Israel’s strike on Qatar exposes the collapse of Arab security assumptions
By Dr Sania Faisal El-Husseini | MEMO | September 12, 2025
The thunder of Israeli warplanes over Doha this week was more than just a military operation, it was a shattering moment for the region. Missiles aimed at residential neighbourhoods in Qatar’s capital, as an attempt to assassinate Hamas leaders, sent a shockwave across the Gulf. The United States, caught between its alliance with Israel and its defence commitments to Qatar and other Arab Gulf states, sought refuge in manoeuvering, distancing itself from the strike while tacitly enabling it. For Arab national security, particularly in the Gulf, the implications are sobering.
The paradox is glaring, Qatar, host to the vast Al-Udeid Air Base, America’s forward headquarters in the region, and dependent on US military systems for its defence, finds itself exposed. The strike underscored what many Arab analysts have long warned, Washington’s strategic loyalty lies firmly with Israel, while Arab allies are seen as expendable partners.
This attack, the first of its kind on Qatari soil, is unlikely to be the last in the region. While framed as part of Israel’s campaign against Hamas, its significance extends far beyond Gaza.
For years, Qatar has hosted indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel, offering itself as a diplomatic broker. But Israel, it now appears, used those talks as cover, buying time while pursuing unchanged objectives, the conquest of Gaza, the dismantling of Hamas, and the displacement of its population. As Israel intensified its push into Gaza City, it simultaneously targeted the Hamas delegation in Doha, an unmistakable signal that diplomacy was never the true endgame.
The operation reflects a broader Israeli strategy, expand military dominance step by step, strike beyond borders, and erase red lines that once constrained its reach.
Qatar’s own relationship with Israel has always been a delicate balance. From the opening of an Israeli trade office in Doha in 1996, to intelligence meetings hosted in recent years, to participation in joint air exercises in Greece, the two states have maintained limited yet functional ties. Still, Israel’s decision to strike inside Qatar amounts to a message to the entire Arab Gulf, no country is immune, and restraint will only embolden further violations.
This reality stretches well beyond the Palestinian question. Israel’s ambitions are no longer confined to blocking Palestinian statehood. The Netanyahu government, driven by the most hardline coalition in Israel’s history, has laid bare its intent, redraw the regional map through force, not diplomacy. Its declared expansion goals in the region, military reach backed by nuclear superiority, unmatched intelligence networks, and unwavering US support positions it as a major security threat to the regional countries. From assassinations in Iran to operations in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and now Qatar, Israel acts with impunity. The Gulf, it seems, is simply no longer far from its attacks and ambitions.
The position of the American adminstration towrds the Israeli attack on Qatar has revealed a pivotal thorny issue. Qatar’s partnership with Washington was supposed to offer military and security safeguards. The two countries signed a Defence Cooperation Agreement in 1992, renewed in 2013, and Qatar was designated a Major Non-NATO Ally in 2022. Billions have been invested in Al-Udeid, now central to US operations across the region and Central Asia. Yet when Israel violated Qatari sovereignty, the US response revealed the harsh truth, strategic guarantees for Arab states collapse the moment they clash with Israel’s interests.
For Qatar and for every Arab state relying on US military systems, the lesson is stark. Dependence on Washington offers no shield when it matters most.
Many Arab states, particularly in the Gulf, have built their national defense almost entirely on Western military and security systems. In addition to Qatar, Saudi Arabia relies heavily on U.S. made F15 fighter jets and Patriot missile defence systems, the United Arab Emirates has invested billions in advanced American and French aircraft, as well as the THAAD missile shield, Bahrain hosts the US Fifth Fleet, and Kuwait depends on American logistical and intelligence support. These examples reflect a broader regional reality, the very foundations of Arab security are tied to Western supply chains, training, and decision making structures. Yet the Israeli strike on Qatar laid bare the danger of this dependency. When the interests of Washington and Tel Aviv converge, as they so often do, the security of Arab allies becomes secondary. Israel’s declared ambitions to project power beyond Palestine, coupled with the US’s unambiguous tilt toward Israel, mean that the entire architecture of Arab national security now stands on precarious ground.
Silence now would be perilous. If Arab governments allow this strike on Doha to pass without response, Israel will take it as a green light to extend its reach even further. The moment demands more than statements of concern. It requires a collective Arab reckoning, not only with Israel’s unchecked aggression, but with the illusion that the US security umbrella offers reliable protection.
The question is simple, if uncomfortable, will Arab states finally learn from experience, or will they continue to build their security on foundations that crumble when tested?
