignment, even when that alignment implicates it in grave violations of international law.
For decades, India cultivated a carefully balanced foreign policy identity. Strategic realism coexisted with a rhetorical—and often principled—commitment to anti-colonialism, international law, and Palestinian self-determination. That equilibrium is now visibly fractured. As European governments confront legal challenges, parliamentary resistance, and mass public pressure over arms exports to Israel amid the devastation in Gaza, India has quietly filled part of the vacuum—not only as a buyer of Israeli weapons, but increasingly as a co-producer and supply-chain partner.
This distinction matters. Arms trade is one thing; arms integration is another.
Joint ventures, technology transfers, and domestic manufacturing under the “Make in India” framework collapse ethical distance. When Israeli drones, surveillance systems, or missile components are partially manufactured in India—or when Indian firms supply components to Israeli defence companies – responsibility is no longer abstract. India ceases to be a passive recipient of military technology and becomes embedded in the infrastructure of Israel’s war economy.
Geopolitically, the alignment is justified as realism. Israel offers high-end military technology, battlefield-tested systems, and privileged political access to Washington. India offers scale, manufacturing capacity, diplomatic cover, and a vast, dependable market. The partnership is efficient, mutually beneficial—and profoundly political.
But realism without restraint carries costs.
India’s growing defence intimacy with Israel has coincided with a striking diplomatic silence on Gaza. Abstentions at the United Nations, carefully calibrated statements, and the avoidance of legal language around occupation, collective punishment, and war crimes reflect not neutrality but risk management. Arms relationships constrain speech. They narrow moral space. They recalibrate what can and cannot be said.
This silence has consequences for India’s standing in the Global South. India has long claimed leadership among post-colonial nations, many of which view Palestine not as a peripheral issue but as a living symbol of unfinished decolonisation. By materially supporting Israel’s defence sector at a moment of unprecedented civilian suffering, India risks being seen not as a balancing power but as an enabler of impunity.
The comparison with Europe is instructive. European governments are hardly innocent actors, but they are constrained – by courts, civil society, investigative journalism, and international legal scrutiny. Arms export licences are challenged. Parliamentary debates erupt. Transfers are delayed, suspended, or reviewed. India faces no comparable domestic pressure. Its arms relationship with Israel operates in an opaque political space, largely insulated from parliamentary scrutiny and sustained media interrogation. This very absence of constraint makes India uniquely valuable to Israel at a time of growing global isolation.
Equally significant is the ideological convergence beneath the hardware.
Israel is admired within sections of India’s ruling establishment not only for its military prowess but for its model of securitised nationalism—one that fuses religion, territory, surveillance, and permanent emergency. Defence cooperation thus operates on two levels: material capacity abroad, ideological reinforcement at home. Technologies perfected in occupied territories circulate globally, normalising practices of population control, digital surveillance, predictive policing, and militarised governance.
From Kashmir to urban policing, from drone surveillance to data-driven security systems, Israeli technologies and doctrines are increasingly embedded within India’s internal security architecture. What is imported as “counter-terror expertise” often returns as counter-citizen governance.
This is where the ethical rupture becomes unavoidable.
Supporters of the India–Israel defence relationship often argue that India does not directly supply “lethal” weapons for use in Gaza. This is a narrow and misleading defence. Modern warfare does not distinguish cleanly between lethal and enabling systems. Surveillance platforms, targeting software, drones, radar, electronic warfare, and data integration are integral to killing. Participation in these supply chains carries responsibility, even if indirect.
The irony is sharp. India, once wary of military blocs and foreign entanglements, now finds itself entangled through production lines rather than treaties. This is alignment by stealth. It avoids formal alliances but produces similar outcomes: shared interests, muted criticism, strategic dependency, and moral accommodation.
The costs to India are not merely reputational; they are structural and long-term.
First, India’s credibility as a voice of the Global South is being quietly hollowed out. You cannot credibly invoke anti-colonial solidarity while partnering militarily with one of the world’s most entrenched settler-colonial regimes. You cannot champion international law selectively without eroding its meaning altogether.
Second, India’s Middle East policy risks becoming dangerously unbalanced. While economic ties with Arab states remain strong, strategic intimacy with Israel alienates popular opinion across West Asia—particularly among younger generations and civil society actors. Governments may remain pragmatic; publics remember.
Third, there is domestic blowback. The normalisation of Israeli security practices – profiling, surveillance saturation, militarised responses to dissent – feeds directly into India’s democratic erosion. Technologies developed under occupation do not remain neutral when imported; they reshape political culture.
Finally, there is the question of historical judgment. Arms relationships forged during moments of mass atrocity do not age well. They leave archives, trails, and responsibilities. Today’s commercial rationalisations become tomorrow’s moral reckonings.
None of this requires hostility toward Israel’s existence, nor denial of India’s legitimate security needs. It requires something far simpler and far more demanding: moral coherence.
India has not replaced Europe as Israel’s arms partner because it is stronger or wiser. It has replaced Europe because it is less constrained—ethically, politically, and institutionally. That is not a compliment. It is a warning.
The question is not whether India has the right to pursue its interests. It does. The question is what kind of power India seeks to become: one that merely substitutes for Europe in Israel’s war economy, or one that understands restraint as a form of strength.
History is unforgiving to those who confuse strategic gain with moral silence. Arms deals fade from balance sheets; complicity lingers in memory. For a country that once spoke the language of justice fluently, the cost of forgetting that language may prove far higher than any defence contract can justify.
December 29, 2025 Posted by aletho | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Human rights, India, Israel, Palestine, Zionism | Leave a comment
The Great DIABETES DECEPTION – Why Treatment FAILS, While $$ MADE
Dr. Suneel Dhand | December 15, 2025
Dr Dhand’s Natural Insulin Resistance Reversal & Fat Loss 30-Day Health Reset: https://www.metthrive.com
Dr. Dhand’s Website: https://www.drsuneeldhand.com
Ojais Wellness Natural Health Store (USA/North America): https://www.ojaiswellness.com
Ojais Wellness Natural Health Store (UK/Europe): https://www.ojaiswellness.co
Dr Dhand Free Newsletter Sign-Up: https://drsuneeldhand.com/free-newsle…
December 26, 2025 Posted by aletho | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment
Higher Mortality Rates Detected in Vaccinated 3-Month-Olds Compared With Unvaccinated Infants
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | December 23, 2025
Infants vaccinated in their second month of life were more likely to die in their third month than unvaccinated infants, according to an analysis of data obtained from the Louisiana Department of Health. Female and Black infants died at higher rates than male or white babies.
Children’s Health Defense scientists Brian Hooker, Ph.D., and Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., conducted the analysis, which was published Monday on Preprints.org.
Depending on which vaccines they received, vaccinated children were between 29%-74% more likely to die than unvaccinated children. Vaccinated Black infants were 28%-74% more likely to die, and vaccinated female infants had a 52%-98% greater risk of death.
Overall, children who received all six vaccines recommended for 2-month-olds were 68% more likely to die in their third month of life, the data showed.
Hooker and Jablonowski determined the death rates by analyzing immunization and mortality records from the Louisiana Department of Health for children who died before age 3 months between 2013 and 2024.
“This very important paper represents one of the first studies on the cumulative effect of vaccines given at 2 months of age following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recommended schedule,” Hooker told The Defender.
He added:
“The highest infant mortality rates were seen when children received all six of the recommended vaccines in one visit. In addition to elevated mortality, the vaccination schedule also increased the likelihood that children were more likely to die of non-leading causes of death.
“This type of study is needed to guide the efforts of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and especially the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) as they revisit the recommended schedule.”
Hooker and Jablonowski compared infants vaccinated between 60 and 90 days of life — the window corresponding to the CDC’s recommended 2-month immunization visit — with children who were unvaccinated during that same period. Mortality was defined as death occurring between 90 and 120 days of life.
At the 2-month visit, during the period studied, a CDC-compliant infant would likely have received shots for respiratory syncytial virus or RSV; hepatitis B (Hep B); rotavirus; diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis; Haemophilus influenzae type B; pneumococcal; and poliovirus.
“It is the largest single-day antigenic assault a person is ever likely to encounter in their lifetimes, and may be accompanied with 1.225 mg [milligrams] of aluminum adjuvant … even though the … maximum per-dose limit allowable by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is 0.85mg,” according to the authors.
The infant mortality rate in the U.S. is about 1 in 200. However, “in what amounts to one of the greatest health hazards in the entire country, and a national injustice,” according to the authors, the mortality rate for infants born to Black mothers is approximately 1 in 100 — almost double the national rate.
Major departure from the standard narrative
Public health authorities have long maintained that childhood vaccines are safe and effective and that vaccination prevents far more deaths than it could plausibly cause.
However, some doctors and scientists, including some who spoke at recent ACIP meetings, are beginning to acknowledge that these claims are based on limited evidence, that many vaccines were recommended without sufficient safety data and that the expansion of the childhood schedule coincided with a rise in chronic illness among U.S. children.
The authors said their study — although limited to a few thousand children — is, to date, one of the largest studies of its kind.
“By epidemiological standards, it is a really small dataset, yet it is among the largest and most detailed of its kind,” Jablonowski told The Defender. “By contrast, when Vanderbilt University and the CDC published ‘Risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome after Immunization with the Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis Vaccine,’ they analyzed only a couple hundred infant deaths”
He added:
“I didn’t have expectations on what we would find, because there is no comparator. A study this large, with this level of detail, focused on the second month of life, to my knowledge has never been done before.
“If vaccine safety were as heavily researched as vaccine proponents would like us to believe, this would have been a well-trodden exercise and we would have found nothing, not even the whisper of a disturbing trend. But there is nothing subtle about the measured safety signals. The records of children who are no longer with us demonstrate the hazard of the 2-month recommended vaccines.”
Study included an analysis of multiple vaccines administered at once
The researchers identified approximately 5,800 infant deaths during the period studied. Of those, 1,775 children could be exactly matched to their immunization records.
The analysis focused on a subset of 1,225 children who survived beyond 90 days of life and whose vaccination status could be evaluated.
