Western media peddle Russia’s ‘abduction’ of Ukrainian children to prolong the proxy war
It is not Moscow, but rather the Kiev regime and its backers who are using children as “pawns of war”
By Finian Cunningham | RT | December 18, 2025
It’s not clear if the Trump administration wants to genuinely resolve the proxy war with Russia, or if it is merely trying to extricate itself from the mess Washington helped instigate. But one thing is clear: the major Western European capitals are desperate to keep the war going.
Various pretexts are being used to frustrate a diplomatic process. NATO-like security guarantees to Ukraine pushed by Berlin, London, and Paris are likely to be a non-starter for Moscow. So too are moves by the Europeans to use Russia’s seized wealth as a “reparations loan.”
Another issue that Europeans are dredging up is the allegation that Russia has abducted Ukrainian children. This emotive issue has support in Washington among the hawkish anti-Russia factions in the US establishment opposed to Trump’s diplomacy with Moscow.
Earlier this month, the European states sponsored a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly calling on Russia to return all Ukrainian children that it is alleged to have forcibly relocated from Ukrainian territory during the past four years of conflict. The president of the UNGA is former German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock.
An article published by the Washington DC-based Atlantic Council contended: “The issue of abducted Ukrainian children is especially relevant for Ukrainians as they debate painful political compromises, territorial concessions, and security guarantees premised on Western assurances. If world leaders cannot secure the return of the most vulnerable victims of Russia’s aggression, how could Ukrainians trust that those same leaders can prevent Russia from reigniting the war or committing new atrocities?”
In other words, the allegation of child abduction is being made into a condition for Russia to fulfill for the diplomatic resolution of the conflict. The trouble is that the condition is impossible to fulfill because the allegation is so vague and unfounded. Russia has denounced the accusation that it forcibly relocated Ukrainian children as a “web of lies.”
In March 2023, the Hague-based International Criminal Court indicted Russian President Vladimir Putin, along with Russian Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, of war crimes related to the unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia.
Moscow is not a member of the ICC and rejected the charges as null and void.
Still, however, the Kiev regime and its Western sponsors continue to level the accusations. The Western media, as usual, serve to amplify the narrative despite the lack of evidence.
At the recent UN General Assembly debate, British representative Archie Young stated: “Today is a moment to reflect on the plight of Ukrainian children who have become victims of Russia’s illegal invasion. We all have an obligation to protect children and must not allow Russia to use them as pawns of war. According to the government of Ukraine, corroborated by independent mechanisms, more than 19,500 Ukrainian children have been forcibly deported to Russia or within the temporarily occupied territories.”
Note how the British official peddles a series of disputable claims that are transformed into normative facts by the Western media’s repetition.
It is not Russia, but rather the Kiev regime and its Western backers who are using children as “pawns of war.”
Moscow has openly stated that up to 730,000 children have been relocated to the Russian Federation since hostilities erupted in February 2022. Most of the children are accompanied by parents and come from the territories that seceded from Ukraine in legally held referenda.
Of the nearly eight million people who fled Ukraine, the largest share of them – an estimated 35% – have taken shelter in Russia. The second and third biggest host countries for Ukrainian refugees after Russia are Poland and Germany. But the European governments and media are not accusing Warsaw or Berlin of “child abductions.”
In a war zone affecting millions of people, it is absurd to make out that displaced families and their children are being kidnapped. The vast majority of people have willingly sought shelter within Russian territory to escape the violence on the frontlines – violence that has been fueled by NATO states pumping hundreds of millions of dollars’ and euros’ worth of weapons into Ukraine.
Moscow points out that the figure of 20,000 to 35,000 that the Western governments and media claim for children “abducted by Russia” is never substantiated with names or identifying details.
Russian authorities say that the Kiev regime has provided the names of just over 300 individuals. Moscow has endeavored to return individuals where it is mutually requested, although some of the identities provided by the Kiev regime have turned out to be adults or they are not present in Russian territory.
In the chaos of war, it is all too easy to throw around vague numbers and exploit the imprecision for propaganda. The European governments and media are doing that and embellishing the emotive issue with dark claims that Russia is sending masses of Ukrainian children to “re-education camps” for “indoctrination.”
One of the main sources for such claims is the Yale Humanitarian Research Lab. It has produced unverified reports that Russia has sent 35,000 Ukrainian children to hundreds of brainwashing centers all across Russia to erase their national identity.
A major supporter of the Yale research group is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. This association strongly suggests that the group is a CIA-sponsored propaganda tool. But the US and European media regularly cite the research and amplify its claims as reliable facts.
The exploitation of children for war propaganda is a staple of Western intelligence agencies and the media.
A classic case was in Vietnam in the 1950s and 60s when the Western media were replete with horror stories of the Viet Cong torturing Vietnamese children, as recounted by James Bradley in his book, ‘Precious Freedom’. The supposed communist guerrillas reportedly stabbed Vietnamese children with chopsticks in their ears so that they could not hear the Bible being preached. Such alleged atrocities were widely published by the Western media to whip up public support for the US military deployment “to save Vietnam from evil communists.” But it was all CIA-orchestrated lies. More than three million Vietnamese were killed in a war based on American intelligence and media lies.
A re-run of the psychological operation today is the lurid claims that Putin’s evil Russia has kidnapped tens of thousands of children for brainwashing in detention camps. Some reports even claim Russia has sent the children to North Korea.
The Western media are doing their usual service of peddling war propaganda and ensuring diplomacy is rendered impossible because Russia is portrayed as monstrous.
Finian Cunningham is an award-winning journalist and co-author of Killing Democracy: Western Imperialism’s Legacy of Regime Change and Media Manipulation. For over 25 years, he worked as a sub-editor and writer for The Mirror, Irish Times, Irish Independent and Britain’s Independent, among others.
No More Ukraine Proxy War? You’re a Traitor!
Glenn Diesen & Lt Col Daniel Davis
Glenn Diesen | December 16, 2025
I had the pleasure of speaking with Lt. Col. Daniel Davis about how Europe has trapped itself in ideological narratives of good versus evil
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.
Villains of Judea: Ronald Lauder and his War on American Dissent
For Lauder, Israel always comes first.
José Niño Unfiltered | December 16, 2025
World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder likes to present himself as a civic minded elder statesman, a sober billionaire warning America about a rising tide of antisemitism.
At the Israel Hayom Summit on December 2, 2025, he framed the moment as a crisis of the West itself, calling it “a full-scale assault on truth, on democracy, and on the safety of Jewish people everywhere,” and insisting, “This is not normal. And it is not ‘just criticism of Israel.’ It is the world’s oldest hatred, once again wearing political clothing.”
