From crypto-Zionist left-Bolshevism and right-Neoconservatism in the Diaspora, through naked Jewish national socialism in Israel, Judeo supremacist (Zionist) movements have murdered and terrorized millions in pursuit of a messianic, "Chosen Race" agenda. They will continue to kill until the Judeofascists and their agents, allies and accomplices are identified, exposed and brought to justice.
In a recent episode of Press TV's Spotlight program, former CIA analyst Larry Johnson discussed the significant naval drills conducted by Iran and Russia in the Sea of Oman and the northern Indian Ocean. These joint exercises focused on enhancing military cooperation and regional security, specifically targeting counter-piracy and counter-terrorism operations. Notably, Iranian forces briefly closed the Strait of Hormuz during these drills, which aimed to convey a strong message about the region's capacity to maintain its own security without foreign intervention. The cooperation between Iran and Russia is not only military but also extends to economic aspects, particularly regarding the north-south transit corridor that will link St. Petersburg to India through Iran, marking a transformative shift in international trade routes.
The joint naval exercises, which included complex simulations of retaking hijacked vessels, were said to achieve all planned objectives successfully. Rear Admiral Hassan Mafzoudlu confirmed the successful execution of objectives, emphasizing the importance of operational coordination between the Iranian and Russian navies. The drills reflect a deepening strategic partnership, highlighting both nations' commitment to addressing maritime security challenges collaboratively. As tensions escalate in the region, particularly with increased U.S. threats against Iran, the drills signify Tehran's readiness to respond assertively to any perceived threats to its sovereignty.
Larry Johnson pointed out that these military exercises were planned well in advance, and their timing now carries additional weight due to rising global tensions. He noted that Iran has gained the backing of powerful allies, specifically Russia and China, through a trilateral agreement that enhances their collective military readiness. Johnson suggested that the exercises are not merely about counter-terrorism but serve to strengthen communication and cooperation among Iran, Russia, and China, which he believes has been underestimated by U.S. policymakers. This underestimation could lead to dangerous miscalculations, particularly if the U.S. takes aggressive actions against Iran based on flawed intelligence.
Dr. Kevin Barrett echoed Johnson's perspective, asserting that the military capabilities of Iran should not be underestimated, especially given the advancements in defense technology it has achieved with the help of its allies. He warned that any military action by the U.S. against Iran could lead to significant escalation, given the Iranian military's readiness and improved technologies. Both analysts agree that the geopolitical landscape is shifting, with Iran, Russia, and China emerging as a formidable bloc against U.S. dominance. The development of the north-south corridor symbolizes not only an economic shift but also a political realignment that challenges the traditional power structures upheld by Western nations. As tensions loom, both Johnson and Barrett expressed concern over the potential for conflict, highlighting the urgent need for diplomatic solutions to avoid escalation...LINK TO FULL VIDEO AND TEXT
Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Gates sought to profit from — and exert influence over — scientific publishing and online discourse, according to information in the “Epstein Files” released last month by the U.S. Department of Justice.
The Epstein Files contain a “fund summary” published in 2014 by Biosys Capital Partners. The report lists companies “at the intersection of medicine, life sciences and digital technology” that it considered attractive investment targets.
The summary listed ResearchGate, noting that Gates provided $10 million in funding to ResearchGate in 2013. This was part of a Gates-led funding round that attracted $35 million in investments to ResearchGate.
The fund summary stated that ResearchGate aimed to “connect searchers and scientists … to share, discover, use, and distribute findings.”
But according to ScienceGuardians, the platform was actually developed “as a for-profit business to make big money from science” — with the intent to “control the flow of scientific ideas” and exert influence over scientific discourse...
Gates, Epstein helped attract Big Pharma, key journals to ResearchGate
Gates and Epstein helped attract investors and advertisers — including Big Pharma — to ResearchGate, promising healthy returns.
The 2014 Biosys fund summary lists the firm’s managing partner as Boris Nikolic, Gates’ chief science and technology adviser. Included in the Epstein Files is an August 2013 agreement between Gates and Epstein, in which Gates requested that Epstein “personally serve” as Nikolic’s representative.
According to a September 2013 document, Nikolic stood to gain between $2.5 and $100 million — contingent on how much ResearchGate’s value increased. This created “huge motivation” to hype up ResearchGate, ScienceGuardians wrote.
In 2017, Gates participated in a new funding round for ResearchGate that garnered $52.6 million in investments.
Investors included Goldman Sachs and the Wellcome Trust, led by Jeremy Farrar, Ph.D., architect of key COVID-19 pandemic-era policies and now assistant director-general of the World Health Organization...
Gates and Epstein also helped secure partnerships with the publishers of major scientific journals, including Nature. Published by Springer Nature, it is widely considered one of the “giants” of medical and scientific publishing.