They found increased mortality odds ranging from 29%-74% depending on the specific vaccine analyzed. The largest individual association was reported for the rotavirus vaccine, with an odds ratio of 1.74 — a 74% greater mortality rate — which the authors note reached the level of statistical significance.
When vaccines were analyzed in combination — reflecting how immunizations are typically administered — children who received all five non-hepatitis B vaccines at the 2-month visit were reported to be 60% more likely to die in their third month than unvaccinated children.
Children who received all six recommended vaccines, including Hep B, were reported to be 68% more likely to die during that period.
Across all comparisons in the dataset, unvaccinated children had the lowest observed mortality rates during the 90- to 120-day window.
Race and sex-based differences were notable
For every vaccine analyzed, Black infants reportedly experienced higher relative increases in mortality compared to white infants when vaccinated during the second month of life. The finding was consistent across individual vaccines and vaccine combinations.
The strongest associations were reported among female infants. According to the analysis, vaccinated females experienced substantially higher increases in mortality risk than vaccinated males. In several comparisons, the reported increase in mortality odds for females exceeded 80% and, in some cases, exceeded 100%.
For females, they wrote, “The difference is so great, it is statistically significant almost everywhere it was measured.”
The authors suggest that sex-based differences in immune response may contribute to these findings, citing prior research that has shown stronger immune responses — and higher rates of adverse reactions — among females following vaccination.
There were also patterns in cause of death
The authors also analyzed reported causes of death, comparing distributions of those causes among vaccinated and unvaccinated female infants who died in their third month of life.
They found that vaccinated females were more likely to die from causes outside the leading categories of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), accidental suffocation and ill-defined causes.
Specifically, the analysis identified several deaths attributed to infectious diseases and nervous system conditions among vaccinated female infants, compared with none in the unvaccinated group during the same period.
This was significant, they wrote, because if vaccinations played no role in mortality, the distribution of causes of death would be expected to remain consistent between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.
‘One of the most horrible experiences a parent can go through, multiplied by 1,225 times’
Jablonowski and Hooker described the analysis as a “proof-of-concept,” demonstrating that statistically significant associations between vaccination timing and infant mortality can be identified in real-world data.
They called on health authorities and researchers to make similar linked datasets available for independent analysis, arguing that transparency is essential for evaluating vaccine safety at the population level.
Jablonowski said the results weren’t just significant, they were deeply troubling. “I always knew it would be emotionally difficult to work for CHD. Our data is a record of one of the most horrible experiences a parent can go through, multiplied by 1,225 times.”
However, he said, “One study does not make consensus. It needs to be replicated many times over, in every state, province or nation willing to look. I am extremely grateful that CHD was able to pair with such courageous people in the state of Louisiana.”
Jablonowski and Hooker said that only broader access to comparable datasets — and independent replication — can determine whether the patterns observed in Louisiana reflect a localized anomaly or a more general phenomenon.
“To validate, generalize, and explore that harm further requires corroboration with additional sources of evidence. Every state, province, and country where an immunization registry may be matched with a death registry may provide that evidence,” they wrote.
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.
December 25, 2025 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | SIDS, United States | Leave a comment
Honduras: The Making of a Controlled Democracy

Zionist Organisation of America (ZOA) Praises Honduras’ Opening Diplomatic Mission In Jerusalem & Later Its Embassy. (Source: Zionist Organisation of America | ZOA)
21st Century Wire | December 22, 2025
Tegucigalpa — The streets of Honduras’ capital were tense as the results of the 2025 elections unfolded, a nation holding its breath amid suspicion, polarisation, and uncertainty. Beneath the visible turmoil lies a deeper story: for over a century, foreign powers have shaped Honduran politics, society, and culture, deliberately fracturing communities and weakening democratic institutions. Once a predominantly Catholic country with a cohesive social fabric, Honduras now grapples with divisions along religious, social, and racial lines, leaving its citizens vulnerable to manipulation and its democracy under strain.
Israel’s influence in Honduras extends far beyond diplomacy or military cooperation. Historical ties, dating back to the early 20th century with figures like Samuel Zemurray, established patterns of economic and political leverage to control Honduran leadership while advancing pro-Zionist objectives. In modern times, presidents, including Juan Orlando Hernández, have strengthened these ties through military cooperation, arms purchases, and symbolic gestures, such as relocating the Honduran embassy to Jerusalem in 2021. Israeli influence also penetrates civil society, promoting Zionist ideology, synagogue expansion, and religious conversion programs, including Protestant-to-Judaism conversions, that embed loyalty to Israeli interests within key segments of society. Four figures who held or effectively controlled the Honduran presidency, Juan Lindo, Ricardo Maduro, Juan Orlando Hernández, and Samuel Zemurray, have been Jewish or closely aligned with pro-Zionist interests, highlighting the deep historical roots of Israel’s influence in the country. These interventions reinforced a pro-Israel political bloc, cultivated an environment where dissent is socially penalised, and subtly shaped political allegiances, a dynamic clearly evident in the 2025 elections.

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, right, shakes hands with his Honduran counterpart, Lisandro Rosales as Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, top right, speaks with Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez during the signing of bilateral agreements at the prime minister’s office in Jerusalem, June 24, 2021. (Source: Heidi Levine/AFP via Getty Images)
The CIA has complemented Israel’s long-term strategy by employing ostensibly humanitarian or religious NGOs, such as USAID, World Vision, and Church World Service (CWS), to fracture Honduran civil society. By promoting Protestantism over the historically cohesive Catholic majority and supporting programs that exploit divisions along religious, racial, and social lines, including tensions within the Garifuna community influenced by organisations such as OFRANEH, the CIA created fertile ground for ideological manipulation and elite control. Together, the actions of Israel and the CIA have destabilised Honduran society, skewed politics in favour of external interests, and amplified societal divisions. The 2025 elections starkly revealed these dynamics, exposing a democracy heavily shaped by decades of foreign intervention and manipulation.
While Honduras showed some symbolic independence, such as recalling its ambassador from Israel in November 2023, there is a strong case to argue that the deep structural influence of Israel and the U.S, reinforced over decades through military, economic, religious, and civil society channels, created a 2025 electoral landscape strongly favourable to a pro-Israel government, as confirmed by The Times of Israel. Nasry Asfura, promoted by President Trump, embodied this alignment, openly supporting Israeli interests and continuing policies that reinforced the country’s pro-Zionist orientation, making the elections less a contest of domestic politics and more a predictable outcome of long-term foreign influence.
Honduras is a nation under the shadow of powerful foreign influences, where politics, religion, and society have been quietly shaped for decades. The following article investigates how Israeli interests, CIA-backed NGOs, and elite manoeuvring have fractured communities, manipulated loyalties, and set the stage for the tensions that exploded during the 2025 elections…

Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez visits the Western Wall in Jerusalem, September 1, 2019 (courtesy Western Wall Heritage Foundation)
Hondurans Curiously Ambivalent On Palestinian Genocide
Thomas Tomczyk writes for PÄYÄ Magazine…
Hondurans have been mostly silent regarding the reported genocide taking place in Gaza over the past two years. The question is: Why such silence? Are Hondurans unaware of the massacres and starvation used against Palestinians in the occupied territories? Do they not care, or are they perhaps afraid of something? “To learn who rules over you, simply find out whom you are not allowed to criticise,” the saying goes.
There was one example of Hondurans protesting Israeli crimes against Palestinians during the Gaza war after the Hamas attack and Israeli stand-down operation of October 7. On October 23, 2023, dozens of Honduran Palestinians demonstrated in front of the Israeli Embassy in Tegucigalpa. Since then, the long-established and influential Arab Palestinian community has been mostly silent about the plight of their Palestinian relatives amid Israel’s escalating atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank.
There is certainly a disconnect, as the 300,000 members of Honduras’ Christian Palestinian community are the third and fourth generations to be born outside of Palestine. Their ancestors began arriving in Honduras from Palestine in the 1890s, and today their connection to and knowledge of Palestine and Israel is mostly superficial. Most Honduran Palestinians don’t know the full scale or nature of the barbarism inflicted on their compatriots who stayed behind and continue to face Israeli oppression, violence, discrimination and now genocide. A Honduran Palestinian businessman told me that many in his community are afraid of being accused of anti-Semitism and facing potential consequences. Simply acknowledging that a systematic genocide may be occurring in Gaza is viewed by some as anti-Semitic.
It is hard not to notice. Since October 2023, Israeli military actions have resulted in the deaths of many Christian civilians in Gaza who have nothing to do with Hamas. In October 2023 Israeli military bombed a Christian orthodox church and murdered 18 Christians. In December 2023, Israeli snipers executed two Palestinian women on the Gaza Holy Family Catholic church property. In July 2025, Israeli soldiers fired a tank shell at a cross of the same church, killing three and wounding a catholic priest. While this all fell on deaf ears in Honduras, it does seem that the Israelis don’t like Christians very much.
One person who spoke with concern about the plight of Palestinians was President Xiomara Castro. In November 2023, the Honduran government recalled its ambassador to Israel for consultations due to escalating massacres of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. President Castro described Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide during a U.N. speech in September 2024. Still, words have not turned into actions. Honduras is nowhere near recognising Palestine as an independent state or moving its embassy from Jerusalem back to Tel Aviv. In fact, Honduras remains firmly in the pro-Zionist camp as it continues to support Israel’s military by purchasing 15 Black Mamba military vehicles. Pro-Zionist sentiment is strong in Honduras. Israeli flags are flown throughout the country. Hondurans increasingly wear the Star of David around their necks, and taxi drivers display the Israeli emblem on their vehicles. Honduran roots of Zionism and Judeophilia run deep, well over a century.
The country now counts three of its presidents to be Jewish: Juan Lindo, Ricardo Maduro and Juan Orlando Hernández. In fact, you could argue that there was a fourth Jewish president of Honduras who ruled the country from 1911 well into the 1950s. Samuel Zemurray, the Banana King, was responsible for the 1911 Honduran presidential coup that secured land and concessions for his United Fruit banana company. American mercenaries hired by Zemurray deposed President Miguel Dávila and made Honduras his “banana republic.” Zemurray installed his puppet, Manuel Bonilla, as president and received 20,000 acres of land in return. After President Bonilla’s death in 1913, Zemurray continued to be a virtual puppet master of several other Honduran presidents.