Lauder was referring to the rise of antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment worldwide in the wake of Israel’s 2-year bombing campaign in Gaza.
Then he sharpened the spear and aimed it at domestic enemies like Tucker Carlson, who has been one of the most vocal critics of Israel in the post-October 7 reality we live in. He told the audience, “Tucker Carlson is the Father Coughlin of our generation.” In the same speech he warned that complacency is over, because “antisemitism is rampant throughout our culture,” and he demanded a political and institutional counteroffensive.
That is the Lauder formula in its purest form. He wraps a totalizing political program in the language of safety and moral emergency, then treats America’s public life as territory to be reorganized around his crusade. The target is never merely hatred. The target is dissent, drift, and disobedience from the priorities he has chosen, priorities that consistently put Israel first.
Lauder did not arrive at this posture late in life. He was born into power in New York City in 1944, the heir to the Estée Lauder fortune, raised in elite institutions, and trained for international influence through business and foreign policy studies. He entered the family company early, then moved into government in the Reagan era, where he served at the Pentagon as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO policy.
Ronald Reagan then tapped him as U.S. ambassador to Austria in 1986. In Vienna, he did not behave like a neutral American emissary. He turned his diplomatic post into a stage for historical confrontation and political signaling. Lauder refused to attend the inauguration of Austria’s president Kurt Waldheim amid allegations of him being involved in or being aware of National Socialist atrocities in the Balkans during his service as a German army lieutenant in World War II. He also fired U.S. diplomat Felix Bloch for engaging in suspected espionage activities.
After government service, Lauder tried to convert his vast wealth into formal power at home. In 1989, he ran for mayor of New York City as a Republican, where he spent big bucks to get his name out and campaign to the right of Rudy Giuliani, only to lose the primary. Even in defeat, the pattern held. He treated politics as an arena where money does all the talking, and he kept looking for levers that could bend public life to his will.
He found one in term limits. During the 1990s he poured resources into imposing term limits on New York City officials, selling it as a democratic reform and a check on machine party politics. Yet in 2008, when Mayor Michael Bloomberg wanted a third term, Lauder reversed course and supported extending those limits, a turn that mainstream critics interpreted as a billionaire bargain dressed up as civic necessity. However, from the perspective of long-time observers of Jewish behavior, Lauder’s support for Bloomberg reflects a pattern of co-ethnic solidarity among Jewish power brokers.
While Lauder played these games in New York, his real career was consolidating leadership in the organized Jewish political world. Notably, Lauder was a member of the Mega Group—a mysterious network of Jewish oligarchs that worked behind the scenes to advance Jewish interests and strengthen pro-Israel bonds among Jews in America. Leslie Wexner, founder of The Limited and Victoria’s Secret, and the late Jewish sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein were among the most prominent members of this Jewish consortium. By 2007, Lauder had become president of the World Jewish Congress, a position that turned him into a roaming power broker who meets heads of state and treats international politics as a permanent lobbying campaign.
From that perch, he repeatedly framed Western security architecture as a vehicle for Israeli priorities. In 2011, he publicly argued that Israel should be admitted into NATO, insisting, “Israel needs real guarantees for its security,” and pressing NATO states to bring Israel into the alliance.
In 2012, he attacked European pressure campaigns on Israel with maximalist rhetoric. When Irish officials floated an EU ban on goods from Israeli communities in the West Bank, Lauder called boycott talk “cynical and hypocritical,” and declared, “Minister Gilmore is taking aim at the only liberal democracy in the Middle East while keeping quiet about those who really wreak havoc in the region: the Assads, Ahmadinejads and their allies Hezbollah and Hamas.” He added that the West Bank was “legally disputed and not illegally occupied.”
He carried the same posture with respect to Iran — enemy #1 for world Jewry at the moment. In 2013, as Western diplomats negotiated with Tehran, he mocked their perceived softness and conjured Munich analogies, warning, “Just as the West gave up Czechoslovakia to Hitler in Munich in 1938, we see what is happening again and the world is silent,” and boasting, “Frankly, only France stands between us and a nuclear Iran.” In 2015, he escalated again, attacking the nuclear deal with a moral curse, saying, “The road to hell is often paved with good intentions,” and arguing that the agreement could revive Iran economically without stopping long term nuclear ambitions.
The story kept darkening as his proximity to Israeli power deepened. In 2016, Israeli police questioned Lauder in connection with “Case 1000,” the Netanyahu gifts affair. Reports said investigators sought his testimony because of his closeness to Netanyahu and the broader allegations involving luxury gifts and favors. Lauder was not charged, but the episode revealed how near he operated to Israel’s governing circle, not as an outside friend, but as part of the broader, transnational Jewish network.
By 2023, he openly wielded donor money as a disciplinary weapon in American institutions. After the October 7 attacks and campus controversies, he warned the University of Pennsylvania that, “You are forcing me to reexamine my financial support absent satisfactory measures to address antisemitism.” The message was simple. If a prestigious American university fails to police speech and activism the way he demands, he will squeeze it financially until it complies.
In 2025, Lauder continued supporting Israel’s ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza. He categorically rejected the idea that Israel bears any responsibility for ending the conflict, insisting, “The truth is simple: the war could end tomorrow if Hamas were to release the remaining hostages and disarm.” On education and propaganda, he stopped pretending the solution is persuasion alone. At the World Jewish Congress gala in November 2025, he argued that the education pipeline must be rebuilt from the ground up, declaring, “The entire education system — K-12 to college — must be retaught,” and adding, “It’s time we fight back with stronger PR to tell the truth.”
He also made the threat explicit. In a widely shared clip, he vowed, “Any candidate running for a seat… whose platform includes antisemitism, we will target them as they target us.”
Like most of the Israel First set, Lauder was ecstatic about the toppling of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria in late 2024. In September 2025, he met former al-Qaeda terrorist-turned Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly and afterward said, “We had a very positive discussion about normalization between Israel and Syria.”
Seen in order, the picture is not complicated. Lauder builds influence through money, embeds himself in elite institutions, and uses both to steer policy and culture toward a relentless Zionist agenda. He does not talk like a man defending American sovereignty. He talks like an agent of world Jewry who expects America’s parties, schools, media, and alliances to function as enforcement arms for a foreign cause.
That is why his December 2025 sermon about antisemitism matters. It is not only a warning. It is a blueprint. When Lauder says “If we don’t tell our own story, others will rewrite it,” he is not describing a cultural debate. He is declaring ownership over the narrative, and claiming the right to punish anyone in American life who refuses to repeat it.