Geopolitical Ripple Effect: How Doha Attack Undermines US Credibility in the Gulf, Empowers BRICS
Sputnik – 12.09.2025
Israel’s aggression against one of America’s key allies in the oil-rich Persian Gulf is a wake-up call for the region’s nations about the hollowness of US security guarantees. The question now is whether they’ll answer, military and regional experts tell Sputnik.
Security
The failure of US and European-made equipment to stop Israel’s assault leaves only one option open: Russia, says defense analyst Igor Korotchenko.
Russian specialists could build Qatar a system that would give the emirate “the keys” to its skies, leaving “no country able to strike with impunity without the risk of losing both the carriers and strike systems” used in the aggression.
A pivot to Russia is fully realistic, given Moscow’s sale of Pantsir-S1s to the UAE, Qatar’s maritime neighbor.
To reliably close the skies to the enemy, Qatar could complement its defenses with Pantsirs, Buk-M3s, and Tor-M2s.
Commerce & Trade
“The Gulf is already engaged with the multipolar world” on economic matters, says Dr. Tamer Qarmout of the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies.
If the political will exists, not just Qatar but the region could “diversify their alliances and engage more with multipolarity.”
The UAE is already in BRICS, and Saudi Arabia has been invited. Gulf states also enjoy strong bilateral economic links with key BRICS powers including Russia (agriculture, IT), India (labor and trade) and China (trade and strategic initiatives like BRI).
Old Chains of Bondage Could Be Hard to Break
For most of their existence, Gulf powers “have never been truly sovereign,” says veteran Mideast expert Isa Blumi. “They’ve always been dependent on the British and the Americans,” and “internal struggles and rivalries” have made them ripe for manipulation.
That means “strategically and from a security and political perspective,” Gulf powers’ “interests are still largely embedded with, or aligned with, the US as a strategic partner,” Qarmout says.
Time for Strategic Self-Reflection
Israel’s attack “introduced significant uncertainties and major questions for Gulf nations regarding the future” of economic, political and military partnerships with the US.
The “difficult and existential” question is whether Gulf nations will “intensify” links to BRICS “to include new sectors like security and defense,” given the US’s abject failure to protect its “ally” “in such a blatant manner,” Qarmout summed up.
If the United States Wants to Survive It Must Free Itself from Israel
Israeli dominance over Washington has gone on for far too long
By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • September 11, 2025
I have university degrees in ancient, medieval and early modern history but search as I may, I cannot find another example of a small, low population state largely devoid of natural resources that has been able to dominate the politics and policies of a much larger great power to the extent that Israel controls many aspects of America’s government, its economy, its education system, its media, and, most of all, its foreign and national security policies. Little Israel commands and the superpower United States obeys, a relationship that has coined the expression “the tail wags the dog.”
To be sure, Israel has resources that might be regarded as unconventional for most nation states around the globe, consisting of a large and astonishingly wealthy network of “diaspora” co-religionists who are prepared to corrupt the governments in the countries where they actually live to benefit the Jewish state in every way possible. Politicians can easily be bought by Jewish billionaires, as in the case of President Donald Trump who reportedly received $100 million as a campaign donation from Israeli Las Vegas casino magnate Miriam Adelson, plausibly in exchange for Israel having a free hand in the West Bank, up to and including total annexation and deportation of the inhabitants to eliminate a possible Palestinian state.
In the United States, this Zionist Lobby power has produced a series of presidents terrified to object to what Israel declares to be its interests, plus a Congress that has been bought and manipulated into total submission to war criminals like Israel’s ghastly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Even the US Constitution is no defense against Israel’s interests, with First Amendment free speech rights being abridged through the interpretation that any criticism of the self-described Jewish state is ipso facto a hate crime, which is a felony.
The abuse inherent in the relationship, which is hugely expensive to the US and damaging to its real interests, is fortunately beginning to be so visible that a reaction to the arrangement is beginning to penetrate to the level of the average voters. Opinion polls suggest that most Americans oppose what Israel is doing to the Palestinians, but President Donald Trump and the clowns he has appointed to high office, Zionists all, are unmoved. Hopefully they will see the light if a strong message is sent during elections coming up in November.
In a recent interview, I declared that the only real national security threat against the United States comes from Israel in that it has repeatedly pushed America into bad policy choices to serve its own interests. That means that policymakers, in search of the number one “American enemy” in the world, should look no farther than Israel and they should immediately take steps to distance themselves from Israeli initiatives. In terms of other alleged threats to the US, one must concede that most analyses coming out of Washington are essentially phony, designed to deflect from real problems, including which is what to do about Israel and the all-powerful Israeli Lobby reenforced by the “waiting for a Rapture” Christian Zionists that have taken over so much of the government. Sorry Marco Rubio but Russia, China, Iran, and Venezuela do not threaten the United States of America. Continuation of the dance of death with the Israelis will on the contrary be likely to lead to ruin for Americans.