In 1947, the World Zionist Organisation tasked Zemurray with delivering Honduras’ U.N. vote in support of the creation of the state of Israel. Reportedly, in a personal phone call, Zemurray tried to bribe then-Honduran President Tiburcio Carías Andino. Because of pressure from the Honduran Palestinian community, Honduras abstained from voting for Israel. Since then, and with plenty of CIA help, Christian Zionism has made many inroads in Honduras. CIA fronts such as World Vision, USAID and Protestant Church World Service for many decades worked to undermine the cohesiveness of Honduran society.
Since the 1950s, the CIA, which some critics considered an Israeli-captured agency, promoted the establishment and expansion of Protestant churches in Latin America. The excuse given was that Protestants were more anti communist and a good alternative to the Liberation Theology preached in many Catholic parishes.
The percentage of Catholics in the country fell from 97% in the 1960s to 47% today. Protestant denominations undermined the Catholic cohesion of Honduran society. Religiously divided Honduras is much easier to manipulate, with one denomination pitted against another. Sixty years later, those Catholic-to-Protestant converts have not only become Zionists, but they are also actually converting to Judaism. According to El Heraldo, 37 families converted to Judaism and, in 2022, established Honduras’ first synagogue. The San Pedro Sula Mishkan Shlomo synagogue members advertise their plans to Judaise and convert thousands of Hondurans.
“The plan is for the expanded synagogue to be a six-story, shaped like a Star of David building and be able to accommodate 456 people. This would make it the biggest synagogue in Latin America.”
Ex-President Juan Orlando Hernández was key in the expansion of Judeophilia and Zionism in Honduras. Just in terms of economy, according School of the Americas, between 2013 and 2019, Honduras purchased $342 million in military and surveillance equipment from Israel. Basically, Honduras has been supporting Israel to the tune of around $5 million a month for that period. Road to conversion of Juan Orlando Hernández began in the early 1990s when he completed a one-year Mashav leaders course in Israel. Israel’s investment in JOH obviously paid off as he learned Hebrew, moved Honduras’ embassy to Jerusalem in 2021, and converted to Judaism with his entire family in 2021. The last one, right before going to a US jail for 45 years, was convicted of decade’s long drug and arms smuggling operation.
Honduras is likely getting set up for a rough ride. Israel funded military dictatorships where even the CIA would not venture. Israel trained and supplied arms to many bad actors that destabilised the region: the genocidal regime in Guatemala in the 1980s, Colombian drug smuggling death squads, Los Zetas drug lord Heriberto Lazcano. “Israel has given its soldiers practical training in the art of oppression and in methods of collective punishment. Some of those officers choose to make use of their knowledge in the service of dictators,” said Israeli general Mattityahu Peled.
“Honduras will likely become an increasingly polarized and violent society.”
There is also a growing Israeli pressure on the Honduran public by co-opting its anti-Gaza genocide sentiment into nebulous movements. The normally restrained Honduran Ministry of Foreign Affairs complained that Israeli Ambassador Nadav Goren meddled in internal Honduran affairs by meeting with Protestant church leaders preparing for the August 16 March for Peace and Democracy. “We express to the Honduran people our deep discomfort at their participation in said public event. The involvement of a diplomat not only ignores his limitations,” stated the Honduran ministry. There are plenty of other players seeking discord. Until its recent defunding by the Trump administration, San Pedro Sula was also home to the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS). The worldwide HIAS organisation does not assist Palestinians, Arabs or Christians in moving to Israel, but uses U.S. tax dollars to help move undocumented migrants through Honduras to the United States.
For decades, certain interest groups have promoted racial resentment —particularly among Black communities— while fostering a sense of guilt among white, European and Christian populations. In Honduras, this strategy is reflected in the 23-year-old movement known as the Fraternal Organisation of Honduran Blacks (OFRANEH), which has received funding from organisations such as American Jewish World Service and the Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros. These groups have been involved in fermenting revolutions, protests and underhanded political activism around the world. Just as with organisations such as Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA, which were recently designated by the U.S. as a terrorist organisation, OFRANEH fosters division, racial tension, grievances and expectations of compensation in the historically well-integrated Garifuna community. Honduras, in the second quarter of the 21st century, will likely become an increasingly polarised and violent society. Powerful interest groups are working hard to implement this, and Roatan is increasingly a party to those tensions. In September 2025, OFRANEH conducted demonstrations in Cayos Cochinos, and in March 2025, there were protests in Diamond Rock. Tensions on Roatan are just starting to heat up.
Read more news from PÄYÄ Magazine
December 22, 2025 Posted by aletho | Corruption, Timeless or most popular | CIA, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Honduras, Israel, Palestine, USAID, World Vision, Zionism | Leave a comment
Natural Solutions to Bladder Health
The Dr. Ardis Show | November 2025
In this week’s episode of The Dr. Ardis Show, Dr. Bryan Ardis explores natural solutions for common bladder problems – including UTIs, kidney or bladder stones, and interstitial cystitis.
You’ll learn what causes these painful conditions, why standard treatments like antibiotics can backfire, and how to restore urinary health naturally. Dr. Ardis dives into the immune, neurological, and detoxification factors that affect bladder function, and what you can do to address the root causes—not just the symptoms.
December 19, 2025 Posted by aletho | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment
How Policies From The Bi-Parisian Foreign Policy Establishment Led To Trump’s Venezuela War
Trump’s Escalation In Venezuela Is Just A Continuation Of A Longstanding Regime Change Campaign
The Dissident | December 18, 2025
Trump is currently escalating a regime change war with Venezuela to overthrow its president, Nicolas Maduro. He has sent what Julian Assange described as “the largest U.S. pre-invasion buildup since the Iraq war” to the Caribbean and and has killed 95 people in strikes on boats in the Caribbean, under the false pretext of fighting drug traffickers, but with the real intention- as Trump’s chief of staff, Susie Wiles, admitted– of “blowing boats up until Maduro cries uncle”.
The Trump administration has also authorized covert CIA action to overthrow Maduro and announced a “complete blockade of all sanctioned oil tankers going in and out of Venezuela”, which amounts to siege warfare on the people of Venezuela, given the fact, as Economists Jeffery Sachs and Mark Weisbrot have noted, that “nearly all of the foreign exchange that is needed to import medicine, food, medical equipment, spare parts and equipment needed for electricity generation, water systems, or transportation, is received by the Venezuelan economy through the government’s revenue from the export of oil”.
While this has been widely reported, what has been mostly ignored is the fact that Trump’s policy is nothing new and is only an escalation of a bipartisan regime change policy in Venezuela that has been ongoing since 1999.
In this article, I will document the longstanding regime change campaign from the U.S. foreign policy establishment that led to Trump’s current escalation.
The Bush Administration’s Regime Change Campaign Against Hugo Chavez.
The regime change campaign in Venezuela did not start with the current Venezuelan president, Nicolas Maduro, but with his predecessor, Hugo Chavez, who was elected president of the country in 1999, and whom the Bush administration repeatedly tried to overthrow.
According to leaked documents, the U.S. gave $15 million to USAID and instructions to carry out a program to undermine Hugo Chavez when he first got elected, which included “penetrating Chavez’s Political Base”, “dividing Chavismo”, and “isolating Chavez internationally”.
This ramped up in 2002, when the International Republican Institute (IRI), a subsidiary of the CIA cutout NED, was given $300,000 from the Bush administration to train opposition politicians to carry out a coup against Chavez.
As Mother Jones reported, “In April 2002, a group of military officers launched a coup against Chavez, and leaders of several parties trained by IRI joined the junta. When news of the coup emerged, democracy-promotion groups in Venezuela were holding a meeting to discuss ways of working together to avoid political violence; IRI representatives didn’t attend, saying that they were drafting a statement on Chavez’s overthrow. On April 12, the institute’s Venezuela office released a statement praising the ‘bravery’ of the junta and +commending the patriotism of the Venezuelan military.”
The coup was briefly carried out against Chávez after members of the U.S.-backed Junta began firing snipers on pro-Chávez protestors and then manipulated the footage to make it look like Chávez’s forces were firing on opposition protestors.
As CounterPunch documented:
On April 11th, 2002, the Venezuelan opposition activated snipers who fired on a largely pro-Chávez crowd that had gathered near Miraflores Palace to defend the president from the threat of an approaching and aggressive opposition march. Film footage from the ensuing gun battle was inserted into a pre-fabricated media strategy which sought to convince the Venezuelan population that government supporters were responsible for the deaths, and that they had acted directly on the orders of Chávez himself
That the opposition planned to slaughter innocents is clear from the fact that the public statement by members of the high military command, which cited a specific number of casualties and urged Chávez to resign, had been filmed long before the deaths had even taken place. That the role of the media was paramount is clear from the revelation that this pre-filmed statement was recorded at the house of opposition journalist and host of 24 Hours, Napoleón Bravo.
According to CNN journalist Otto Neustadtl, the opposition planned the false flag massacre before carrying it out, saying, “On the night of the 10th (of April 2002, one day before the coup), they phoned me and told me Otto, a video of Chavez is coming tomorrow, the 11th, the demonstrators will be diverted to Miraflores (presidential house) there will be some dead, and there will be a statement from a group of 20 military high command, asking the president to resign. In the morning of the 11th (of April 2002), they told me everything goes as planned, a video is coming, some dead are coming, and the military will speak out. I was there with the military that was giving the statement against President Chavez. I was there at least two hours before the first death occurred. In that rehearsal, they talked about the dead when the first death had not occurred”.
Strangely, as journalist William Van Wagenen has documented, false flag sniper massacres were again carried out during several future U.S. regime change operations.
The coup against Chavez was soon reversed when his supporters took to the streets and demanded he be reinstated as president.
After the coup was reversed, the Guardian reported that the Bush administration knew of and supported the coup in advance, noting that the Bush administration official Elliot Abrams, “gave a nod to the attempted Venezuelan coup” and added that, “officials at the Organisation of American States and other diplomatic sources, … assert that the US administration was not only aware the coup was about to take place, but had sanctioned it, presuming it to be destined for success.”