In the end, Ronald Lauder emerges not as a guardian of American civic life but as a disciplined enforcer of a foreign political creed, using wealth, intimidation, and moral blackmail to bend institutions to his will. What he calls a fight against hatred looks increasingly like a campaign to subordinate American sovereignty, speech, and policy to the imperatives of Israel and the transnational Jewish clique that sustains it.
The Folly of Establishing a U.S. Military Base in Damascus
By José Niño | The Libertarian Institute | December 16, 2025
Recent reports indicate the United States is preparing to establish a military presence at an airbase in Damascus, allegedly to facilitate a security agreement between Syria and Israel. This development represents yet another misguided expansion of American military overreach in a region where Washington has already caused tremendous damage through decades of failed interventionist policies.
The United States currently operates approximately 750 to 877 military installations across roughly eighty countries worldwide. This staggering number represents about 70 to 85% of all foreign military bases globally. To put this in perspective, the next eighteen countries with foreign bases combined maintain only 370 installations total. Russia has just twenty-nine foreign bases, and China operates merely six. The American empire of bases already dwarfs every other nation combined, and the financial burden is crushing. Washington spends approximately $65 billion annually just to build and maintain these overseas installations, with total spending on foreign bases and personnel reaching over $94 billion per year.
These figures are not abstract accounting entries. They translate directly into American lives placed in volatile environments, as demonstrated by the recent insider attack in the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra, where a purported ISIS infiltrator embedded in local security forces turned his weapon on a joint U.S. Syrian patrol, killing two U.S. soldiers and one U.S. civilian during what was described as a routine field tour. The incident underscores how the sprawling U.S. basing network increasingly exposes American personnel to unpredictable and lethal blowback in unstable theaters far from home.
Syria itself already hosts between 1,500 and 2,000 American troops, primarily concentrated in the northeastern Hasakah province and at the Al Tanf base in the Syrian Desert. The Pentagon recently announced plans to reduce this presence to fewer than 1,000 personnel and consolidated operations from eight installations to just three. Yet now, despite this supposed drawdown, Washington reportedly plans to establish a new presence in Damascus itself, either at Mezzeh Air Base or Al Seen Military Airport. This contradictory expansion reveals the hollow nature of promises to reduce American military commitments abroad.
Since the fall of Bashar al Assad in December 2024, Israel has conducted hundreds of airstrikes on Syrian military and civilian infrastructure while occupying parts of southern Syria including Quneitra and Daraa. Israel has systematically violated the 1974 disengagement agreement and expanded control over buffer zones. These actions align disturbingly well with the Yinon Plan, a 1982 Israeli strategic document by Israeli foreign policy official Oded Yinon that envisions the dissolution of surrounding Arab states into smaller ethnic and religious entities. The plan explicitly calls for fragmenting Syria along its ethnic and religious lines to prevent a strong centralized government that could challenge Israeli interests.
A permanent American military presence in Damascus would effectively serve as a tripwire guaranteeing continued U.S. involvement in securing Israeli strategic objectives in the Levant. Rather than protecting American interests or enhancing national security, such a base would entrench Washington deeper into regional conflicts that have consistently proven disastrous for both American taxpayers and Middle Eastern populations.
The human cost of American intervention in Syria should give any policymaker pause. The Syrian Civil War has resulted in between 617,000 and 656,000 deaths, including civilians, rebels, and government forces. More than 7.4 million people remain internally displaced within Syria, while approximately 6.3 million Syrian refugees live abroad. This catastrophic toll stems partly from Operation Timber Sycamore, the CIA covert program that ran from 2012 to 2017 to train and equip Syrian rebel forces.
Timber Sycamore represented a joint effort involving American intelligence services along with Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. The CIA ran secret training camps in Jordan and Turkey, providing rebels with small arms, ammunition, trucks, and eventually advanced weaponry like BGM 71 TOW anti-tank missiles. Saudi Arabia provided significant funding while the United States supplied training and logistical support.
The program proved to be counterproductive. Jordanian intelligence officers stole and sold millions of dollars worth of weapons intended for rebels on the black market. Even worse, U.S.-supplied weapons regularly fell into the hands of the al Nusra Front, al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, and ISIS itself. The program inadvertently strengthened the very extremists Washington was ostensibly fighting.
The failure of Timber Sycamore illustrates a fundamental problem with American interventionism in Syria. Washington has pursued regime change in Damascus in various forms for decades, yet these efforts have consistently backfired, creating power vacuums filled by jihadist groups and prolonging devastating conflicts. The current enthusiasm for establishing a military presence in Damascus suggests American policymakers have learned absolutely nothing from these failures.
The figure now leading Syria exemplifies the moral bankruptcy of this entire enterprise. Ahmed al Sharaa, better known by his nom de guerre Abu Mohammad al Julani, currently serves as president of Syria’s interim government. This represents a stunning rehabilitation for a man who founded al Nusra Front in 2012 as an al-Qaeda affiliate and later formed Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) by merging various rebel factions. Under the name Abu Mohammad al Julani, he was designated a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the United States on July 24, 2013, with a $10 million bounty maintained on his head.
Al Sharaa’s terrorist designation stemmed from his leadership of al Nusra Front, which perpetrated numerous war crimes including suicide bombings, forced conversions, ethnic cleansing, and sectarian massacres against Christian, Alawite, Shia, and Druze minorities. He fought with al-Qaeda in Iraq, spent time imprisoned at Camp Bucca between 2006 and 2010, and was dispatched to Syria by Abu Bakr al Baghdadi in 2011 with $50,000 to establish al Nusra. His close associates have faced accusations from the United States of overseeing torture, kidnappings, trafficking, ransom schemes, and displacing residents to seize property. The New York Times reported that his group was accused of initially operating under al-Qaeda’s umbrella.
Yet in November 2025, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 2799, removing al Sharaa and Interior Minister Anas Khattab from the ISIL and al-Qaeda sanctions list. The U.S. Treasury Department followed suit, delisting him from the Specially Designated Global Terrorist registry. This reversal came after the State Department revoked HTS’s Foreign Terrorist Organization designation in July 2025. Washington essentially decided that a former al-Qaeda commander who oversaw sectarian massacres was now a legitimate partner worthy of American military support. This absurd rehabilitation demonstrates how completely untethered American foreign policy has become from any coherent moral framework or strategic logic.