Other Springer publications include Politico, Springer Health, Nature, BioMedCentral, Scientific American and Nature Medicine — publisher of the infamous “Proximal Origin” paper in 2020, used to support the claim that SARS-CoV-2 had a natural origin.
Last year, the Trump administration launched an investigation against Nature Medicine’s publisher, examining whether the journal allowed Fauci and other public health officials to influence the paper’s conclusions in exchange for funding.
‘When we needed them the most, free-thinking scientists were scarce’
According to ScienceGuardians, traditional scientific publishers initially opposed ResearchGate’s influence — before opting to collaborate with the platform...
“Why would billionaires like Gates & Epstein crave this kind of power? Owning a hub like ResearchGate lets them shape what research explodes into the spotlight — and what quietly fades away,” ScienceGuardians wrote.
Mead agreed. “The most insidious direct impact on this exposure aspect could be on algorithmic choices … what gets recommended or highlighted — that is, which fields or topics gain more online visibility without suppressing others outright. It’s a subtle form of narrative control.”
A 2023 book, “The Bill Gates Problem: Reckoning with the Myth of the Good Billionaire,” criticized the influence of figures like Gates in scientific publishing. A 2024 book review — published in Nature — stated the dispersal of these funds is being “driven mainly by the personal interests of a handful of super-rich individuals.”
“It’s not heavy-handed censorship — it’s subtle, invisible steering of ideas, trends, and ‘truths,’” ScienceGuardians wrote.
Jablonowski agreed. “Algorithmic control is authoritarian control, and largely without accountability.” He compared it to pandemic-era Big Tech censorship.
“With a few tweaks to the algorithms, Facebook and Google were able to direct and control the information most Americans consumed during the pandemic: Google, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, etc. — from which CHD was either banned or shadow-banned,” Jablonowski said...MORE...
Douglas Macgregor: Russia, China & Iran Seek to Contain U.S. Military Douglas Macgregor is a retired Colonel, combat veteran and former senior advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Defense. Col. Macgregor explains how the military adventures of the U.S. are incentivising greater military cooperation between Russia, China and Iran...LINK
As I previously reported , in response to claims from Benjamin Netanyahu that “soldiers were killed during the war in Gaza from a lack of ammunition due to a partial embargo that was imposed by the Biden administration”, Amos Hochstein, a top Biden advisor, admitted that Israel could not have committed its genocide in Gaza without the Biden administration’s support.
In response, he told Israeli journalist Barak Ravid, “Netanyahu is both not telling the truth and ungrateful to a president that literally saved Israel at its most vulnerable moment”, and wrote on X, “Let me be clear to ‘journalists’ commenting. After more than $20 Billion military support, largest in Israel history, 2 aircraft carriers rushed to the region, deterring a massive regional war, defeating Iran missile/drone attack x2, defending israel at most vulnerable moments, after SAVING countless lives of Israelis - only acceptable response to POTUS Biden and American people is THANK YOU.”
Responding to the same comment from Netanyahu, Philip H. Gordon, who served as Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to the Vice President of the United States under the Biden administration, took it a step further and admitted that the Biden administration “resisted enormous pressure” and even violated U.S. law, in order to fuel Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
In response, Gordon said, “Hard to overstate the damage to US-Israel relations done by the sense of entitlement and ingratitude reflected in comments like these and Netanyahu’s own recent statements. Baseless misdirection to suggest that Israeli soldiers’ deaths in Gaza were caused by some phantom US ‘embargo’ (when in fact Biden resisted enormous pressure to condition aid, as required by U.S. law, even as Israel rebuffed calls to facilitate more humanitarian assistance and reduce civilian casualties)”...
As I previously reported , in response to claims from Benjamin Netanyahu that “soldiers were killed during the war in Gaza from a lack of ammunition due to a partial embargo that was imposed by the Biden administration”, Amos Hochstein, a top Biden advisor, admitted that Israel could not have committed its genocide in Gaza without the Biden administration’s support.
In response, he told Israeli journalist Barak Ravid, “Netanyahu is both not telling the truth and ungrateful to a president that literally saved Israel at its most vulnerable moment”, and wrote on X, “Let me be clear to ‘journalists’ commenting. After more than $20 Billion military support, largest in Israel history, 2 aircraft carriers rushed to the region, deterring a massive regional war, defeating Iran missile/drone attack x2, defending israel at most vulnerable moments, after SAVING countless lives of Israelis - only acceptable response to POTUS Biden and American people is THANK YOU.”...LINK
Jeffery Epstein’s Israel connections have been well documented by Drop Site News, through leaked emails of the former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who was a close associate of Jeffery Epstein, and often used him as a backchannel to States, for example, to Russia during the Syrian war.