The Guardian reported that the Bush administration “immediately endorsed the new government under businessman Pedro Carmona”, adding “visits by Venezuelans plotting a coup, including Carmona himself, began, say sources, ‘several months ago’, and continued until weeks before the putsch last weekend. The visitors were received at the White House by the man President George Bush tasked to be his key policy-maker for Latin America, Otto Reich”.
After the 2002 coup, the Bush administration tried to force a referendum against Hugo Chavez in 2004 through its paid assets on the ground.
The referendum was pushed for by the U.S. asset María Corina Machado, and her NGO, Sumate, which was, “financed by the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI), all three of which are known across Latin America for their attempts to destabilize progressive governments under the guise of ‘democracy promotion’.”
In a recent profile on Machado, CNN noted, she “gained widespread attention in 2004 after participating in a failed effort to recall Venezuela’s then-President Hugo Chávez”.
The regime change attempt again failed, with Hugo Chavez winning by 59 percent, but the U.S.-funded opposition apparently faked exit polls to make it look like Chavez lost the referendum.
The U.S. Carter Centre, which monitored the referendum, noted at the time that, “the opposition cited the exit poll contradicting the official results and expressed their deep skepticism” and “the opposition rejected the results, primarily because opposition’s exit polls carried out throughout voting day suggested the Yes vote (to remove Chavez) would prevail” but noted that, “the machines were extremely accurate. Only one-tenth of 1 percent variation between the paper receipts and the electronic results was found, and this could be explained by voters taking the paper receipts or putting them in the wrong ballot box,” and concluding that, “the Carter Center has found no evidence of fraud”.
Obama Administration Continues Regime Change Against Maduro
After Hugo Chavez died in 2013, his successor, Nicolas Maduro, was elected, and the Obama administration continued the regime change attempt through a paid propaganda campaign to swing the Venezuelan national assembly to the opposition, funding violent riots and putting crushing sanctions on the country.
Leaked documents reported on by Jacobin magazine show that the Obama administration gave $300,000 to the National Democratic Institute, the democratic wing of the CIA cutout NED, in order to, “mobilize a voter database that identified and targeted swing voters through social media” in the run-up to the 2015 national assembly elections.
Jacobin noted that, “indeed, in December 2015, the opposition won a majority in the Venezuelan National Assembly for the first time since Chávez came to power in 1999” and noted, “the NDI claims credit for the opposition’s success, writing that this strategy ‘ultimately played an important role in their resounding victory in the 2015 election’ and that a ‘determining factor in the success of the coalition in the parliamentary elections of 2015 was a two-year effort prior to the elections”.
Under the Obama administration, the U.S. asset María Corina Machado and her U.S.-funded Sumate helped stir up riots in the country that lasted for years.
As journalist Michelle Ellner reported, “Machado was also one of the political architects of La Salida, the 2014 opposition campaign that called for escalated protests, including guarimba tactics. Those weren’t ‘peaceful protests’ as the foreign press claimed; they were organized barricades meant to paralyze the country and force the government’s fall. Streets were blocked with burning trash and barbed wire, buses carrying workers were torched, and people suspected of being Chavista were beaten or killed. Even ambulances and doctors were attacked. Some Cuban medical brigades were nearly burned alive. Public buildings, food trucks, and schools were destroyed. Entire neighborhoods were held hostage by fear while opposition leaders like Machado cheered from the sidelines and called it ‘resistance.’
In 2015, Obama absurdly labeled Venezuela a “threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States” and placed crushing sanctions on Venezuela, which eventually killed at least tens of thousands of people, if not hundreds of thousands.
Trump’s First Term Sanctions and Coup Attempts.
The sanctions on Venezuela increased under the Trump administration, killing at least tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of Venezuelans.
Economist Mark Weisbrot noted in the LA Times that:
In Venezuela, the first year of sanctions under the first Trump administration took tens of thousands of lives. Then things got even worse, as the U.S. cut off the country from the international financial system and oil exports, froze billions of dollars of assets and imposed “secondary sanctions” on countries that tried to do business with Venezuela.
Venezuela experienced the worst depression, without a war, in world history. This was from 2012 to 2020, with the economy contracting by 71% — more than three times the severity of the Great Depression in the U.S. in the 1930s. Most of this was found to be the result of the sanctions.
Weisbrot and Jeffrey Sachs revealed that the sanctions killed 40,000 people from 2017 to 2019, and in 2020, the UN expert Alfred de Zayas found that the sanctions had killed 100,000 people since 2015.
Also in 2020, the UN documented that, “the economic blockade of Venezuela and the freezing of Central Bank assets have exacerbated pre-existing economic and humanitarian situation by preventing the earning of revenues and the use of resources to develop and maintain infrastructure and for social support programs, which has a devastating effect on the whole population of Venezuela, especially those in extreme poverty, women, children, medical workers, people with disabilities or life-threatening or chronic diseases, and the indigenous population”.
Along with Trump’s continuation of Obama’s starvation sanctions on Venezuela, he also attempted multiple coup attempts in the country.
The Trump administration recognized Juan Guaido- an unelected U.S. asset in Venezuela- as the official president of the country and sent him $52 million through USAID to set up a fake “interim government” intended to force Maduro from power.
Trump also appointed the aforementioned Elliott Abrams- one of the architects of the 2002 coup- as the Special Representative for Venezuela, and Abrams attempted to funnel weapons to the opposition in Venezuela disguised as humanitarian aid, a repeat of a strategy he enacted in Nicaragua under the Reagan administration.
In 2020, the Trump administration ran another failed coup against Maduro, this time by training defectors from the Venezuelan military in Colombia for a coup attempt.
Describing the Trump administration’s regime change policy during his first term, U.S. Senator Cris Murphy admitted, “First, we thought that getting Guaidó to declare himself president would be enough to topple the regime. Then we thought putting aid on the border would be enough. Then we tried to sort of construct a kind of coup in April of last year, and it blew up in our face when all the generals that were supposed to break with Maduro decided to stick with him in the end”.
Biden’s Attempt To Kidnap Maduro.
A recent AP investigation found that in 2024, a U.S. DHS agent named Edwin Lopez, with “permission from his superiors” in the Biden administration, attempted to bribe Maduro’s pilot, Bitner Villegas, to kidnap Maduro and bring him to the U.S.
Reportedly, Lopez told Villegas that, “in exchange for secretly ferrying Maduro into America’s hands, the pilot would become very rich”.
Lopez apparently offered Villegas a “$50 million reward” to kidnap Maduro and bring him into U.S. custody.
When Villegas responded to the proposal, saying, “We Venezuelans are cut from a different cloth, the last thing we are is traitors,” Lopez made thinly veiled threats against his children, with the AP reporting that, “Lopez tried one last time, mentioning Villegas’ three children by name and a better future he said awaited them in the U.S.” saying that Villegas added, “The window for a decision is closing, soon it will be too late”.
While Trump is carrying out a serious escalation of the regime change policy, it is worth remembering that it is an escalation of a longstanding regime change policy that has continued through the Bush, Obama, first Trump, and Biden administrations.
December 19, 2025 Posted by aletho | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular | Latin America, NED, United States, USAID, Venezuela | Leave a comment
Sexual Blackmail Makes the World Go ‘Round
Jeffrey Epstein may be dead, but the network that created him is still screwing us all
Helen of desTroy | December 17, 2025
American democracy has devolved into a humiliation ritual in which we are expected to pledge support for people who hate us so they can steal our property, molest our children, and punish us for talking about their crimes. In election after election we are pressured to declare allegiance to one morally bankrupt criminal, simply because the other morally bankrupt criminal in the race might be even worse, thus becoming complicit in the election of a morally bankrupt criminal. Casting that vote on an electronic voting machine that even the government’s own intelligence director has admitted is totally hackable only strengthens the power of the ritual. Americans feel dumber every time we feed our choices into the ballot scanner and pray not to be disenfranchised, as if our selections made a difference in a contest that has been limited to the “lesser of two evils” for years. Standing up for ourselves and refusing to participate in such demeaning pageantry is denigrated as un-American, and our sentimental attachment to the democratic ideal masks the understanding that no change is actually possible within a system designed to deprive us of agency, so we legitimize a corrupt system with our participation instead. Like the teenage victims of Jeffrey Epstein, who returned to his mansions again and again even as they felt the humiliating experience draining their life force because they’d become convinced they could expect nothing better out of life, we have grown so accustomed to having our faces rubbed in outrageous and self-evident lies that we are starting to think we deserve the abuse.
Trump voters in particular have had a difficult year. Spooked back in July by a trickle of leaks suggesting he had been closer with Epstein than he claimed, the president raged at his supporters for demanding the release of the government’s remaining files on the case, despite repeated promises to release them during his 2024 reelection campaign. He sent FBI chief Kash Patel — who had also called for Epstein transparency before joining the Trump administration and acquiring his own Mossad handler (you gonna sue me, Kash?) — to inform the public that Epstein trafficked hundreds if not thousands of girls to absolutely nobody, despite copious documentation including an actual client list featuring at least 20 boldface names in FBI possession. The humiliation ritual was an encore performance for Patel, who had already appeared alongside his deputy Dan Bongino earlier in the year in an infamous clip where the pair, looking more uncomfortable than the stars of the average hostage video, reassured the public that Epstein had killed himself after all — case closed!
Having publicly disavowed the support of anyone still concerned how an intelligence operative working for Israel and the US was able to fly planeloads of teenage girls around the world for sex and lend them out to a who’s who of the global elite, maintaining a trove of compromising video footage of the aforementioned, without authorities lifting a finger in protest or (supposedly) finding the resulting videos, Trump spent several months trying to block the release of the files. He only took time out from railing against what was now declared a “Democrat hoax” to relocate Epstein’s partner-in-crime Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20-year sentence, to a minimum-security facility, in violation of prison sex-offender protocols. He even teased a pardon for the alleged Mossad asset, whose victims remember her as even more abusive than Epstein himself. Trump targeted Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie — perhaps the most respected man in American politics — with his next social media tantrum, condemning him as a “loser” for co-authoring a bipartisan bill to release the files, then turned his rage on Marjorie Taylor Greene, excoriating the Georgia Republican who was once among his most loyal supporters as a “traitor” because she hosted a press conference with a group of Epstein survivors in support of Massie’s transparency bill. The president even announced he’d host his first fundraiser of the 2026 season to reelect notoriously closeted warmonger Lindsey Graham, South Carolina’s Israel-First senator. By the time Trump finally dropped his opposition to the file release — which predictably showed he had been much cozier with the billionaire child trafficker than he’d admitted in the past — he had effectively alienated most of his base with seemingly unforced blunders that made no political sense.