Critics rightly question whether al Sharaa has truly broken from his extremist roots or merely engaged in calculated political rebranding. The speed with which Washington embraced him as a legitimate leader suggests American policymakers care far more about advancing Israeli interests and maintaining regional influence than about genuine counterterrorism or protecting religious minorities.
The United States needs to pursue a fundamentally different approach to foreign policy. Rather than establishing yet another military base to advance Israeli strategic objectives in Syria, Washington should implement a comprehensive drawdown of overseas military commitments. The hundreds of foreign bases it maintains abroad represent an unsustainable burden that diverts resources from genuine national security priorities like border security and stability in the Western Hemisphere. American taxpayers deserve better than footing the bill for an empire that consistently fails to advance their interests while enriching defense contractors and serving foreign powers.
Syria offers a perfect case study in the futility of American interventionism. Decades of attempts at regime change through covert programs like Timber Sycamore and direct military presence have produced nothing but chaos, empowered jihadist groups, created millions of refugees, and cost hundreds of thousands of lives. The rehabilitation of a former al-Qaeda commander into Syria’s president illustrates how divorced American policy has become from any coherent strategy or values.
Rather than doubling down on failed policies, the United States should pursue strategic restraint, scale back its sprawling network of foreign bases, and allow regional powers to sort out their own affairs without American military involvement. That represents the path toward a more sustainable, affordable, and morally defensible foreign policy. The Damascus base proposal deserves to be rejected outright as yet another wasteful expansion of an already overextended military empire.
US strikes three vessels in Eastern Pacific, killing eight
Al Mayadeen | December 16, 2025
The United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) announced that it launched deadly strikes on three vessels allegedly involved in drug trafficking in international waters in the Eastern Pacific, resulting in the deaths of eight people.
The strikes were carried out on December 15, under the orders of US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, according to an official statement posted on X.
“Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted lethal kinetic strikes on three vessels operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations in international waters,” SOUTHCOM said.
The military reported that all individuals killed were adult males: three aboard the first vessel, two on the second, and three on the third.
While the US claims the targeted vessels were engaged in narco-trafficking, no verification of the alleged links to terrorism or drug networks has been provided for any of the 26 boats it struck. Critics, lawmakers, and legal experts have denounced the strikes as illegal under international law.
Part of a broader Trump-led coercion campaign
The latest strikes come amid a wider US military campaign launched by US President Donald Trump targeting so-called drug smuggling routes in the Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea, including areas near Venezuela.
According to US officials, American forces have struck more than 20 vessels as part of the campaign, with at least 90 suspected drug smugglers reported killed so far. The operations represent a significant escalation and a marked departure from previous US approaches, which traditionally relied on interdictions, arrests, and prosecutions rather than direct military force.
Although the strategy has been widely criticized for its effectiveness in addressing the opioid epidemic in the United States, particularly given that Venezuela is not a source or transit hub for drug trafficking routes to the US, Trump and senior administration officials have continued to level baseless accusations against Caracas. Additionally, Washington has transferred an expansive force to the Caribbean, including its most advanced aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford.
Legal controversy and international concerns
“Our operations in the Southcom region are lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict,” Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson told reporters earlier this month.
Critics, however, have questioned the application of the Law of Armed Conflict outside a declared armed conflict, particularly in international waters and against individuals not formally designated as combatants. Under the United Nations Charter, the use of force by one state against another, including against that state’s vessels on the high seas, is generally prohibited unless the target has conducted an armed attack or the action is authorized by the UN Security Council or undertaken in legitimate self-defense.
Legal analysts have pointed out that there is no credible evidence presented to suggest that the vessels struck were engaged in an armed attack against the United States, meaning the strikes lack a clear legal basis under international law.
Another major issue arose from a controversial September strike in the Caribbean, in which US forces hit a suspected drug-smuggling vessel. After the initial attack, which killed the majority of those aboard, surveillance reportedly showed two survivors in the water.
According to multiple accounts, the operation’s commander authorized a second strike on those survivors, based on a directive that those on board should be left with no survivors. Legal experts and lawmakers have warned that targeting individuals who are no longer actively resisting or posing an imminent threat, “hors de combat” under international humanitarian law, is a war crime and violates both the Geneva Conventions and customary law prohibitions on denying quarter.
Trump Files Sweeping $10 Billion Lawsuit Against BBC — Exposing a Global Machinery of Narrative Suppression
By Sayer Ji | December 15, 2025
President Donald Trump has filed a sweeping defamation lawsuit against the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), alleging that the UK’s state-backed broadcaster deliberately edited his words to falsely portray him as inciting violence. You can view my report on the details of the initiating event here.
The 33 page suit, filed in U.S. federal court, seeks billions in damages and cites internal whistleblower documents, leadership resignations, and a documented pattern of prior misconduct to argue that the edit was not an error — but an intentional act of malice with real-world and political consequences.
The lawsuit stems from a BBC Panorama documentary that spliced together two separate portions of Trump’s January 6 speech — spoken nearly an hour apart — while omitting his explicit call for peaceful protest. According to the complaint, this manipulation created a false impression that Trump urged violence. The BBC has since issued a formal apology, withdrawn the documentary, and seen its Director-General and Head of News resign in disgrace.
But the significance of the case extends far beyond a single documentary or a single speech.
For the first time, a court filing squarely places legal scrutiny on the institution that has long functioned as a global arbiter of “misinformation” — and asks whether that authority has been weaponized against American political speech.
A Defamation Case With Systemic Implications
At face value, Trump’s lawsuit is a high-profile defamation action against one of the world’s most powerful media institutions. Yet embedded in the filing is a far more consequential allegation: that the BBC knowingly falsified political speech in pursuit of a narrative objective, and did so as part of a repeat pattern rather than a one-off lapse.
The complaint cites an internal memorandum by a former BBC editorial standards adviser who concluded that the edit “materially misled viewers,” as well as evidence that senior leadership was warned in advance. It also documents prior BBC broadcasts that used similar splicing techniques to misrepresent Trump’s words, including a 2022 Newsnight segment and a separate 2024 incident in which BBC presenters falsely suggested Trump had called for a political opponent to be shot.
In other words, the lawsuit alleges not mere negligence, but institutional intent.
That distinction matters — because it forces a broader reckoning with how narrative authority is exercised, exported, and enforced.
Why the BBC Matters More Than This Case
The BBC is not just another media outlet. It is a globally trusted, publicly funded broadcaster whose reporting is routinely cited by governments, technology companies, NGOs, and newsrooms worldwide.
Remarkably, US taxpayers have historically been compelled to fund BBC through USAID, as reported below.