The newly released files from the Department of Justice adds further evidence of Jeffery Epstein’s Israel connections, and even raises the possibility that he was an agent of the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, trained under Ehud Barak.
This possibility is best underscored in an FBI document released in the Epstein files, which quoted a CHS (Confidential Human Source), who claimed that Epstein was an agent of the Mossad.
The CHS was apparently connected to Epstein’s former lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, with the document noting, “CHS learned that Dershowitz influenced many students from wealthy families. For example. Josh Kushner (Josh) and Jared Kushner (Jared) were both his students. Dershowitz told CHS that if he were young again, he would be holding a stun gun as an Israeli Intelligence (Mossad) agent. CHS believed Dershowitz was co-opted by Mossad and subscribed to their mission. CHS still continues to communicate occasionally for Dershowitz”. It was through this connection to Alan Dershowitz that the CHS claimed to have learned that Jeffrey Epstein was A Mossad agent.
The FBI document wrote, “Jeffrey Epstein (Epstein) was represented by Dershowitz.CHS remembered Dershowitz tell Alex Ocasta (U.S. Attorney of Southern District of Florida at the time) that Epstein belonged to both U.S. and allied intelligence services. CHS shared phone calls between Dershowitz and Epstein during which he/she took notes. After these calls, Mossad would then call Dershowitz to debrief. Epstein was close to the former Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak (Barak) and trained as a spy under him.”
(Emphasis: Mine)
The document added, “CHS became convinced Epstein was a co-opted Mossad Agent”...MORE
In a dramatic geopolitical development this afternoon, Iran, China and Russia formally signed a comprehensive strategic pact, marking one of the most consequential shifts in 21st-century international relations. While the full text of the agreement is being released in stages by the three governments, state media in Tehran, Beijing and Moscow have acknowledged the ceremony and described it as a cornerstone for a new multipolar order.
The pact comes against the backdrop of decades of growing cooperation between these three states. Iran and Russia earlier concluded a 20-year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty designed to deepen economic, political, and defence ties, and to blunt the impact of Western sanctions — a treaty that was signed in January 2025 and entered into force last year. Meanwhile, Iran and China have been bound by a 25-year cooperation agreement first signed in 2021, aimed at expanding trade, infrastructure, and energy integration.
What makes today’s signing significantly different, and newsworthy, is that it explicitly combines the three powers in a coordinated framework, aligning them on issues ranging from nuclear sovereignty and economic cooperation to military coordination and diplomatic strategy.
Officials in Tehran described the pact as a joint commitment to “mutual respect, sovereign independence and a rules-based international system that rejects unilateral coercion,” echoing similar statements issued by Beijing and Moscow.
What the pact represents
This agreement does not – at least from the initial public texts – constitute a formal mutual defence treaty akin to NATO’s Article 5, obligating one to defend the others militarily. Past pacts between Iran and Russia always carefully stopped short of a binding defence guarantee. Instead, the pact appears to link three major powers in a broader geopolitical coalition defined by shared opposition to Western military dominance and economic coercion.
Central to the agreement is a unified stance against reimposition of sanctions on Iran tied to its nuclear programme under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Tehran, Beijing and Moscow have previously issued joint statements rejecting European attempts to trigger “snapback” sanctions, and have declared the UN Security Council’s considerations of the nuclear deal terminated.
This trilateral pact is therefore as much about diplomatic leverage and strategic narrative as it is about concrete defence or economic mechanisms.
Immediate regional and global consequences
The pact’s signing coincides with heightened tensions between the United States and Iran. President Donald Trump has reiterated threats of military action against Iran absent a negotiated settlement on its nuclear activities, even deploying a US carrier strike group to the Middle East theatre. Against that backdrop, this new strategic pact serves both Tehran and its partners as a buffer against unilateral US military pressure. By presenting a united front, the three governments aim to compel Washington to negotiate from a position of constraint rather than dominance.
For the Middle East, the balance of power is reshaping. Iran, long isolated by Western policies — now claims the protection of two permanent members of the UN Security Council. This will embolden Tehran’s regional posture in theatres such as Iraq, Syria and the Persian Gulf, and complicate conventional deterrence strategies exercised by the United States and its Gulf allies.
For Europe, the pact undercuts Brussels’ ambitions to retain independent influence in Middle Eastern diplomacy. European powers have repeatedly attempted to revive elements of the JCPOA and threaten punitive measures against Tehran, but coordination by Iran, China and Russia has thwarted those efforts, exposing Europe’s diplomatic limitations in a world less anchored to Western consensus...MORE
A similar document issued under the previous administration of President Joe Biden in October 2022, less than a year after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, described Moscow as an “acute threat.”