Rosetta Stone
Unlike most political scandals, which only expose one aspect of the machinery behind the scenes, the Epstein case and its incompetent coverup provide all the intellectual tools needed to understand how the sausage is made. Like the apocryphal apple that fell on Sir Isaac Newton’s head and alerted him to the existence of gravity, the revelation that a multinational intelligence operation rooted in organized crime had for decades trafficked teen girls by the thousands as a means to secure global control not only of politics but of science, technology, industry, and the arts, with full knowledge and even cooperation of multiple law enforcement agencies, highlighted a force that most people had never considered was influencing current events. The phenomenon of Jeffrey Epstein — and the others like him who are still blithely ruining kids’ lives to secure leverage over power — finally makes sense of what for many on the dark side of the informational iron curtain had been a hopelessly scrambled puzzle.
This is why the Epstein files won’t go away, no matter how many distractions are dumped into the news cycle. The Epstein case and the ongoing efforts to bury its implications constitute a geopolitical decoder ring allowing anyone to understand how vibrant, thriving democratic societies are reduced to kakistocratic loosh farms with seeming impunity. Seen through the lens of Epstein — the real-world equivalent of the glasses from They Live — the narrative deceptions and limited-hangout misdirections become transparent, the proximity alarms surrounding “dangerous” thoughts are defused, and one can see right into the beady little eyes of the organized crime ring masquerading as a country masquerading as a religion, headquartered in modern-day Israel, that has its tentacles in every boardroom (and bedroom) in the West. While the source of its power was once a closely-guarded secret — journalist Danny Casolaro was famously murdered for investigating aspects of the network, which he called “The Octopus” — it has more recently leaned into the power of ritual humiliation in cementing its dominance, and can frequently be found flaunting its impunity. This is “Big Parasite” (think Big Pharma or Big Oil), an empire built through the covert extortion of resources from its host.
Because the first rule of Pedo Club is you don’t talk about Pedo Club, it’s difficult to determine when this tactic became widespread as a means of coercion. Whitney Webb credits the Prohibition-era Jewish mafia, who used it on the law enforcement agencies that were supposed to be pursuing them, earning years of peace while the mortified cops looked the other way. But it has certainly reached its nadir in modern Israel, where soldiers who gang-rape Palestinian prisoners are celebrated as heroes while rabbis campaigning for peace are arrested for bringing food to starving people. Built by terrorists, criminals, and Nazi-collaborators to provide a secure base of operations and diplomatic cover for their illegal enterprises, forced down the world’s throat through the judicious application of blackmail and bribery, Israel quickly became the ultimate money-laundering front and an extradition-proof haven for pedophiles. It has secured de facto exemption from nearly every international treaty, human rights convention, international arms agreement, and social norm that binds the civilized world, using a muscular and deep-pocketed propaganda apparatus to escape accountability by blaming its enemies and bribing or threatening allies to look the other way. Its victims are preemptively accused of the crimes committed against them so that when they do contact authorities, they appear suspect. Its trained assassins will kill another nation’s citizens anytime, anywhere to remove an obstacle to further consolidation of power, and whenever the central bank needs a top-up, the US and Europe will fight each other for the privilege of handing over their last pennies to the country that has everything (except a soul).
While a Venn Diagram depicting Big Parasite and “The Jews” would partially overlap, it would also show a serious imbalance in power driven by what “ex-Jew” Gilad Atzmon calls pre-traumatic stress syndrome — a pathological reaction to a feared (but nonexistent) trauma. Big Parasite, conflating Zionism with Judaism to justify the existence of its criminal outpost in the Middle East, claims to speak for all Jews while advocating the ethnic cleansing of “Greater Israel” and other war crimes. The resulting international condemnation of Zionist aggression, spun as a surge in anti-Jewish hate by a media establishment in the pocket of the thugs doing the killing, frightens “the Jews” — who’ve been propagandized from the cradle to believe that everyone wants them dead simply because they’re Jewish — back into the arms of their Zionist manipulators. But while it is undeniable that Jews in the West enjoy some privilege as a trickle-down benefit from their leaders’ influence, it has long baffled me why more of them don’t condemn those leaders’ crimes, at least for self-preservation’s sake, since they reflect so poorly on the entire group. When a serious effort is finally made to rip the Zionist facehugger off Lady Liberty, Americans will remember who it was that pimped her out and then cut out the people’s tongues to stop their complaining.
But Jewish apathy toward going down with the Zionist ship makes more sense as a manifestation of learned helplessness, itself the product of the very real trauma of epidemic child sexual abuse within the Orthodox tradition. Those who try to blow the whistle are ostracized as traitors, so the majority keep silent, becoming complicit in the abuse and even developing a Stockholm Syndrome-like loyalty to the group. The powerful Chabad Lubavitch sect, which counts Epstein lawyer Alan “I kept my underwear on” Dershowitz and Jared Kushner as adherents, is particularly notorious for protecting child abusers, shuttling offenders between cities (a tactic also used to protect Catholic predators within the priesthood), colluding with secular authorities to bury the charges, and ostracizing parents of victims. One popular Chabad rabbi admitted in 2013 that most of the children in its programs had been sexually abused at some point and even defended the practice as harmless, arguing it was up to the victims how they felt about the experience. Tunnels discovered beneath the group’s Brooklyn headquarters in a police raid last year contained stained child-sized mattresses and other kiddie furniture. Ghislaine Maxwell, half-Jewish only on her father’s side, officially converted in prison to access privileges supplied by a Chabad-linked group. The absence of a strong cultural taboo against child predation in many Jewish communities means that even if some amoral entity were to entrap Netanyahu himself in bed with a dead girl or a live boy, it’s unlikely that he would lose the support of diaspora Zionists. Big Parasite itself is thus all but immune to the pedophilic blackmail it has weaponized against the world, and only this can explain its staying power.
Child-Trafficking As Statecraft
Epstein began working for this pedocentric network in the 1980s with the CIA, and by 1983 was working with media baron and Israeli spy Robert Maxwell, according to former Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben Menashe. While the US and Israel were already running multiple trafficking rings that used underage children to compromise powerful figures as part of their Iran-Contra operations, Israel’s military intelligence directorate Aman had selected Epstein to deal with a more serious threat: the US was considering making peace with the Palestinians and had to be stopped, Epstein was told, with orders to set up his own ring and blackmail presidential candidate Bill Clinton with underage girls. Through L Brands and Victoria’s Secret owner Les Wexner, a billionaire faithful to the Zionist cause with mafia ties hidden beneath his respectable clothing business, Epstein was outfitted with a massive Manhattan townhouse outfitted with state-of-the-art surveillance in every room, a seemingly bottomless bank account, and a low-effort cover story that cast him as money manager for Wexner, who as co-founder of the Mega Group, a “philanthropic club” where 20 of the wealthiest and most powerful Zionists could focus on advancing the cause of Jewish supremacy, had a potentially unlimited amount of power and influence at his fingertips.

Dumb and horny, just like we like ‘em!
While Clinton was such an enthusiastic participant in his own compromising that it’s impossible to say which honeypot (Monica Lewinsky being the most famous) secured his cooperation, a nation that views the peaceful solution to a conflict as a greater evil than child-trafficking has clearly lost the plot. By the time Epstein’s operation was in full swing in 2000, Israel was literally run by (“alleged”) rapists. Ehud Barak, who would later be accused by Virginia Giuffre of raping her so violently she bled for hours and becoming aroused by her terror as she begged for her life, was prime minister, while Moshe Katsev, who would later be convicted of raping one of his employees, was president. That same year, the nation welcomed back Arie Scher, its disgraced vice-consul of Rio de Janeiro, after he was found to be trafficking children to Israeli tourists in Brazil, not only not prosecuting him but handing him a promotion as Consul of Canberra (Australia, in a rare show of good judgment, wouldn’t let him in). Another Israeli child trafficking ring was exposed in 2018 in Colombia, operating with protection from local authorities.
Barak seemed genuinely surprised when his friendship with Epstein, whom he would continue to visit at least 30 times in the US after the pedophile’s 2008 conviction required him to register as a sex offender, became a sticking point for voters during his attempted return as Prime Minister in 2019. Unwilling to believe Israelis had suddenly started caring about rape, especially rape of impoverished shiksas, Barak blamed his opponent Benjamin Netanyahu for ginning up a “poisoned atmosphere” to distract from the multiple corruption charges pending against him. Barak had a point — Israel had officially declared itself a Jewish supremacist state the previous year, abdicating any responsibility to protect its second-class citizens. After a 2024 UN report condemned Israel’s acceptance of the use of sexual humiliation, harassment and torture against Palestinian prisoners, 10 IDF soldiers were arrested for gang-raping a Palestinian man being held without evidence as a Hamas fighter. The backlash was immediate as government officials — led by Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, who called the rapists “heroes” — rallied to secure their release and demand those who ordered the arrest be punished. The soldiers’ lawyers even argued they had acted in self-defense.
Revelation of the Method
Unlike most intelligence agency honeytraps, Epstein’s trafficking ring included a public relations aspect, with glossy media profiles depicting him as a suave, mysterious, Jay Gatsby-by-way-of-James Bond playboy jet-setting around the world with princes and presidents, a bevy of (near)-babies surrounding him at all times. It is absurd to believe that it took a decade after survivor Maria Farmer first reported Epstein and Maxwell to the FBI for the agency to build a case against him even as he carried on with the same behaviors, or that the agency only found time to interview Farmer in 2006 after Palm Beach police made them look bad by charging the pedophile with abusing a 14-year-old girl. When the Palm Beach case landed in their lap as well, they waited until it was resolved in that jurisdiction, then wrote to victims falsely claiming a “thorough investigation” was underway. The agency’s behavior is less baffling given the FBI has been sexually compromised from its very beginnings, with founder J. Edgar Hoover blackmailed out of the gate by the same organized crime syndicate the agency was established to police, forcing him to deny the very existence of the Mafia for years. One can attribute the same motive to Kash Patel’s “who’re you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?” wide-eyed denials of reality.