USAID & BBC Caught Laundering Censorship—Unconstitutional & Unforgivable!
Moreover, British citizens are forced to pay the BBC license fees, even if they don’t use the service, with non-payment resulting in tens of thousands of prosecutions annually. You can find more details on this here.
When the BBC labels something “dangerous,” “extreme,” or “misinformation,” those labels do not remain confined to British television screens.
They travel.
For years, BBC investigations — particularly through programs like BBC Click — have been used to frame American websites, platforms, and political movements as threats to public order. In fact, their 2020 collaboration with the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) and the US-Based NewsGuard listing 34 sites they wanted demonetized and removed from the internet including GreenMedInfo.com (yours truly), which I documented in detail here.
Those framings have then been echoed by advocacy groups, relied upon by technology companies, and quietly incorporated into content moderation policies, reputational risk assessments, and even intelligence briefings that labeled dissenting voices challenging medical orthodoxies as equivalent to domestic extremists.
This is how narrative power becomes operational power.
Trump’s lawsuit matters because it places that process — long taken for granted — under legal examination.
Before Trump: How the Architecture Was Built
Long before the BBC edited Trump’s speech, it had already positioned itself at the center of a transnational ecosystem that defines and enforces acceptable discourse.
Through partnerships with non-governmental organizations, alignment with “counter-disinformation” initiatives, and collaboration with philanthropic and government-adjacent funding streams, the BBC helped construct a system in which certain viewpoints could be labeled, marginalized, and suppressed — often without any judicial process or meaningful recourse.
That system did not begin with Trump.
Years earlier, similar mechanisms were deployed against U.S. presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., against independent media platforms, and against journalists whose speech was lawful under U.S. law but nonetheless treated as suspect once filtered through foreign media authority.
At the time, these actions were routinely dismissed as editorial disagreement or platform policy enforcement. In light of the Trump lawsuit, they now appear less accidental — and more like early applications of a model that would later be used against a sitting president.
From Narrative Framing to Enforcement
What the Trump case exposes is not simply bias, but a supply chain of suppression:
- Media institutions generate authoritative narratives
- NGOs and advocacy groups translate those narratives into risk frameworks
- Technology platforms operationalize them through moderation and deplatforming
- Targets — often U.S. citizens — absorb the consequences without due process
Once established, this architecture allows reputational harm and speech suppression to occur at scale, while responsibility remains diffuse and accountability elusive.
The BBC’s unique role in this system is precisely why Trump’s lawsuit is so consequential. It targets the node where authority originates — not merely where enforcement occurs.
A Personal Note of Corroboration
I have seen this system up close. Years before Trump filed suit, my own reporting and platforms were targeted following BBC-, ISD, Newsguard, and CCDH-linked reporting and targeting that framed lawful health and policy speech as dangerous. Some of these reports even made it into foreign court proceedings, to which I was not a party and had no standing, but nonetheless was named as a ‘shadow defendant.’ At the time, there was no mechanism to challenge those labels — only consequences to endure. More details of my plight can be found here.
Trump’s lawsuit does not vindicate any single individual. It does something more important: it makes visible the machinery that was previously invisible — and untouchable.
Why This Moment Is Different
Trump is not the first to be harmed by this system. But he may be the first with sufficient power, evidence, and legal standing to force it into the open.
Whether the lawsuit ultimately succeeds or fails on the merits, it has already accomplished something unprecedented: it has transformed what was once dismissed as “media controversy” into a matter of legal accountability.
That shift should concern anyone who cares about free expression, democratic self-governance, and the dangers of unaccountable narrative power — regardless of political affiliation.
The Rise of the Isaac Accords: How Israel is Redrawing South America’s Political Landscape
This is not neutral cooperation. It is political conditionality.
By Freddie Ponton | 21st Century Wire | December 15, 2025
Foreign influence in the Global South rarely arrives in uniform. It comes disguised as ethics, stability, and shared values, only revealing its true cost once the rules are set. In Latin America, such a transformation is now underway. A new architecture of alignment is being quietly assembled, presented as moral course correction but functioning as a geopolitical filter. At its core lie the Isaac Accords, a project deliberately modelled on the Abraham Accords. Where the latter normalised Israel’s position in the Middle East through elite deals brokered by Washington, the Isaac Accords aim to reorder Latin American politics by locking governments, economies, and security institutions into Israeli and U.S. strategic orbit.
The Accords are not simply about Israel’s image or diplomatic isolation. They operate as a filter of legitimacy: governments that align are embraced, financed, and promoted; those that resist are marginalised, sanctioned, or framed as moral outliers. Venezuela, long aligned with Palestine and the broader Axis of Non-Alignment, sits squarely in the crosshairs.
This article examines how the Isaac Accords function in practice, why figures such as Javier Milei and María Corina Machado have become central to their rollout, and what this strategy reveals about Israel’s ambitions in South America, not as a neutral partner, but as an active geopolitical actor working in tandem with U.S. power.
The Isaac Accords: A Latin American Reboot of the Abraham Model
The Isaac Accords did not emerge in a vacuum. They are consciously modelled on the Abraham Accords, which rebranded Israel’s regional integration in the Middle East as “peace” while bypassing Palestinian self-determination entirely. The lesson Israeli and U.S. policymakers appear to have drawn is simple: normalisation works best when imposed from above, through elite alignment, financial incentives, and security integration.
The Accords are administered through a U.S.-based nonprofit, American Friends of the Isaac Accords, and financially seeded through institutions closely linked to Israeli state and diaspora networks. Their stated aim is to counter antisemitism and hostility toward Israel. Their operational requirements, however, reveal a far broader ambition.
Countries seeking entry are expected to:
- Relocate embassies to Jerusalem, recognising Israeli sovereignty over a contested city
- Redesignate Hamas and Hezbollah in line with Israeli security doctrine
- Reverse voting patterns at the UN and the OAS, where Latin America has historically voted in favour of Palestinian rights
- Enter intelligence-sharing agreements targeting Chinese, Iranian, Cuban, Bolivian, and Venezuelan influence
- Open strategic sectors: water, agriculture, digital governance, security, to Israeli firms
Israel’s own diplomats have described the Isaac Accords as a way to pull “undecided” Latin American states into Israel’s orbit at a moment when European public opinion has become less reliable. In other words, the Global South is being repositioned as Israel’s strategic rear guard.
The role of Javier Milei in Argentina illustrates how this model operates. Milei has not merely improved relations with Israel; he has embraced it as an ideological reference point. He has pledged to move Argentina’s embassy to Jerusalem, framed Israel as a civilisational ally, and positioned himself as the Isaac Accords’ flagship political figure.