But the updated defense strategy, published by the War Department on Friday, referred to Russia as “a persistent but manageable threat to NATO’s eastern members for the foreseeable future.”
The document also stressed that Moscow “possesses the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, which it continues to modernize and diversify, as well as undersea, space, and cyber capabilities that it could employ against the US Homeland.”
It said the fighting between Moscow and Kiev has proven that Russia “retains deep reservoirs of military and industrial power,” as well as “national resolve required to sustain a protracted war in its near abroad.”
However, according to the Pentagon’s assessment, Moscow is “in no position to make a bid for European hegemony. European NATO dwarfs Russia in economic scale, population, and, thus, latent military power.”
The document said that the US will “continue to play a vital role in NATO” and “remain engaged in Europe,” but from now on it will “prioritize defending the US Homeland and deterring China,” echoing the White House National Security Strategy published in October.
Despite Europe having “a smaller and decreasing share of global economic power,” NATO members on the continent are “strongly positioned to take primary responsibility for Europe’s conventional defense, with critical but more limited US support,” according to the strategy.
The EU and UK should also be “taking the lead in supporting Ukraine’s defense,” the Pentagon stressed. It also reiterated the stance of US President Donald Trump that the conflict between Moscow and Kiev “must end.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin opined last October that the Trump administration is guided by American interests, which he called a “rational approach.”
“Russia also reserves the right to be guided by our national interests. One of which, incidentally, is the restoration of full-fledged relations with the United States,” he stressed...LINK
Christianity is back at the centre of American life, but not necessarily in the way most believers imagine. Churches are fuller, Christian language saturates politics, and faith-based identity has become a mobilising force once again. Yet beneath this revival lies a more unsettling reality: for decades, U.S. government agencies have treated religion not as sacred ground, but as strategic terrain.
This is not theory. During the Cold War, the U.S. State Department and intelligence agencies, most notably the CIA, recognised theology, doctrine, and religious institutions as instruments of influence. Faith was studied, guided, and at times quietly reshaped to serve geopolitical aims. The goal was rarely to destroy belief outright; rather, it was to domesticate it, align it, and render it strategically useful.
DOCUMENT: CIA’s use of journalists and clergy in intelligence operations – Select Committee On Intelligence Of The United States Senate One Hundred Fourth Congress, Second Session, July 17, 1996 (Source to download full pdf: US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence)
Initiatives like the Doctrinal Warfare Program illustrate the scale of this engagement. Churches with mass followings, moral authority, and transnational reach were not simply tolerated; they were targeted for influence. Orthodox congregations in the U.S. and abroad were monitored to ensure alignment with Western interests. Catholic seminaries became conduits for doctrinal shaping, funding networks, and leadership development favourable to U.S. objectives. Even Protestant and Evangelical movements, decentralised and spontaneous, were quietly steered through cultural engagement, philanthropic networks, and selective amplification of certain voices.
Sincere people seeking truth, purpose, and transcendence found themselves caught in influence systems they neither designed nor understood. Their worship, community, and faith became tools in a broader psychological and cultural battle they never consented to.
Doctrinal Warfare: When Theology Became a Battlefield
The CIA’s Doctrinal Warfare Program, particularly its work with Roman Catholic institutions, offers a rare glimpse into how intelligence agencies approach faith. Unlike cinematic portrayals of spies manipulating events, this program operated through subtler, more effective channels.
Influence was exerted via:Funding pipelines and philanthropic foundations, directing resources to seminaries, clergy travel, and publications Theological conferences and academic exchanges, creating opportunities to propagate ideas aligned with U.S. interests Publishing houses, journals, and media networks, shaping what doctrines and interpretations were elevated Selected intermediaries, often clergy or theologians, who could subtly shift discourse without appearing coerced
The program’s goal was not to dictate belief directly but to frame the boundaries of acceptable belief. Anti-communism, Western liberal ideals, and American exceptionalism were integrated into theological narratives. Over time, certain interpretations were elevated while others, particularly liberationist, socialist, or anti-Western emphases, were sidelined.
This structural influence was not limited to Catholics. Orthodox churches in the diaspora, particularly in Eastern Europe and North America, were monitored for political alignment. Protestant and Evangelical networks, decentralised and emotionally charged, presented different challenges. Leaders resisted hierarchical oversight, yet strategic use of media, donor support, and conferences quietly aligned these movements with larger political and global objectives.
The CIA and allied agencies like the Israeli MOSSAD also monitored global religious developments, from Latin America to Africa, mapping networks of clergy, seminaries, and youth movements. Influence became a form of psychological warfare: it did not coerce, but conditioned; it did not command, but subtly steered. And it thrived where people least expected manipulation, within trusted communities, sacred spaces, and moral authority...MORE...