The sad truth is that the United States gains absolutely nothing from its bondage to Israel, quite the contrary. When I was in government in CIA Stations and Bases in Europe and the Middle East I used to hear US politicians proclaiming how Israel (Mossad) shared wonderful intelligence information that made America safer. The truth was quite different as I used to see the Israel-generated reports and they were consistently puff pieces intended to make Arabs and Iranians look bad by inventing “threats.” It was that type of information, i.e. the claimed existence of WMD, promoted by Jewish neocons in the media as well as in the Defense Department and in the Vice President’s office, that led to war against a completely non-threatening Iraq that killed as many as 600,000 Iraqis.
More recent developments illuminate just how poisonous the relationship with Israel is, though one might also dare to mention long ago Jewish state perfidy like the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 that killed 34 sailors and the suspicions about Israeli involvement in both the killing of JFK and 9/11, all of which were subject to deliberate US government cover-ups and bungled investigations. Israel does not hesitate to kill Americans, witness the cases of protester Rachel Corrie and journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, both of whom were murdered by the Israeli army. In neither case did the US Embassy demand an explanation from the Israelis.
This past June, Israel decided to attack Iran and convinced Donald Trump to join in the game, with the argument that Iran is secretly building nuclear weapons, which was not true. Israel, of course, has its own secret nuclear arsenal, and has even threatened to use the weapons in the Samson Option, but both Tel Aviv and Washington apparently regard that as perfectly acceptable. So the United States, to oblige Israel, followed on to the Israeli attack and hit selected targets in Iran. This led to a lying or ignorant, you can take your choice, Trump boasting about how he had “obliterated” the Iranian nuclear development sites, which was not true. So what was gained? Again “nothing” but the US went to war, a war crime, solely to appease Israel and spent something like $1 billion to carry out the mission.
More recently, Israel bombed a residential building in Doha, the capital of Qatar, in a bid to kill Hamas officials who were in the city to negotiate a cease fire in Gaza with the Israelis. The meeting was allegedly backed and “guaranteed” by Washington but it now appears that, at the same time, Trump or his associates were conniving with Israel to assassinate the Hamas representatives. The US has its largest air base in the Middle East in Qatar at Al Udeid with 10,000 American military on site. Mysteriously, the base’s radar and air defense system appear to have been turned off when the Israeli planes were approaching the target. One wonders who ordered that. And the planes needed to be refueled to return to Israel after the attack. Conveniently, British Royal Air Force tankers were in the area to carry out that task. Sounds like a set-up to end any chance of a ceasefire by killing Hamas envoys in an ostensibly safe country Qatar that was orchestrated by Israel, the US and Britain. And what does the United States of America gain from it? “Nothing!” Or rather, global hatred of Washington due to its groveling support of all things Israeli just crept up by ten points!
And then there is the Genocide in Gaza itself. If there is any remaining confusion about Trump’s true intentions, one might cite Netanyahu, who has asserted that he has complete American support to do whatever he wants in Gaza, “no partial deals with Hamas, go with full force.” It is nevertheless difficult to imagine how average Americans benefit by allowing the crime against humanity to go on and on, something that could be stopped with a phone call if Donald Trump had even a trace of compassion hidden somewhere in that empty head that he bears.
Regrettably, the United States is completely complicit in the atrocity that is taking place in Gaza which is clearly visible to the entire world. And the US is even paying for and providing the arms for the slaughter. There is a certain irony in the fact that Washington funds the war for Israel, which has both free medical care and free higher education for its Jewish citizens, something that many American citizens are reportedly struggling with. One might well describe it as a misplaced priority, but it is in reality yet another symptom of the power that Israel has over the United States government from top to bottom.
Finally, if any additional evidence were required to demonstrate Israel’s power over the United States, the recent block by Washington on visa issuance for Palestinian participation in the United Nations opening session in New York as well as the general ban on accepting passports issued by the Palestine Authority are steps demanded by Israel to make it impossible for Palestinians to argue their own case for statehood and decent treatment in international fora. And what does the US get out of it even though it in theory supports a two-state solution for Israel/Palestine? Nothing.