Co-Founder and Chairman of The Genesis Prize Foundation Stan Polovets presents prize to 2025 Laureate Javier Milei on June 12 in Jerusalem. (Source: American Friends of Isaac Accords)
That role was formalised in 2025 when Milei became the Genesis Prize Laureate, an award frequently described as the “Jewish Nobel Prize.” The Genesis Prize is not politically neutral. It is explicitly awarded to figures who strengthen Israel’s global standing and its ties with the diaspora. Milei’s decision to donate the prize money directly back into the Isaac Accords ecosystem symbolised how moral recognition, political allegiance, and financing now operate as a single circuit.
This is alignment rewarded, visibly, materially, and publicly.
As reported by AP in August, the Isaac Accords are set to extend to Brazil, Colombia, Chile, and potentially El Salvador by 2026, as stated by the organizers, the American Friends of the Isaac Accords.
Recent New York Times reporting situates Brad Parscale’s involvement in the Honduran election within Numen, a Buenos Aires–based political consultancy he co-founded with Argentine strategist Fernando Cerimedo, highlighting how transnational firms operate beyond traditional regulatory scrutiny. Critics warn that Numen’s methods reflect a broader global political influence ecosystem that often draws on data-driven targeting, psychological profiling, and digital amplification techniques associated with Israeli-linked political technology and messaging firms that have operated in elections worldwide.
When combined with U.S. political endorsements, strategic pardons, and offshore consulting structures, this model raises serious concerns about how advanced data analytics and covert messaging infrastructures are used to shape voter behavior in vulnerable democracies, eroding electoral sovereignty while remaining largely insulated from accountability.
Venezuela, Palestine, and the Manufacturing of Illegitimacy
If the Isaac Accords require a moral antagonist, Venezuela fulfils that role perfectly.
Since Hugo Chávez severed diplomatic relations with Israel in 2009, in response to Israel’s assault on Gaza, Venezuela has positioned itself as one of Palestine’s most consistent supporters in the Western Hemisphere. Chávez, and later Nicolás Maduro, framed Palestinian resistance not as terrorism but as an anti-colonial struggle, aligning Venezuela with much of the Global South rather than the Atlantic bloc.
Under the Isaac Accords’ logic, this position is intolerable.
Opposition to Israel is no longer treated as a political stance but as evidence of extremism or antisemitism. Zionism and Judaism are deliberately conflated, allowing criticism of Israeli state policy to be reframed as hatred. This narrative provides the moral justification for isolation, sanctions, and, potentially, regime change.
Maria Corina Machado in Venezuela, Thursday, July 25, 2024. (Source: AP – Matias Delacroix)
Into this context steps María Corina Machado, the Venezuelan opposition figure most warmly received by Israeli and U.S. political networks. Machado’s alignment with Israel is not rhetorical or recent. In 2020, her party, Vente Venezuela, signed a formal inter-party cooperation agreement with Israel’s ruling Likud Party, led by Benjamin Netanyahu. The agreement committed both parties to shared political values, strategic cooperation, and ideological alignment.
This is a remarkable document. It ties a Venezuelan opposition movement directly to a foreign ruling party, well before any democratic transition, and signals how a post-Maduro Venezuela is expected to orient itself internationally.
DOCUMENT: Vente Venezuela signs cooperation agreement with Israel’s Likud party – Agreement signed by María Corina Machado and Eli Vered Hazan, representing Likud’s Foreign Relations Division (Source: Vente Venezuela)
Machado has since gone further, pledging to:
- Restore full diplomatic relations with Israel
- Move Venezuela’s embassy to Jerusalem
- Open Venezuela’s economy to privatisation and foreign investment
- Align Venezuela with Israel and the United States against Iran and regional leftist governments
Her narrative rests on a crucial claim: that Venezuela itself is not anti-Israel, only its government is. According to this framing, Venezuelans are inherently pro-Israel and pro-West, their “true” preferences suppressed by an illegitimate regime.
In a November interview with Israel Hayom, Machado asserted that “The Venezuelan people deeply admire Israel.”
This argument is politically useful and historically thin. Venezuelan solidarity with Palestine predates Maduro and reflects a wider Latin American tradition of identifying with colonised peoples. To erase that history is to deny Venezuelans their own political agency.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has repeatedly accused the Venezuelan government of fomenting “anti-Israel” and anti-Semitic rhetoric. Yet, a closer look tells a different story. Caracas’ statements are largely expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian people and their right to self-determination, combined with pointed criticism of Israeli state policies. By framing these positions as attacks on Jews or Israel itself, the ADL distorts the narrative, turning principled political stances into a perceived moral failing. This tactic underscores a broader pattern in which international organizations can paint Global South governments as rogue actors whenever they resist the gravitational pull of Israeli and U.S. influence, subtly laying the groundwork for diplomatic pressure or intervention.
DOCUMENT: Mini report from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), formerly known as the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, accuses Venezuela of fuelling an incendiary anti-Israel and anti-Semitic environment.(Source (ADL)
Security, Economics, and the Cost of Obedience
Beneath the moral language of the Isaac Accords lies a familiar architecture of control: security integration, economic restructuring, and ideological discipline.
Israel is a leading exporter of surveillance technologies, border systems, cyber-intelligence platforms, and urban security tools, many developed under conditions of occupation and internal repression. In South America, these systems are marketed as solutions to crime and narcotrafficking, but their real function is often political: expanding state surveillance capacity during periods of transition.
Security cooperation creates dependency. Once intelligence-sharing, training, and doctrine are integrated, political autonomy narrows. Policy divergence, particularly toward China, BRICS, or non-aligned partners, becomes risky.
The economic dimension is equally strategic. Israeli firms are deeply involved in water rights, desalination, agrotechnology, digital governance, and infrastructure, sectors that determine long-term sovereignty. These investments are typically tied to privatisation, deregulation, and long-term concessions, transferring control of strategic resources away from the public sphere.
Venezuela is the ultimate prize. A post-sanctions transition would open one of the world’s most resource-rich economies to restructuring. Machado’s commitment to rapid privatisation aligns seamlessly with this vision, raising an unavoidable question: who benefits from “democracy” when it arrives pre-packaged with foreign economic priorities?
This strategy is inseparable from U.S. power. The Trump administration’s framing of global politics as a permanent war on terror and narcotrafficking, a framing echoed by figures like Marco Rubio, has provided cover for sanctions, covert operations, and extrajudicial violence across the Caribbean and Pacific. Israel’s partnership reinforces this logic, supplying both technology and moral framing.
