The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.
From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."
IDF says Iranian missile strikes may resume in the coming hours, IAF airstrikes have crippled key Iranian air defenses, enabling expanded operations over Tehran; Fordow nuclear site still untouched.
טייס ישראלי ממריא לתקיפה באיראן צילום: דובר צה"ל
The IDF estimates that rocket
barrages will likely resume later on Saturday night, following the
conclusion of a holiday currently being observed in Iran.
Friday
night and early Saturday morning saw multiple ballistic missile strikes
from Iran, which included four barrages totaling around 200 missiles.
Following
this, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir and Air Force Commander
Maj. Gen. Tomer Bar declared Saturday morning at the end of a situation
assessment that “the road to Tehran has been paved.” This statement
indicates that the Israeli Air Force now has greater operational freedom
in Iranian airspace, following the destruction of anti-aircraft, SAM,
and air defense installations. While this does not yet amount to air
superiority in Iran, the IDF says it enables an escalation of offensive
activity over Tehran.
The
IDF clarified that the underground nuclear site in Fordow has not yet
been attacked and that reports in Iranian media on the matter are likely
part of Tehran’s psychological warfare campaign.
The
IDF is currently reviewing the missile impacts in central Israeli
cities, as well as the interceptions and timing of Home Front alerts.
Approximately 200 ballistic missiles were launched in four waves, the
majority of which were intercepted. Around a quarter fell in open areas,
while a small number struck urban centers in central Israel.
Israel has collected and analyzed vast quantities of intelligence materials that reveal the regime's plan: “The Destruction of Israel Plan.”
IDF reveals that for years,
the Iranian regime has been waging a direct and indirect campaign of
terror against the State of Israel by developing a nuclear weapon,
developing advanced long-range missiles and warheads, and funding and
directing terror proxies across the Middle East.
According
to the IDF, the goal of destroying the State of Israel is rooted in the
founding principles of the extremist regime, and leaders of the regime
have openly proclaimed this.
In
recent years, and especially since the beginning of the war, the IDF
Intelligence Directorate has collected and analyzed vast quantities of
intelligence materials that reveal the regime has a concrete plan to
destroy the State of Israel, which they call “The Destruction of Israel
Plan.”
In parallel to the
efforts of the Iranian regime to obtain nuclear weapons, the regime has
focused on manufacturing tens of thousands of missiles and UAVs, and are
advancing plans for a combined ground offensive against Israel on
multiple fronts simultaneously.
Materials
collected during the war show the coordination between the Iranian
regime and the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah, including after the
October 7th Massacre, which demonstrates how the regime plans to re-arm
the terrorist organizations.
"The
State of Israel was left with no choice", IDF Spokesman explains, "The
IDF is obligated to act in order to defend the citizens of the State of
Israel and will continue to do so."
Trump told reporters on Thursday at the White House that he preferred Israel not strike Iran but hinted that an attack might be coming.
As Israeli warplanes and drones
were launched into Iran, President Donald Trump was quick to distance
the U.S. from Israel's decision-making, but behind the scenes, his
administration was aware of what Israel had planned.
As soon as the smoke from the first bombs cleared, Trump pivoted to
use the moment to implore Tehran back to the negotiating table and to
protect Israel from a counteroffensive.
Israel targeted Iran's nuclear facilities and about 25 of its nuclear scientists. So far, two scientists have been confirmed dead,
in addition to the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, the military
chief of staff and senior general. The men were subject to international
sanctions over their role in Iran's longstanding bid to join Israel as
the second nuclear-armed power in the Middle East, according to the
Australian Broadcasting Company.
Trump told reporters on Thursday at the White House that he preferred Israel not attack Iran.
“I don’t want them going in, because I think it would blow it,” Trump
said, referring to a potential Israeli attack on Iran during the
ongoing U.S. nuclear negotiations with Iran. “Might help it actually,
but it also could blow it.”
Trump: "I'd love to avoid the conflict"
Trump said he preferred a diplomatic solution with Iran over military conflict.