Such is the level of pure evil emanating from Israel that many have come to believe that it is capable of any crime, which is quite likely true. Conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated on Wednesday, reportedly had begun to entertain some criticism of Israel which had resulted in threats that led him to employ bodyguards. As a result of that and other developments, momentum is growing to do something about Israel, which is clearly considered a threat to all the world, completely reckless in its behavior, and having “secret” nuclear weapons that it is very likely prepared to use. Suspension from the UN and the insertion of an international protection force in Gaza to stop the genocide are being discussed under the “Uniting for Peace” resolution, which empowers the General Assembly to recommend such steps to take when the Security Council is unable to act due to the expected US veto. There are also calls for Israel’s presence and privileges within the UN system to be suspended until a ceasefire in Gaza and full humanitarian access to the strip is restored. But never fear, Donald Trump will receive his orders from Benjamin Netanyahu and the US will do everything in its power as the rogue state it has become to stop any such action, including threats of sanctions and even violence against those promoting those moves, just as the US has done with the International Criminal Court and other bodies seeking an end to Israel’s war crimes. That is the unfortunate reality.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
Qatar: an ambiguous agent in the Zionist architecture for the Middle East
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 11, 2025
The recent Israeli attacks on Qatar have brought to public debate an issue long overlooked by analysts during the current Middle East conflict: Qatar’s ambiguous role in the regional security architecture.
In the geopolitical theater of the Middle East, Qatar has played a profoundly ambiguous role—at times portrayed as a regional mediator, at others as a strategic collaborator with the Washington-Tel Aviv axis. This ambivalence is neither accidental nor merely tactical. It is rooted in the very foundations of Gulf monarchies’ foreign policy, notoriously driven by a commercial mentality that prioritizes stability, survival, and diplomatic gains over any consistent ideological alignment. However, in light of the current stage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this self-interested neutrality has increasingly morphed into active complicity with the Zionist occupation regime.
Despite hosting the political leadership of Hamas in Doha, Qatar does not finance its military wing—which, in fact, is supported by Iran. The hospitality extended to the political branch of the Palestinian movement serves, in reality, as a diplomatic tool to increase Qatari influence over the resistance and steer it toward behavior less hostile to Israeli and American interests. This strategy has been employed for years under the pretense of “mediation,” but in practice, it functions as a containment mechanism for the Palestinian national movement.
For years, the Al Jazeera network, controlled by Doha, had authorized access to the Gaza Strip, even under the strict control of Israeli security forces. This privilege was not granted out of goodwill by Tel Aviv but was the result of a strategic arrangement: Al Jazeera promoted anti-Iran rhetoric within the occupied territories, reinforcing the sectarian divide between Sunnis and Shiites and distracting Palestinians from their real source of military support. In return, Israel allowed the ideological diffusion of Wahhabism in Gaza, calculating that this doctrine would weaken Palestinian nationalism and inter-Muslim solidarity, replacing them with religious divisions and fractured loyalties.
This pact began to decline as Al Jazeera became a major outlet for exposing the brutal reality of the genocide in Gaza. Once Qatar’s media presence in occupied Palestine started to generate more costs than benefits for Israel, the Zionist regime enacted a censorship law banning Al Jazeera and assassinated several of its journalists during the criminal airstrikes on Gaza.
Qatar is also home to the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East—Al Udeid Air Base. This facility not only houses American equipment and troops but also serves as an operational platform for Israeli assets in joint missions against Gaza, Hezbollah, and potentially Iran. The Israeli presence on Qatari soil is an open secret and illustrates just how much Qatar has functioned as a logistical hub for the regional security architecture coordinated by Washington and Tel Aviv.
In June, Iran launched precision strikes against this base during its brief direct war with Israel. The message was unequivocal: by allowing its territory to be used by powers hostile to the Axis of Resistance, Qatar had crossed the limits of neutrality. Doha’s response, however, was to remain in a position of complicit silence, ignoring internal protests and maintaining its alignment with Western allies.
This posture exposes the fundamental paradox of Gulf foreign policy: even with populations broadly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, the Wahhabi bloc has repeatedly chosen to accommodate Israeli and American projects, as long as doing so ensures dynastic survival and economic stability. This reflects a deeply rooted rationality in the political culture of desert nations—one shaped by centuries of pragmatic adaptation to scarcity and existential threats. In an environment where taking sides can mean ruin, ambiguity becomes a way of life.
However, in the current context of conflict radicalization, this ambiguity is no longer perceived as strategy but as betrayal. By refusing to break with the occupying powers, Qatar risks being dragged into an escalation it helped to ignite. The Israeli bombs falling on Gaza today do so, directly or indirectly, with American logistical support originating from Qatari territory. This undeniable fact—under any serious analysis—undermines Doha’s attempt to present itself as both bridge and wall, as arbiter and accomplice.