Nor was the FBI the only law enforcement agency to mysteriously drop the ball on the 52-page indictment. Palm Beach State Attorney Barry Krischer abandoned the charges that could have put Epstein away for life after meeting with his defense team, deciding probation and a psychological evaluation would be sufficient punishment given that the girls were “prostitutes.” Krischer, who retired the following year, was in charge of the state’s Crime Against Children unit, yet had habitually refused to prosecute cases of men raping teenage girls even when his inaction led to further harm coming to the girls. His true motives were likely revealed in the award he would receive 10 years later from the Anti-Defamation League, an organization that was literally founded to protect Jewish pedophile and murderer Leo Frank from justice after he was found guilty of murdering his 13-year-old factory employee Mary Phagan. Bellowing the quiet part out loud, the ADL’s “Jurisprudence Award” is supposed to recognize “an outstanding contribution to the legal profession and to the community at large, while exemplifying the principles upon which the Anti-Defamation League was founded.” It certainly did that last part.
Palm Beach police chief Michael Reiter kicked the case up to US Attorney Alex Acosta, who also fumbled it, agreeing with Epstein’s lawyers to an infuriating no-prosecution deal on a single charge of soliciting a teen prostitute that would allow him to serve just 18 months in jail with day release. Victims were not told of the agreement, in violation of federal law. Acosta would later admit when he was interviewed by the Trump transition team for a cabinet post that he had been ordered to back off Epstein because “he belongs to intelligence,” but this was apparently acceptable to the incoming administration, which appointed him Secretary of Labor. Only when the public learned of the interaction was he pressured to resign.
Epstein had briefly considered fleeing to Israel like so many pedophiles before him in order to escape conviction, even complaining to friends that an “antisemitic conspiracy” in Palm Beach was to blame for his prosecution, a notion other Palm Beach Jews who didn’t spend their days molesting children found ludicrous. But instead, he embraced his new routine, leaving his cell each day to go to “work” and sneaking girls into his “office,” and served just 13 months of his sentence. He ignored the requirement that he register as a sex offender and was never asked to, nor did his wealthy and powerful friends drop him over his conviction.
As an asset of both US and Israeli intelligence, insulated in the personal wealth of mafia-affiliated Mega Group billionaires, surrounded by the wealthiest, most influential, and most powerful people he and Maxwell could lure into their nest, a retinue of nymphets obediently attending to his every need, Epstein likely believed that truly “getting caught” was impossible and thus resumed flaunting his lifestyle after weaseling out of the 2006 charges. Indeed, it’s the flaunting of the crime that makes for such an effective humiliation ritual. Confronted with such a towering miscarriage of justice, it is impossible to believe in the integrity of the US political system, and the destabilization of society advances by leaps and bounds.
Sex Slaves Breed Thought Slaves

The reason for the treason
Only by recognizing the role of sexual blackmail and the networks that run it can Americans understand the generational betrayal that has reduced our political system to just another asset-stripping mechanism. Decades under the thumb of Big Parasite have withered the US from a proud world power to a desiccated husk, one unethical compromise at a time. Dignity and patriotism left the building when, fresh off a starring role in the assassination of JFK, Israel persuaded his successor Lyndon Johnson to look the other way as it attempted to sink the naval intelligence ship USS Liberty, killing hundreds of Americans to drag Washington into its war with Egypt. Johnson, repeatedly blocking rescue efforts so as to leave no survivors to tell the truth about the attack, inaugurated a traitorous tradition that subsequent presidents have followed religiously. Israel will be permitted to violate everything from international law to the laws of physics, while the US will stand by to enforce its lunatic demands. Americans, reduced to serfs on an Israeli plantation, embraced the scam of Christian Zionism to try to make some moral sense of the situation, a coping mechanism the Israeli lobby has eagerly exploited with propaganda campaigns aimed at turning American churches into recruiters for what is ultimately a self-effacing death cult. As the US’ national debt spirals uncontrollably alongside its foreign aid bill, it is a wonder Big Parasite has not instituted a debt forgiveness program that allows Americans to offer up their nubile young daughters as payment. What do you get the nation that has everything, besides shame?
Only when the role of institutionalized pedophilia as the driving force within the halls of power is taken into account does the behavior of American politicians, uniting in lockstep to tear up the Bill of Rights so Israel’s feelings aren’t hurt, make any sense. Mere avarice or lust for power cannot account for the anti-human, shortsighted cravenness that defines the political class. Warehouses full of video recordings of these people and their associates schtupping 14-year-olds can.
When a State Department official praises Israel over the US and brags about sporting a Star of David necklace despite being Italian, it’s not because they don’t understand optics. When the Democratic Party commits political Seppuku by embracing a “hug Bibi” pro-Israel strategy in the middle of a genocide, it’s not because they love the wildly corrupt Israeli PM more than their jobs. When BlackRock-controlled brands like Bud Light and Jaguar clamber on board the LGBT bandwagon in the most tone-deaf way possible, offending their entire customer base and tanking their stock price with commercials that constitute aesthetic terrorism, it’s not because they love gay people or hate money. These are acts of ritual humiliation that provide Big Parasite with spiritual nourishment. Many of Epstein’s victims report that he and Maxwell seemed to take as much pleasure in their fear and distress as they did in the sex itself. Like the girls, blackmailed politicians must betray themselves anew with every assignment, cringing through life like a kicked dog knowing somewhere in a nondescript warehouse sits evidence of crimes that could put them away for a very long time. It’s kiss the Wailing Wall or kiss their ass goodbye.
Destroying Something Beautiful
While the media has lazily followed Alan Dershowitz’s lead in characterizing Epstein’s victims as trailer-trash juvenile delinquents barely on the wrong side of the age of consent, Epstein and his associates were in fact very picky about their prey, spending at least as much time strategizing the ruination of the flower of gentile feminity (the absence of Jewish girls from the “sisterhood,” confirmed by Maria Farmer and also notable among the victims of producer Harvey Weinstein, is notable given the ethnic-supremacist ideology of the parasite class) as they did on compromising VIPs — though admittedly it wasn’t rocket science getting a prince or a president to drop his zipper in the presence of underage beauties. They wanted “white girls” who appeared “prepubescent” and demure, according to survivor Courtney Wild, while another report specified their ideal type as “nymphishly thin, with no tattoos.” Maxwell insisted the girls should be “as young as possible.” Not only were they required to be virginal and disease-free (on pain of death), but they were forbidden from drinking, smoking, and using drugs and put on strict diets if they started to gain weight. Academic achievement and artistic talent were a bonus. Youth and beauty were important, but it was purity and innocence they were targeting.
Epstein was ideally placed to recruit girls — and charm their wealthy parents — from his first job, having been installed as math and science teacher at the prestigious Dalton School despite lacking even a college degree in what was likely an intelligence posting designed to position him in New York high society. He leveraged his financial benefactor Les Wexner’s Victoria’s Secret brand to great effect, enticing girls to his townhouse by pretending to be a model scout. At Interlochen Center for the Arts, where he had attended a youth music camp, his name emblazoned on the “Jeffrey Epstein Scholarship Lodge” helped him pick up musicians, while New York Academy of Art’s dean of students Lisa Guggenheim allegedly pimped out her choicest young students to him, among them Maria Farmer, the painter who would first report Epstein to the FBI.
So innocent when she first met Epstein at a gallery show that she actually believed his explanation that the steady trickle of young girls (many in school uniforms) in and out of his townhouse were Victoria’s Secret models on casting calls, Farmer, hooked with the promise of helping her art career, reluctantly agreed to travel to brand owner Les Wexner’s Ohio estate to work as an artist in residence. Trapped on the well-guarded property and verbally abused by Wexner’s wife Abigail, she was kept under constant surveillance and forbidden to eat at the “Jewish-only” country club on the property, losing 20 pounds as she gradually lost her will to resist.
Farmer only snapped out of her despondency when Epstein and Maxwell sexually assaulted her during a visit to the estate. The pair had set their sights on her younger sister Annie after spotting a nude photo of her that Farmer had used for a painting, and Farmer realized she had been bundled off to Wexner’s so that they could have full access to the younger girl. While she ultimately escaped and reunited with her sister, her art career had been destroyed, not helped, by her association with Epstein, who had forced her to turn down a Hollywood painting commission so she could be locked away in Ohio instead. He and Maxwell threatened to cut her off from “art related opportunities,” and she fled the city to get away from them. Despite her pre-Epstein success selling $20,000 paintings and showing in galleries, she stopped painting for 20 years, explaining to Whitney Webb, “They destroyed me on purpose.”

Farmer’s painting depicting Epstein-world as a “diagram” for the clueless FBI
While one can only speculate on how many other talented young girls had their creativity deliberately snuffed out, or why this was so important to Epstein and Maxwell, it is clear that many brilliant works of art, music, and literature that could have uplifted humanity were not made because their creators were made to give up. This has left space for Big Parasite, with its chokehold on the entertainment industry, to aesthetically terrorize the population with soulless mediocrity without having to worry about competition. Under their guidance, music and other forms of popular entertainment have become not a celebration of life but a grooming tool, with Diddy’s “freakouts” only the latest sexual blackmail scandal to surface in an ecosystem that was literally built by organized crime. The sexualization of young girls by popular culture and the normalization of pornography have inspired epic pearl-clutching by politicians willing to look at everything except the source. The role of Epstein’s virgin sacrifices in the runaway success of Big Parasite in its cultural warfare against the West should thus not be underestimated.
Playing the Box
The surest route to long-term compliance with an unconscionable order is tricking the target into active participation in enforcing it, a strategy Epstein himself called “playing the box.” Only when their own participation in the trafficking ring had ceased with Epstein’s death did institutional enablers like JP Morgan Chase and the Virgin Islands government experience attacks of conscience over what they’d facilitated for so many years, though both stopped short of taking accountability and blamed the other for allowing their cooperation to be bought. Journalists who had obediently spiked negative coverage of the pedophile during his life marked his death with disingenuous bewilderment at why the media never looked into the girls.