Conclusion: The Global South and the Right to Choose
The Isaac Accords are not simply about Israel’s diplomatic standing. They are about reordering South America’s political horizon at a moment when the Global South is rediscovering multipolarity.
Israel’s role in this process is active, strategic, and consequential. Through political patronage, economic leverage, security integration, and narrative control, it is shaping which governments are deemed legitimate and which are disposable.
For South America, and the wider Global South, the warning is familiar. When alignment is framed as morality, dissent becomes deviance. When sovereignty is conditional, development serves external interests. When history is rewritten, intervention soon follows.
Non-alignment was never about isolation. It was about the right to choose. That very right, today, is being quietly renegotiated, and the cost of refusing may soon become very clear.
Hamas says Israel’s killing of senior commander threatens Gaza ceasefire
Press TV – December 14, 2025
Hamas chief negotiator Khalil al-Hayya has warned that Israel’s targeted assassination of a senior commander of the movement threatens the “viability of the truce” in the besieged Gaza Strip.
He confirmed the killing of Commander Raed Saad in a video statement on Sunday, and slammed Israel for violating the ceasefire.
“The continued Israeli violations of the ceasefire agreement…and latest assassinations that targeted Saad and others threaten the viability of the agreement,” he said.
The Israeli military reported Saad’s death in an attack near Gaza City, which also wounded at least 25 people. This marks the highest-profile assassination of a Hamas figure since the US-backed Gaza ceasefire began in October.
Al-Hayya emphasized that progress is unattainable unless mediators compel Israel to adhere to the ceasefire’s first phase. He called on mediators, particularly the US administration, to ensure Israel respects the agreement.
Despite the ceasefire, Israeli attacks have persisted, resulting in at least 386 Palestinian deaths since October 10.
Large areas of Gaza remain inaccessible due to the continued presence of Israeli occupation forces.
“Our priority is to continue with the steps to end the war and especially to complete phase one [of the ceasefire], which includes allowing aid and needed equipment to enter to rehabilitate hospitals and medical centers and the infrastructure,” al-Hayya said.
He also stressed that the role of the International Stabilization Force (ISF) should be limited to maintaining the ceasefire without interfering in Gaza’s internal affairs.
Al-Hayya reiterated that Hamas and other factions are committed to the agreement but reject any imposed guardianship over Gaza.
Hamas political bureau member Husam Badran also said that ongoing Israeli violations have hindered phase-two negotiations.
Last week, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution demanding that Israel open unrestricted humanitarian access to Gaza and comply with international law.
Aid agencies continue to advocate for expanded access for humanitarian convoys, while Israel has declined requests to allow relief shipments through the Rafah crossing.
Observers have expressed concerns about the reliability of the Israeli regime and the lack of mechanisms to enforce the deal’s terms.
Since October 2023, over 70,400 people, mostly women and children, have been killed in Israel’s ongoing genocidal war in Gaza.
Why The Wall Street Journal amplifies collaborators instead of Palestinian voices
By Ahmed Asnar | MEMO | December 14, 2025
Once again, The Wall Street Journal has chosen to offer its pages not to genuine Palestinian voices, but to figures who align explicitly with Israeli agendas in Gaza. On 11 December, the newspaper published an opinion piece by Hussam al-Astal, an infamous militia leader presented as a potential military – and possible political – alternative in Gaza. His article echoed Israeli talking points almost verbatim, promoting the fantasy of “disarming Gaza” and for being ready to take part in implementing Trump’s so-called “peace plan” for Gaza in accordance with the Israeli objectives from the plan.
What is most troubling is not al-Astal’s rhetoric itself. His views are neither new nor Palestinian, nor do they reflect any authentic constituency among the Palestinian people in Gaza. What demands scrutiny is The Wall Street Journal’s editorial decision to elevate such a figure while systematically excluding real Palestinian scholars, journalists, and intellectuals who articulate the lived reality, aspirations, and internationally-recognised rights of their people.
According to widely reported Palestinian sources, al-Astal escaped from prison in the early days of Israel’s genocide on Gaza in October 2023. He had previously been sentenced to death in connection with serious criminal charges, including being involved in the assassination of a Palestinian scientist in Malaysia in 2018. Following his escape, he reportedly formed an armed gang operating under Israeli military oversight, engaging in the looting of aid convoys and clashes with Palestinian resistance groups. His militia is said to operate in areas under Israeli fire control, often with aerial cover—an arrangement that speaks volumes about whose interests he serves.
This was not an isolated editorial lapse. In June 2025, The Wall Street Journal published a similar opinion piece by another gang leader, Yasser Abu Shabab, who likewise positioned himself as an alternative for ruling Gaza while attacking Palestinian resistance and looting the people’s aid. Abu Shabab, who was later killed in December under circumstances widely linked to his collaboration, had also reportedly been imprisoned for criminal offenses prior to the war. In both cases, the newspaper chose to amplify figures rejected by Palestinian society, elevating them as if they represented a legitimate political alternative.
What these figures share—beyond their alignment with Israeli objectives—is their well-known illiteracy and complete lack of credibility and political thought. This raises an unavoidable question: who actually wrote these polished English-language opinion pieces? The answer is less important than what it reveals about The Wall Street Journal’s editorial standards and political standing.
The deeper issue is structural. The Wall Street Journal has long denied its pages to Palestinian academics, analysts, and journalists who challenge Israeli narratives with facts, law, and lived experience. Palestinian voices are welcomed only when they validate Israeli policy or undermine Palestinian collective resistance. This is not journalism in service of truth; it is gatekeeping in service of a colonial power.
For decades, much of the Western mainstream media has framed the Palestinian struggle through a distorted lens—portraying occupation as self-defence and resistance as aggression. Palestinians are routinely cast as obstacles to peace rather than a people living under military occupation, apartheid conditions, and now genocide. Over time, this bias has hardened into something more dangerous: complicity.
During Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, this complicity became unmistakable. Major Western outlets, including those that once claimed journalistic rigor, uncritically repeated Israeli allegations of mass rape, beheadings, and other atrocities. Many of these claims were later debunked or contradicted by independent investigations, yet they served their purpose: manufacturing moral justification for the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians, the majority of them women and children.
By publishing voices like al-Astal and Abu Shabab while excluding genuine Palestinian perspectives, The Wall Street Journal has crossed from bias into participation. It is no longer merely reporting on power—it is helping shape and legitimize a colonial narrative that seeks to replace a people’s political will with proxies and collaborators.