The recent Israeli strikes on Doha have made one thing painfully clear: befriending the Zionists is a deadly mistake.
US House votes to repeal president’s Middle East war powers
Al Mayadeen | September 11, 2025
In a significant move to reclaim Congressional authority over military engagement, the US House of Representatives voted on Tuesday to repeal decades-old laws that authorized war in the Middle East.
The 261-167 vote represents a bipartisan push to rescind the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs), originally enacted ahead of the Gulf War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
The repeal was adopted as an amendment to the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and is being hailed as a victory for war powers reform advocates, who argue that outdated authorizations enable unchecked presidential use of military force.
Long-awaited win for war powers reform advocates
The amendment was co-sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) and garnered support from 49 Republicans and 212 Democrats. Advocates argue that keeping these authorizations in place enables future administrations to bypass Congress in deploying US military power.
“We don’t need to have Congress effectively modern-day declaring war and leaving it in place for a quarter of a freaking century, or in this case, 34 years,” said Roy.
Meeks added that he was “prepared to fight” in upcoming Senate negotiations to ensure the repeal becomes law.
Pushback from opponents
The proposal had an uncertain path to passage. Initially excluded from the package of amendments allowed for floor debate, the measure was added only after an unusual procedural win in the House Rules Committee. Republicans Ralph Norman (SC), Morgan Griffith (VA), and Chip Roy broke with their party to help Democrats force a debate on the amendment.
Not all lawmakers welcomed the repeal. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-FL) warned that revoking the war powers laws would “tie the president’s hands” in responding to regional threats, including resistance movements in Iraq.
Despite these concerns, the amendment passed with bipartisan backing, though deeper divisions remain over broader defense policies.
Wider debate over executive military power continues
While the vote represents a symbolic step toward limiting presidential war authority, critics note that the repeal will not affect recent military actions, including President Donald Trump’s alleged strike last week on a vessel in the Caribbean he claimed was for smuggling drugs.
The war powers repeal is expected to become a central issue in House-Senate negotiations over the final defense policy package. Although both chambers have voted in recent years to repeal the 2002 Iraq AUMF, no repeal legislation has yet been enacted into law.
Background on AUMFs
- 1991 AUMF: Authorized military force during the Gulf War under President George H. W. Bush;
- 2002 AUMF: Enabled the 2003 invasion of Iraq under President George W. Bush;
- 2014: Former President Barack Obama used the authorization to justify airstrikes in Iraq and Syria;
- 2020: US President Donald Trump used it in his first term to greenlight the airstrike that killed the IRGC’s Quds Force commander General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad.
While former President Joe Biden never formally used the authorization, his administration argued it was important to keep it intact to respond to any future threats.
Why Did Qatar’s Air Defenses Fail During Israel’s Attack?
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 10.09.2025
The missiles fired by Israel could have been intercepted by Qatar’s US Patriot systems. Russian military expert Yuri Knutov weighs in: the Patriots were simply turned off by the US.
Patriots Offline
“The main feature of these systems is their close integration with airborne early warning and control aircraft (AWACS), satellites, and command centers that provide targeting data,” Knutov tells Sputnik. “In addition, they have a [remote] shutdown feature to prevent accidental friendly fire.”
This shutdown feature is problematic: Turkiye refused to purchase the Patriot specifically because the American side could disable these systems at any moment, and therefore preferred the S-400, according to the pundit.
US Didn’t Defend Qatar
Apart from using Patriots, Qatar hosts the US’ largest military base in the Middle East.
“According to the agreement between Qatar and the US, the Americans were, of course, supposed to defend Qatar’s airspace by opening fire on Israeli aircraft. However, this did not happen,” Knutov says.
The US military knew about the incoming Israeli aircraft yet took no action, effectively allowing them to operate freely against the Hamas delegation invited to Qatar for negotiations. The US was fully aware of this.
Arab countries — and not just them — should take note: wherever US Patriots are used, the US can disable them at any moment, leaving their skies completely defenseless.
US Always Sides With Israel
“This is undoubtedly a scandalous situation, given that Qatar is a close US ally and had promised to invest billions in the American economy,” Knutov says. “The Americans warned Qatar of the attack only ten minutes after it had taken place.”
Appeasing the US is futile — they always side with Israel.
Israel’s Doha Strike Burns Bridges for Peace, Marks Dangerous Strategic Overstretch – Experts
Sputnik – 10.09.2025
Israel expanded the geography of countries it has bombed on Tuesday, targeting a delegation of Hamas officials involved in peace negotiations in Qatar. Sputnik asked a pair of regional experts how the aggression will impact Israel’s position in the region in the long term.