“I’d love to avoid the conflict. Iran’s going to have to negotiate a
little bit tougher — meaning they’re going to have to give us some
things that they’re not willing to give us right now,” he said.
Trump had warned that an attack on Iran could spur a "massive
conflict," and signaled that an attack might happen if a nuclear deal is
not reached with Iran.
“I don’t want to say imminent, but it looks like it’s something that could very well happen,” he said.
“Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Other than that, I want them to
be successful,” Trump also said. “We’ll trade with them, we’ll do
whatever is necessary."
Behind the scenes, the U.S. had informed Israel that an attack on Iran would be unilateral and not involve the U.S. military.
After the attack occurred, Trump warned Iran to come to the table and make a deal to avoid further destruction.
"I gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal. I told them, in the
strongest of words, to 'just do it,' but no matter how hard they tried,
no matter how close they got, they just couldn’t get it done. I told
them it would be much worse than anything they know, anticipated, or
were told, that the United States makes the best and most lethal
military equipment anywhere in the World, BY FAR, and that Israel has a
lot of it, with much more to come - And they know how to use it," Trump
wrote on Truth Social.
"Certain Iranian hardliners spoke bravely, but they didn’t know what
was about to happen. They are all DEAD now, and it will only get worse!
There has already been great death and destruction, but there is still
time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being
even more brutal, come to an end. Iran must make a deal, before there
is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire. No
more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. God
Bless You All!" he added.
Iran estimates that 78 people have been killed and 320 have been injured in the attack.
Iran has now responded to the Israeli attack with their own ballistic
missile attack on Israel, where over 50 people were reportedly injured
and one confirmed dead as of Friday evening.
Rubio: "U.S. not involved"
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was quick to emphasize that the U.S. was not directly involved in the planning of the attack on Iran.
"Tonight, Israel took unilateral action against Iran," Rubio said in a
statement. "We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top
priority is protecting American forces in the region. Israel advised us
that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense."
Republicans in Congress have been supportive of Israel's military
actions toward Iran so far. "The Iranian regime is run by terrorists who
have openly called for the destruction of Israel. Past measures of
appeasement and diplomacy have been futile in stopping Iran from
developing a nuclear weapon," said House Budget Chairman Jodey
Arrington, R-Texas.
"Israel is doing what any rational and responsible nation would do
when faced with such an immediate existential threat. The United States
must stand firmly with our ally as it defends its people and prevents a
nuclear catastrophe," he added.
by Rachel Wolf, Greg Norman, Louis Casiano and Jasmine Baehrd
At least two people have been killed in Israel following multiple rounds of Iranian airstrikes in retaliation for missiles launched during "Operation Rising Lion." Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Saturday that "If Khamenei continues to fire missiles at Israel’s home front – Tehran will burn."
The Dutch hero brings down the government – and waxes eloquent on Israel.
[Want even more content from FPM? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock
exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more—now for
just $3.99/month. Click here to sign up.]
On the morning of June 3, Geert Wilders, member of the Dutch House of
Representatives and head of the Party for Freedom (PVV), tweeted that
the PVV would be leaving the Dutch ruling coalition. This move at once
brought down the Dutch government and began a new chapter in an
extraordinary personal – and national – saga. It was a generation ago,
in 2002, on the verge of an election that would likely have made him
prime minister, that Pim Fortuyn, an outspoken gay sociologist, was
gunned down in a parking lot in Hilversum as punishment for his
outspoken recognition of the existential nature of the Islamic threat.
Two years later, Theo van Gogh, an iconoclastic columnist and raconteur,
was murdered on an Amsterdam street in retribution for his own
forthright criticism of Islam. For a brief period, the Somali-born Dutch
legislator Ayaan Hirsi Ali, was the country’s leading critic of the
religion under which she’d grown up, but she was soon forced to leave
for America. That left Wilders to take to the pulpit – or, if you will,
to put on the boxing gloves.