As for Palestinian voices, they will continue to write, document, and speak—whether Western gatekeepers approve or not. New media spaces, independent platforms, and global civil society have already broken the monopoly once held by legacy outlets like The Wall Street Journal. The truth of Palestine no longer depends on their permission.
History has a way of sorting narratives from propaganda. And when it does, The Wall Street Journal will be remembered not for amplifying the oppressed, but for offering its pages to those who work in service of their occupier.
The Real Reason U.S. Troops Were In Syria
The Dissident | December 13, 2025
Recently, two U.S. soldiers stationed in Syria were killed in an ISIS attack.
The U.S. Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria, Tom Barrak, “condemned the ambush on his X account, calling it a ‘cowardly terrorist attack’ and expressing condolences to the families of the fallen.”
Reuters reported that, “in a post on his Truth Social platform, U.S. President Donald Trump vowed ‘very serious retaliation,’ mourning the loss of ‘three great patriots’. He described the incident in remarks to reporters as a ‘terrible’ attack.”
But the more important question to ask is, why were American troops sent to Syria in the first place?
The official reason given, in 2015, when U.S. troops were first sent to North East Syria, was that they were sent there to train Kurdish forces in the Syrian Democratic Forces to fight ISIS.
But the real reason- as admitted years later by a U.S. official- was to deprive Syrians of their oil and wheat, in hopes it would decimate Syria and lead to regime change against then Syrian leader Bashar al Assad.
The United States in 2012 launched “Operation Timber Sycamore”, a covert CIA program that poured billions of dollars into arming and training Syrian rebels, many of whom had links to Al Qaeda, in hopes that it would lead to regime change.
This regime change program- not fighting ISIS- was the real reason for the U.S. troop presence in North East Syria.
This was outright admitted by Dana Stroul, a U.S. Pentagon official, in 2019 when she said, “the United States still had compelling forms of leverage on the table to shape an outcome that was more conducive and protective of US interests … the first one was the one-third of Syrian territory that was owned via the US military, with its local partner the Syrian Democratic Forces … that one-third of Syria is the resource-rich, it’s the economic powerhouse of Syria, so where the hydrocarbons are, which obviously is very much in the public debate here in Washington these days, as well as the agricultural powerhouse.”
Stroul admitted, “this one-third of Syrian territory that the US military and our military presence owned” was, “leverage for affecting the overall political process for the broader Syrian conflict”, noting that because of the U.S. occupation and “owning” of one third of Syria, “the rest of Syria … is rubble”.
Along with this, she boasted that U.S. sanctions on Syria had been “preventing reconstruction aid and technical expertise from going back into Syria”.
Through depriving Syria of its “resource-rich economic powerhouse” and placing crushing sanctions on the country, Stroul boasted that it would lead to regime change in Syria.
Reporting on the effect of this policy on the ground in 2023, journalist Charles Glass wrote, “Damascus reminded me of Baghdad on my many trips there between the war over Kuwait in 1991 and the American invasion in 2003. In those years the US, the EU, and the UN were enforcing similar restrictions based on their conviction that economic hardship would destabilize Saddam Hussein’s regime or compel a hungry populace to depose him. In Iraq then, as in Syria now, the regime flourished and people starved.”
This siege warfare tactic eventually helped lead to the eventual overthrow of the Assad regime last year.
Instead of threatening more U.S. intervention in Syria as a response to the ISIS attack, the U.S should reflect on the fact that it put soldiers in harm’s way in order to starve the people of Syria, and deprive them of their “economic powerhouse” as the last phase of a bloody, covert regime change war.
Featured Video
The Search for Truth: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination One Year Later
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The 9/11 “Double-Cross” Conspiracy Theory
BY LAURENT GUYÉNOT • UNZ REVIEW • SEPTEMBER 6, 2022
Is it true that “9/11 was an inside job”? Yes, insofar as Israel is “inside” the U.S. But for the 9/11 truthers who have identified Israel as the main perpetrators, “9/11 was an inside job” is at best a half-truth, and at worst an integral part of the Zionist operation, like a secondary flag sewn as a lining under the false flag of Islamism. Victor Thorn (1963-2017) wrote in his book 9/11 made in Israel: The Plot Against America (2011): “In essence, the ‘9-11 truth movement’ was created prior to Sept. 11, 2001 as a means of suppressing news relating to Israeli complicity. . . . The slogan ‘9-11 was an inside job’ was quite possibly the greatest example of Israeli propaganda ever devised.” In milder terms, it is “controlled opposition”.
A genuine truth movement would have pointed to Israel as the prime suspect from the start. From day one, it was obvious who would benefit. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Hormuz and the Looming Economic Catastrophe
- Dhubab offensive, media blitz and the rapid unraveling of Saudi-backed coalition’s new gambit
- Putin Conveys to Trump Iran’s Vision on Possible Conflict Resolution – Kremlin
- The Search for Truth: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination One Year Later
- ‘Harsh reality’: Iran says France seeks monopoly on power and intimidation, not peace for all
- When Will This White House Madness End?
- Huckabee aide goes to ‘unusual lengths’ to portray ‘Israel’ positively
- Trump Announces Diesel Supply Deal With Putin Following Phone Call
- MEP blasts ‘Euro-Gestapo’ for lecturing Russia on democracy
- Syria May Send Troops to Saudi Arabia Amid War with Ansar Allah
- If Americans Knew
- Israeli forces kill another child in Gaza – Daily Update
- Gaza ceasefire exists in name only, say more than 100 organizations
- Nearly 2 Million in Gaza Need Urgent Shelter Assistance as Winter Looms: IOM Chief Warns
- Suppressing Palestinian resistance: US charity under fire for AI monitoring of Gaza classrooms
- Thousands Are Held in Israeli Torture Camps. This Is What Happens Inside
- Israel puts Gaza’s sick, injured, newborn in peril – Daily Update
- Report claimed Mark Levin used by Israeli government to influence Trump
- Over 2,000 Gazans have died awaiting medical evacuation amid Israel’s continued siege
- How a U.S. Diplomat Suppressed and Altered Reports Critical of Israel
- 5 Palestinians Die from Israeli Strikes in Gaza as Relentless Attacks Continue
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
- Green Energy Debacle: German Expert Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Warns Of Severe Economic And Social Consequences
- Two More Paleo Reconstructions Affirm Meters-Higher Sea Levels Across Ireland, Brazil 7000-6000 Years Ago
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
- 2025 Nature Paper Claiming Worsening Global Drought Gets RETRACTED …Heavily Flawed
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