Israeli military operations in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and now the Gulf signal an “overstretch” that won’t be left without serious diplomatic repercussions, Ankara-based security analyst Dr. Hasan Selim Ozertem has told Sputnik.
“Looking at Europe, looking at the US, looking at the Gulf, these countries have started to articulate their concerns about Israeli aggression, which was not the case before because of the leverage of the Israeli lobby, especially in US politics,” Ozertem explained.
With Qatar serving as mediator in the Gaza war, the Doha attack “also undermines Israel’s credibility” among the Gulf powers Tel Aviv wants to forge ties with through the Abraham Accords.
Israel’s aggression may even result in the creation of new regional pacts, Ozertem says.
“The Saudi Crown Prince said [Riyadh] will be supporting Qatar. In the past, we know that Qatar and Saudi Arabia had political problems. They managed to solve them. Now we are talking about a military alliance…an anti-Israeli opinion or bloc in the region among local actors… increasing the probability of potential confrontation between Israel and others.”
Burning Bridges
“By attacking Doha as peace negotiations for ending the Gaza genocide were in progress, Netanyahu once again demonstrated his disdain for negotiations and his preference for brute force as the ultimate solution,” says Mehran Kamrava, a professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar.
Netanyahu’s strategy of “managed chaos” threatens to spiral out of control, and further isolate Israel “by making it a rogue, pariah state,” Kamrava said.
Besides Israel’s reputation, the attack promises to “cost the US much of its already diminished credibility in the Arab world,” the scholar says, emphasizing that unconditional US support for Israel is proving “extremely costly” as the Israeli government takes actions that make it seem increasingly “unhinged” and “devoid of all rationality.”
Lion Electric School Buses Still Catching Fire
StacheD Training | September 9, 2025
On September 9, 2025, another Lion Electric school bus burst into flames in Montreal — this time with five children and their driver on board. Thankfully, everyone escaped safely, but this marks the third Lion Electric bus fire in less than a year (Ascot Corner, Huntsville, and now Montreal).
In this video, I break down what happened, why the fire department’s explanation doesn’t quite line up with the bus’s construction, and why these repeated incidents raise serious questions about safety, accountability, and taxpayer funding. Lion has already taken nearly $160 million in U.S. funding for 435 buses, yet many districts never received vehicles — and the ones that did are stuck with broken, unsafe buses and voided warranties.
Are these buses ready for prime time, or is this a dangerous rush to electrify at any cost?
Training & Consulting: https://www.stachedtraining.com
Authors of ‘Astonishing’ Study Showing Unvaccinated Kids Are Healthier Refused to Go Public With Results
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 9, 2025
In a U.S. Senate hearing today, attorney Aaron Siri revealed the results of a large study that found vaccinated children were far more likely to develop chronic disease than unvaccinated kids.
The study never underwent peer review and was never published, because the authors — staunch vaccine supporters — told Siri they were concerned about losing their jobs or reputations because their findings contradicted the official public health narrative and vaccine policy.
Siri’s testimony, delivered during Tuesday’s Senate hearing, “How the Corruption of Science has Impacted Public Perception and Policies Regarding Vaccines,” addressed the study’s origins, findings and suppression.
The study involved over 18,000 children enrolled in Henry Ford Health system’s insurance plan in Michigan.
“The results are astonishing,” Siri told The Defender. “For example, vaccinated children had 4.29 times the rate of asthma, 3.03 times the rate of atopic disease (a group of allergic conditions), 5.96 times the rate of autoimmune disease, and 5.53 times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorder.”
These findings were statistically significant — even when accounting for gender, race, birthweight, premature birth, and respiratory distress or trauma at birth.
But rather than publishing the results, the study authors and their bosses at Henry Ford Health refused to make them public — even though the lead author previously assured Siri and Del Bigtree he would publish the results, whatever the findings.
Hearing held so ‘more Americans have their eyes open to the reality and truth’
Today’s hearing was the third so far this year on vaccine injury held by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. The study’s results were entered into the congressional record.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), subcommittee chair who organized the hearing, told The Defender he hoped the hearing would open people’s minds so that “more Americans have their eyes open to the reality and truth.”
He noted the fierce resistance that U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. faced at last week’s Senate hearing from senators who had “totally closed minds.”
Johnson said he didn’t presume to know the full truth about vaccines’ impact on health. “I don’t know because we haven’t even been allowed to ask the question — much less get the answer.”
In addition to Siri, witnesses included Toby Rogers, Ph.D., and Dr. Jake Scott.
The hearing pitted staunch vaccine supporters Scott and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), subcommittee ranking member, against Johnson, Siri and Rogers.