Efforts to defuse the Epstein bomb by grooming the media were underway long before the pedophile was rearrested and “suicided.” Israeli intelligence operatives poisoned the epistemological well in 2017, priming the American public to reject future political pedophilia scandals by seeding 4chan and other social media platforms with the QAnon psy-op. Q recast Trump — whose mentor had been Roy Cohn, perhaps the most famous sexual blackmailer in US history — as a real-life superhero saving trafficked children from Deep State pedophiles. Smothering its kernel of truth (the rich and powerful are in fact preying on children on an industrial scale) in a bath of bullshit (JFK Jr faked his death and is coming back any minute now! here’s Hillary Clinton in a snuff film!), it suggested Trump was only pretending to sell out to the Deep State while secretly outflanking them in “5-D chess” ordinary folks weren’t smart enough to understand. The narrative punch was further spiked with promises that hundreds of sealed indictments dropping any minute now would send Hillary Clinton and other prominent Democrats off to Guantanamo Bay for life, and the cryptic post format encouraged followers to waste hours hunting for hidden messages, effectively making them participants in deceiving themselves. It should surprise no one that both QAnon itself and the 4chan /pol/ board where it originated were confirmed as Israeli intelligence honeypots earlier this year, with half of all /pol/ posts originating from IP addresses in that country. The Q narrative was tailor-made to pacify millions of Americans with hopium — why rise up against the government when there was a chance the “white hats” within the administration might be engaged in deeply heroic feats of child-rescue behind the scenes? — while ensuring the Epstein revelations would be met with yawns and disbelief by “real” journalists.

Who wouldn’t want to be associated with this?
Victims were also tricked into complicity with their abuse with the order to recruit other girls for pay, a dynamic that ensured their silence and kept many in Epstein’s thrall for months or years. What Palm Beach police described as a “sexual abuse pyramid scheme” was far more effective than threats alone. Many girls dutifully came back with friends, needing the money or believing the false promises of career advancement that had lured them to the property in the first place, even as they gradually lost their will to resist under repeated assaults by Epstein and Maxwell. These encounters were designed to humiliate and strip the girls of agency, and the pressure to recruit other girls blurred the line between victim and perpetrator so effectively that some opted to remain silent out of fear of prosecution, a valid concern given the aggressive legal tactics of Epstein’s defense team. Courtney Wild, who recalls bringing as many as 80 girls — all underage — to Epstein for $200-$300 per girl during the three years she spent in his orbit in Palm Beach, says the money kept her out of homelessness, but at a price. When she met Epstein at 14, she was an A student and captain of the cheerleading team despite a troubled home life. Deemed too old for the predator’s tastes at 17, she drifted into stripping and began using drugs, eventually spending time in prison while her abuser continued feeding on her peers.
The same model of grooming that saw Epstein’s victims evolve from shocked repulsion at the public sex acts performed on his properties to reluctant participation and ultimately to gathering juicy details on the VIPs they were loaned out to can be observed in any society under parasitic exploitation. A wet-behind-the-ears politician initially appalled at the feeding frenzy of lobbyists bidding on his integrity will soon be hooked on their money, perhaps even coming to enjoy the quarterly debriefing with the “AIPAC babysitter” the Israeli group has apparently assigned to everyone in Congress except Thomas Massie. Americans who protested George W. Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 didn’t even raise an eyebrow when his successor Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Prize in hand, began bombing five more countries, and later freaked out when Trump threatened to end the war in Ukraine. Repeat an atrocity enough times and it becomes business as usual.
All Wars are Pedos’ Wars
It’s hard not to compare Epstein’s girls — thrown away once they aged out of jailbait, having given their best years in servitude to masters who saw them as “trash” — with the (mostly) male victims of the US military-industrial complex. These, too, are often left broke and broken on the streets after too much killing has rendered them “unfit for polite society” (in the cringeworthy words of Pete Hegseth). War historically harvests the cream of the generational crop, sacrificing the strongest and bravest boys to enrich a ruling class whose own children always dodge conscription, and while voluntary service has lowered the profile of such systematic abuse, poor kids with no prospects are easily enticed into joining the armed forces the same way girls were sucked into Epstein’s world: promises of good pay, good education, and the opportunity to achieve their dreams. Through the ur-humiliation ritual of boot camp, they become aggressive little golems eager to wipe their asses with international law (and their own self-preservation instincts) for America’s Best Friend, blasting brown civilians until they end up losing a limb or their mind and get sent home, the realization finally dawning that they’ve been used and thrown away. Reading US Third Air Force Commander Lt. Gen Richard Clark tell the Jerusalem Post (once owned by Robert Maxwell) that US troops would be ready and willing to die for Israel, how many veterans felt like General Patton, horror dawning that they have defeated the wrong enemy and doomed the world? Certainly, Israel’s continued existence as a nuclear-armed ethnostate determined to achieve the ultimate loosh harvest by conducting the world’s first live-streamed genocide in Gaza — gorging themselves on the suffering not only of the Palestinians but of everyone who watches the violence knowing that it’s funded by their tax dollars and that there’s nothing they can do about it —is not going to leave many survivors.
While war for its own sake is beloved by Big Parasite, it too has a parallel pedocentric motive: extracting foreign nations’ nubile natural resources for financial and sexual exploitation through UN “peacekeepers” and private military contractors. Sex trafficking by UN peacekeepers is so common it has its own Wikipedia article. The peacekeeping force seems tailor-made for predators, as they are not governed by local laws, and their home country is unlikely to follow up on a claim against them by a foreigner halfway around the world. Abusers caught in the act are merely sent home. The UN has promised to beef up accountability for decades, but no change has been forthcoming, suggesting the widespread child rape is a feature, not a bug. In Haiti, where Hillary Clinton infamously intervened in 2010 to reduce the sentence of missionary Laura Silsby after Silsby was caught attempting to kidnap 33 children from the country, rape by peacekeepers has become so common that a 2017 investigation found only one woman in 12 who’ve been raped by a UN peacekeeper even bothers to report the abuse anymore, knowing nothing will be done. Wars and natural disasters both provide an ideal environment for stealing children, as populations are displaced and authorities distracted while the presence of foreign do-gooder operations is seen as normal, even desirable, by outsiders.
Because private military contractors are not subject to US or military law when operating overseas, they are extremely popular with intelligence agencies in need of plausible deniability for their black ops. They have also become synonymous with human trafficking. The CIA’s preferred contractor Dyncorp was forced to fire several employees in Bosnia in 1999 after two separate whistleblowers revealed the company was operating a sex trafficking ring with the help of the Serbian mafia, flying girls as young as 12 from Serbia, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, and Romania into local brothels and sex clubs where they were trafficked to Dyncorp personnel as well as UN, NATO, and human rights NGO workers. Dyncorp was involved in all areas of the operation, forging documents, smuggling the girls through checkpoints, and tipping off brothel owners to raids. Despite an abundance of evidence that included the company’s Bosnia site director making a home video of himself raping two of the girls, no one was prosecuted, the girls were sent back home, and Dyncorp even kept its contract to provide police forces to the UN. However, the whistleblowers were fired. The plane Dyncorp used to bring the girls to Bosnia shared a tail number with a helicopter owned by Epstein, who was known to have purchased his own Yugoslavian sex slave Nadia Marcinkova during the civil war.
In 2004, Dyncorp contract workers at an airbase in Colombia filmed themselves molesting local kids and distributed the video in the streets of Bogota, suggesting self-blackmail may be de rigueur at the company as a form of mutually assured destruction. Another incriminating video leaked online in 2010 showing Dyncorp employees who’d been contracted to train the Afghan police force enjoying lapdances from a young boy dressed as a female. Pizzagate princess Hillary Clinton herself helped squash the story, though the scandal would ultimately leak again in a Wikileaks cable dump. Sex trafficking by military contractors is so common the Pentagon’s effort to ban it (presumably due to the bad publicity) was shot down by industry lobbyists.
In the glorified money laundering operation that is Vladimir Zelensky’s Ukraine, an entire generation of men has been sacrificed so the parasitic elite can indulge their perversions. White Angel, a paramilitary offshoot of the Israeli-funded neo-Nazi group Azov Battalion, has trafficked tens of thousands of children out of the country under orders from Zelensky’s government, taking advantage of demoralized and confused parents’ willingness to hand over their kids to “any person in military or police uniform” amid the fog of war. Paid $2,000 for each stolen child, the state-sponsored predators were deployed daily in villages across eastern Ukraine in a bid to strip its assets before the inevitable Russian victory, given orders to use violence against parents who would not voluntarily hand over their kids. Ending up an Israeli billionaire’s sex slave might actually be the more desirable of the options open to kidnapped Ukrainian children, however — many were allegedly sold for parts, with organ trafficking such big business in the country that the Verkhovna Rada literally legalized organ theft in 2021, removing the requirement for consent from a donor or relative. While the people of Ukraine have long since soured on their corrupt government, it is clear Zelensky and his puppet-masters are unwilling to permit the end of the war because of the sharp drop in income it would entail.
While Big Parasite consolidated itself under the cover of “Israel” when that nation was created, taking advantage of international sympathy towards Jews post-WW2 to ethnically cleanse its new home with shocking viciousness, it has always been a global network whose only real loyalty is to itself. Organized child sex trafficking is not a recent innovation. An attempted crackdown on “white slavery” in Eastern Europe in the late 19th century raised familiar questions regarding impoverished female victims’ agency in the sex trade, tolerance and even regulation of the trade by the authorities, and the ethnic dynamics of Jewish traders trafficking Polish and Galician nubiles — often tempted with promises of “real” jobs and wealthy husbands, or at least financial freedom — to slave auctions and Middle Eastern harems, their earnings heavily taxed or confiscated. Like Alan Dershowitz, modern apologists for the white slavers argue that desperate families’ willing sale of their daughters — some of whom might have already had sexual experience — in order to pay their debts constituted consensual prostitution, dismissing the stereotype of predatory Jewish slavers as a blood libel because Polish and Galician pimps existed as well and that if Jews hadn’t stepped in to run the sex trade with better business acumen, it would still have existed. Epstein, who bragged about buying “sex slave” Nadia Marcinkova from her parents in Yugoslavia, would be proud.