There were tense exchanges about what constitutes bias and corruption in research.
Blumenthal said he “deeply feared” for the future of public health in the U.S. and claimed Kennedy wanted staff who embraced the secretary’s “dogma.”
Vaccinated kids 2.48 times more likely to be diagnosed with chronic health condition
According to Siri, the study authors looked at health data of 18,468 kids born between 2000 and 2016 who were enrolled in the Henry Ford Health system’s insurance plan.
Siri published excerpts from the study’s manuscript, including its results, in his new book “Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines.” Released on Sept. 4, the book challenges what he calls the “religion” of vaccines. Siri said:
“It is time to start treating vaccines as what they are, consumer products, not items of worship. We can save children from harm from infectious disease and from vaccines. We can do both.”
The study authors divided kids into two groups: vaccinated and unvaccinated. Nearly 2,000 were in the unvaccinated group. Roughly 16,500 kids received one or more vaccines, with the median number of vaccines being 18.
The authors found links “between vaccination and the incidence of asthma, atopic and autoimmune disease, and mental health and neurodevelopmental disorders including developmental delay and speech disorder,” according to a copy of the study Siri obtained.
The authors calculated incident rate ratios — the odds that a vaccinated child would develop a given medical condition versus an unvaccinated child. Overall, vaccinated children were 2.48 times more likely to be diagnosed with a chronic health condition than unvaccinated kids.
Vaccinated children were over four times more likely to be diagnosed with a speech disorder than unvaccinated children, and nearly six times more likely to be diagnosed with an autoimmune disease.
In some cases, the authors couldn’t do the calculation because no child in the unvaccinated group had the target disease. For instance, none of the unvaccinated had diabetes, brain dysfunction, behavioral dysfunction or tics.
The authors said the study couldn’t be used to prove vaccines caused the chronic conditions, but they concluded that the findings warranted further research.
How the study came about
According to Siri, the Henry Ford Health study came about after the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) in early 2017 searched for a highly qualified scientist to do a study comparing health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated kids.
Bigtree, ICAN’s founder, had previously met Dr. Marcus Zervos, co-director of the Center for Emerging and Infectious Diseases at Wayne State University and head of the Infectious Diseases division at Henry Ford Health.
Siri, who represents ICAN, and Bigtree met with Zervos. “While Dr. Zervos was a vaccine believer,” Siri told The Defender, “he showed signs of possibly being open to conducting some actual safety science.”
Siri and Bigtree initially thought it would be advantageous for the study to analyze children’s health data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) database. But accessing VSD data was a complicated proposition.
Zervos instead suggested he and his colleagues do the study using data they already could access through Henry Ford Health’s vast database. Henry Ford Health runs over 550 medical sites in Michigan, according to its website.
Siri said:
“Once Dr. Zervos appeared committed to performing the study, I made two requests. They were merely requests because I was in no position to dictate or demand anything.
“The first was that they would publish the study no matter what the result. The second was that the unvaccinated group would truly be unvaccinated — meaning no vaccines — so that the study would actually assess health outcomes between exposed (one or more vaccines) and unexposed (no vaccines) children.”
Zervos “looked us right in the eyes and assured us that he was a man of integrity and would publish the results, whatever the finding,” Siri recalled. Zervos also agreed to use a truly unvaccinated control group.
Study never published
In early 2020, Siri received a copy of the study but discovered that it had not been submitted to a journal for publication.
Lois Lamerato, Ph.D., who had worked on the study with Zervos, told Siri she and Zervos both thought the study was well done and worthy of publication.
But the “higher-ups” at Henry Ford Health, to whom she was required to send a copy before submission, did not want to submit it. Lamerato also said she was worried the study, if published, would make doctors feel uncomfortable.
According to Siri, Henry Ford Health officials didn’t provide any substantive explanation for not wanting the study published. Siri said:
“The real reason it was not submitted for publication, no doubt, was because of its finding that vaccinated children suffered from multiple times the rate of various serious ailments.
“Had the finding shown vaccinated children were healthier or at least had the same outcomes as unvaccinated children, then this study would have no doubt been submitted for publication and published many years ago. Instead, it remained hidden from the world.”
Other studies also show increased autism in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated
Scott, an infectious disease specialist at Stanford Medicine, presented information during the hearing on studies supporting vaccine safety claims. He said he had no financial conflicts of interest, as his research is either self-funded or funded by Stanford.
Rogers, a fellow with the Brownstone Institute and independent journalist, testified on published research related to the causes of autism.
The U.S. has yet to start writing its report on the possible causes of autism, U.S. Food and Drug Commissioner Marty Makary told Bloomberg yesterday.
Rogers has researched autism since 2015, when his then-partner’s son was diagnosed with autism. At the time, he was pursuing a doctorate in political economy at the University of Sydney.
According to Rogers:
“I went to the CDC’s webpage on the causes of autism. As a Ph.D. student, I was trained to focus on primary source documents, so I read all of the references in their footnotes. … To my surprise, I quickly discovered that the CDC’s narrative did not add up.”
He also noticed that the U.S. government wasn’t responding with a sense of urgency to the sharp increase in autism, despite the cost already having reached “hundreds of billions of dollars.”
So he changed his doctoral thesis topic to “The Political Economy of Autism” and spent four years analyzing published materials on autism’s prevalence, causation and cost.
Roger’s thesis, which passed peer review in 2019, is among the top 10 most-downloaded doctoral research papers in the history of the University of Sydney.
He gave senators a birds-eye view of the published literature. “Here are the facts,” Rogers said.
Twenty-two studies claim that vaccines don’t cause autism — but none have completely unvaccinated control groups. “So unfortunately,” Rogers said, “if you want to understand what’s causing the autism epidemic, these studies are of no use.”
Meanwhile, six published studies that included an unvaccinated control group found an increased risk of autism in the vaccinated. “Unfortunately, these studies have been systematically suppressed and ignored by the mainstream media and the medical establishment,” he said.
Rogers cited additional studies that showed an increase in autism following vaccination.
For instance, a 2018 study showed that up to 88% of autism cases are characterized by autistic regression — meaning a child who had been developing normally suddenly begins to lose skills, such as speech and eye contact. This suggests an acute toxic exposure triggered the development of autism, Rogers said.
“We now have eyewitness testimony from thousands of parents that the acute toxic exposure that preceded the autistic regression was a ‘well-baby’ vaccine appointment,” Rogers said.
What about genetic causes of autism?
According to Rogers, purely genetic causes of autism wouldn’t make sense. “Genes don’t suddenly create epidemics — the human genome just doesn’t change that fast.”
Most studies that look at both genes and environmental toxins, like pesticides and heavy metals, don’t control for vaccines as a possible covariate or confounder.
This makes it impossible to tease out the true impact of the toxin from the possible impact of the vaccine.
“The best available evidence suggests that anything that causes an immune activation event — an infectious disease, an industrial toxicant, or a vaccine — can cause autism.”
According to Rogers, autism is most likely caused by “vaccines and about a dozen additional toxicants.”
He added, “If we stop exposing children to these hazards in the first place, that would stop the epidemics of chronic illness in children. Now we must summon the political will to act.”
Watch the hearing here
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.
US lawmaker moves to block Ukraine aid
RT | September 9, 2025
US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has proposed removing $600 million in Ukraine support from the draft Pentagon spending bill, arguing that Americans’ “hard-earned tax dollars” should not go to foreign aid.
The Georgia Republican proposed cancelling the allocation of these funds in the 2026 and 2027 fiscal years to shift priorities toward the US.
With Donald Trump back in the White House, the US has dramatically cut military aid to Kiev, pausing more than $1 billion in planned funds.
In a video post on X on Tuesday, Greene said that her amendment would strike $600 million from the defense bill, money that she noted “goes to Ukraine.” She argued that the US had already sent “over $175 billion to this war” and that it was “enough of your hard-earned tax dollars.” She described the measure as part of the America First agenda, saying US funds should not be used for “foreign wars” while the country faces a $37 trillion debt.
The congresswoman stated that the US usually allocates $300 million annually but that “Speaker Johnson and Republicans are feeling so generous they’re wanting to give them 600 million this time. My amendment will take it out.” Greene said, adding she has “never voted to fund this war.”
Greene introduced another amendment after learning that “another $100 million” had been earmarked for Kiev and said she wanted to remove all funding in case others in Congress felt “so giving.” Greene also put forward measures to cut aid for Israel, Syria, and Iraq adding that the money should be “kept back here at home.”
While previous President Joe Biden’s administration approved large-scale aid packages to Kiev, Trump has cut assistance but allowed some deliveries, such as Patriot air-defense systems. He has repeatedly expressed concern about possible misuse of US aid to Kiev, claiming that billions allocated under Biden may have been embezzled. In July, Trump said that any additional weapons delivered to Ukraine would have to be paid for by Europe’s NATO members.
Ukraine’s European backers are pressing for more weapons as part of security guarantees, while Russia insists Western military aid is an obstacle to reaching a peace deal.





