Pedo-Futurism

Palantir’s Alex Karp, giving a biiiiiig welcome to the technocratic dystopia
It is not only our present that has been hijacked by this criminal gang, but our future. Seemingly driven by the same pre-traumatic stress syndrome that leads them to see a Shoah in every shoelace, agents of Big Parasite have flooded the communications and technology sector with backdoored equipment and spyware so completely that surveillance is the expectation, not the exception. It is not an exaggeration to say that their quest for omniscience created the modern surveillance state, and that this process has been driven, enabled, and protected by sexual blackmailers. Robert Maxwell sold backdoored PROMIS communication software to 42 governments including the US in the 1980s, opening up the mother of all eavesdropping channels. Ghislaine’s sister Christine sold Chiliad datamining software to the FBI to enable its “War on Terror” through aggressive surveillance of Israel’s enemies, guiding US foreign policy off a cliff. Palantir, the CIA-funded pre-crime program that was recently handed centralized control over all US government systems, began as an extension of PROMIS and has blossomed into a dystopian surveillance behemoth whose executives openly boast about killing people and telegraph their allegiances by reminding the world that they “defer to Israel.” Ghislaine’s other sister Isabel opened the door to Big Parasite’s takeover of the internet by convincing Silicon Valley investors to pour funding into Israeli startups in the 1990s, leading to the success of companies like Commtouch, now a ubiquitous and hidden part of email systems used by Google and Microsoft (whose founder, Bill Gates, has been a friend of Epstein since the 1990s). Israeli startups acquired by US tech giants can easily take control of the company’s direction from within without disturbing the public-facing image of the company as all-American, and this has become standard operating procedure for Israel’s military intelligence Unit 8200, which has turned industry giants like Microsoft and Intel into espionage bonanzas even as their products degrade in quality, burdened and bloated with snitchware. When Netanyahu reminded smartphone users that they were “holding a piece of Israel,” he was not exaggerating — Israeli companies like Pegasus, Candiru and Ehud Barak’s Epstein-funded Carbyne911 have perfected the transformation of personal communications device into personal surveillance device.
Every elite sex trafficking scandal that becomes public is reported in a vacuum, as if there have not been hundreds if not thousands more not mentioned here. Evidence of similar rings can be found anywhere humanity’s baser instincts are exploited. Every time we fail to interrogate the “why” of these scandals beyond “powerful men are into forbidden fruit” and keep silent out of fear of offending the boot wedged firmly on our necks, we are giving our agency over to these predators. As long as there are assets left to strip, Big Parasite will be there, luxuriating in our cowardice while it grows fat off our distress. Epstein may be dead and gone, but the network that created him is still screwing us all.
December 18, 2025 Posted by aletho | Corruption, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Video, Wars for Israel | FBI, Israel, Palestine, United States, Zionism | Leave a comment
Featured Video
Sanctioned by EU. Abandoned by Switzerland | Nathalie Yamb
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Barnes Against the Blackout
By Spencer J. Quinn | The Occidental Observer | January 2, 2026
In short, there is no unique or special case against Nazi barbarism and horrors unless one assumes that it is far more wicked to exterminate Jews than to massacre Gentiles. While this latter value judgment appears to have become rather generally accepted in the Western world since 1945, I am personally still quaint enough to hold it to be reprehensible to exterminate either Jews or Gentiles.” – Harry Elmer Barnes
INTRODUCTION
Anyone still questioning the relevance of World War II revisionism to politics today should realize how often our liberal, globalist elites not only invoke World War II, but also ignore, suppress, or besmirch revisionism. Whenever a mainstream personality invites a revisionist on his program, he gets swiftly rebuked and called a Nazi not only by the Left but also by people presumably on the Right. Recently, Jewish commentator Mark Levin invoked the massacre of German civilians during World War II to justify the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Clearly, whenever someone questions the authority of our liberal elites, they fire back with World War II. Since Adolf Hitler and the Nazis represent the most extreme form of evil and since globalist liberalism is the ideological opposite of Nazism, any form of oppression and aggression by globalist liberals is justifiable – as long as it’s aimed against so-called “Nazis.” And if you happen to be against liberalism or globalism these days, it’s only a matter of time before you get dubbed a “Nazi.”
Historian Harry Elmer Barnes understood this perfectly over seventy years ago and promoted revisionism in the face of eerily similar oppression and backlash. Nine of his most incisive essays on the topic—written between 1951 and 1962—are collected in Barnes Against the Blackout, which was published by the Institute for Historical Review in 1991. Several important themes run through these essays. First, Barnes wishes to proselytize revisionism, and does so by constantly referencing and summarizing the great American works of revisionism of his day. These include:
- American Foreign Policy in the Making, 1932-1940 (1946) and President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War, 1941 (1948) by Charles Beard
- America’s Second Crusade (1950) by William Chamberlin
- The Roosevelt Myth (1948) by John T. Flynn
- Pearl Harbor: The Story of the Secret War (1947) by George Morgenstern
- The Tragedy of Europe (1940-1945) and Makers of War (1950) by Francis Neilson
- Design for War (1951) by Frederic Sanborn
- Back Door to War: The Roosevelt Foreign Policy 1933-1941 (1952) by Charles Tansill
Given the suffocating interventionist hysteria of the time, major publishers declined to publish these volumes despite how many of them had been written by prominent, well-respected historians. Either the publishers were ardent interventionists themselves, or they feared backlash from anti-revisionists who wielded great power in America, just as they do today. Except for the Neilson volumes, which were self-published, these works found only two small publishing houses brave enough to publish them… continue
Blog Roll
-
Join 2,406 other subscribers
Visits Since December 2009
- 7,266,511 hits
Looking for something?
Archives
Calendar
Categories
Aletho News Civil Liberties Corruption Deception Economics Environmentalism Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism Fake News False Flag Terrorism Full Spectrum Dominance Illegal Occupation Mainstream Media, Warmongering Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity Militarism Progressive Hypocrite Russophobia Science and Pseudo-Science Solidarity and Activism Subjugation - Torture Supremacism, Social Darwinism Timeless or most popular Video War Crimes Wars for IsraelTags
9/11 Afghanistan Africa al-Qaeda Australia BBC Benjamin Netanyahu Brazil Canada CDC Central Intelligence Agency China CIA CNN Covid-19 COVID-19 Vaccine Donald Trump Egypt European Union Facebook FBI FDA France Gaza Germany Google Hamas Hebron Hezbollah Hillary Clinton Human rights Hungary India Iran Iraq ISIS Israel Israeli settlement Japan Jerusalem Joe Biden Korea Latin America Lebanon Libya Middle East National Security Agency NATO New York Times North Korea NSA Obama Pakistan Palestine Poland Qatar Russia Sanctions against Iran Saudi Arabia Syria The Guardian Turkey Twitter UAE UK Ukraine United Nations United States USA Venezuela Washington Post West Bank WHO Yemen ZionismRecent Comments
loongtip on Palestine advocates praise NYC… Bill Francis on Did Netanyahu just ask Trump f… Rod on How Intelligence, Politics, an… papasha408 on Trump Says Hamas Will Be Given… papasha408 on Is Israel About to Return to G… Bill Francis on NSW Premier Admits New “Securi… Richard Ong on Israeli forces arrest writer a… Bill Francis on How reporting facts can now la… loongtip on Europe’s Panic Economy: Frozen… Gemma on Israel’s diamond industr… Bill Francis on Victoria Moves to Force Online… papasha408 on The Empire of Lies: How the BB…
Aletho News- Palestine advocates praise NYC Mayor Mamdani for revoking pro-Israel decrees
- Israel and the politics of fragmentation: The hidden hand behind secessionist projects in Yemen, Somalia, and Libya
- U.S. Ambassador To Israel, Mike Huckabee, Boasts That Regime Change In Venezuela Is Good For Israel.
- Barnes Against the Blackout
- Three Reasons Iran Condemns US Attack on Venezuela as a Global Threat
- Why Are Mike Pompeo And The Mossad Publicly Announcing Mossad Involvement In Iranian Protests?
- Protests in Iran: Analysis of current demonstrations and their implications for the Islamic Republic
- Ukraine strikes civilians in drone attacks, western media silent
- Sanctioned by EU. Abandoned by Switzerland | Nathalie Yamb
- Targeting Putin and New Year celebrations… Western war psychosis in desperation mode
If Americans Knew- Israel And Its Supporters Deliberately Foment Hate And Division In Our Society
- ADL’s J7: Biweekly Jewish Nationalism Think Tank
- Israel gives war profiteers sole control of life-saving Gaza aid: Report
- Once Again, the New York Times Sells Israel’s Genocide in Gaza as Law Enforcement
- Israel Accuses Zohran Mamdani of Antisemitism for Reversing Orders Adams Gave Under Indictment
- Israel’s NGO ban a “cynical and calculated attempt” to starve Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 85
- Controlled Dissent: The Hidden System That Broke Charlie Kirk
- Four major dynamics in Gaza War that will impact 2026
- Stunning Victories and Rising Repression: a look back at the global student movement for Palestine in 2025
- Ha’aretz: Israel Blocked 37 Aid Groups From Gaza – and Then Claimed Credit for Their Work
No Tricks Zone- Expect Soon Another PIK Paper Claiming Warming Leads To Cold Snaps Over Europe
- New Study: Human CO2 Emissions Responsible For 1.57% Of Global Temperature Change Since 1750
- Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
- New Study Finds A Higher Rate Of Global Warming From 1899-1940 Than From 1983-2024
- Meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue Warns “Germany Won’t Make It” If Winter Turns Severe
- Merry Christmas Everybody!
- Two More New Studies Show The Southern Ocean And Antarctica Were Warmer In The 1970s
- Der Spiegel Caught Making Up Reports About Conservative America (Again)
- New Study: 8000 Years Ago Relative Sea Level Was 30 Meters Higher Than Today Across East Antarctica
- The Wind Energy Paradox: “Why More Wind Turbines Don’t Always Mean More Power”
Contact:
atheonews (at) gmail.com
Disclaimer
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.