And what a remarkable job he’s done – and in the face of impossible
pressure. Not only have death threats from the adherents of the Religion
of Peace obliged him to live under police protection since 2004; as
punishment for telling the truth about that execrable ideology, he’s
been denounced by corporate leaders, by academics, by clergy, by his
fellow politicians, and, not least, by his country’s (and, often, the
world’s) legacy media. He’s been called in on the carpet more than once
by security and justice officials, and in 2007 no less august a
personage than Crown Prince Willem-Alexander, who is now king, rebuked
Wilders (although without mentioning his name) with the remark, “Not for
nothing do we have the saying, ‘Speech is silver, silence is golden.’”
(Obey your own advice, dude.) In 2008, a who’s-who of the Dutch cultural
elite signed a statement, published on the front page of the newspaper Trouw, that
condemned Wilders’s “intolerance” and urged “a new balance between the
values of then and those of now” – in short, rank and cowering
appeasement of Islam. In 2009 he was denied entry into the U.K. on the
grounds that he might introduce unseemly ideas into a country awash in
jihad-happy imams; in 2010, he was put on trial for insulting Islam. As
Wilders explained
to me that year in an interview in The Hague, “The political elite
today is not very successful in beating my party in a political way, so
they are looking for a different way…..The more popular I get with the
people, the more people want to shut me up.” Sound familiar?
In 2012, after several years of electoral advancement, the PVV
suffered a serious setback at the polls, with its number of seats in the
House of Representatives cut in half from 24 to 12. Over coffee in
Amsterdam, Wilders’s PVV colleague Martin Bosma told me, “Rumors of our
death are greatly exaggerated.” He would be proven right – eventually.
In the meantime, however, successive Dutch governments would oversee
(and, mostly, overlook) the very process of major social transformation
that Fortuyn, Van Gogh, Hirsi Ali, and Wilders had all warned about.
Yes, most of the countries of Western Europe have undergone similar
changes, but in none has the metamorphosis seemed quite as dramatic as
in the Netherlands. It’s a land of tall, lanky, easygoing blonds who
have welcomed into their midst an ever-growing cohort of small, swarthy,
steely-eyed foreigners; a land with a longstanding devotion to
individual freedom that now has a sizable minority of inhabitants for
whom the most important word in life is submission; a country known
since the days of Erasmus for the independent-mindedness of its women
that has become the home to God knows how many housewives who aren’t
allowed in public except in the company of male relatives; a country
that was the first to enact same-sex marriage that now boasts more and
more residents whose faith instructs them to toss gay men off roofs.
Eleven years after I met Martin Bosma for coffee came the elections
of 2023. They took place, specifically, on November 22, when Hamas’s
shocking butchery in Israel was still fresh in the memory, and every
sensible soul in the Netherlands was aware of the very real possibility
that such jihadist carnage could take place on their own turf. On that
day the PVV pulled off what was widely viewed as one of the most
colossal upsets in modern European electoral history: doubling its
number of seats in the House, it became the largest of the Netherlands’
many parties. Under ordinary circumstances, the head of a party scoring
such a success would almost certainly have been installed as prime
minister; but even though members of Wilders’s party now made up a full
quarter of the House, he knew that as a longtime thorn in the side of
the elite he’d be unacceptable to his fellow party bosses as the head of
government. And so, as he formed a coalition with the People’s Party
for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), the New Social Contract (NSC), and the
Farmer–Citizen Movement (BBB) – a coalition that took months to put
together – Wilders stood aside and allowed longtime Labor Party (PvdA)
apparatchik Dick Schoof to become prime minister. And who was named
Speaker of the House? The PVV’s own Martin Bosma.
In one respect, the new government marked a departure from the Dutch
norm: many of its members would be non-politicians, mostly business
people and experts from the private sector. (Trump’s second-term cabinet
comes to mind.) Announcing its formation, Wilders promised that it
would “set a new course for our country” and make Dutch citizens “proud
of this country again.” Among the agenda items: stricter policies for
refugees and “family reunification,” the swift deportation of criminal
aliens and immigrants without valid residence permits, and a more
aggressive approach to integration initiatives. The Dutch media gave the
new government a failing grade even before it took office, because it
was, as I wrote at the time, “to all intents and purposes, a Dutch
variation on Trumpism – favoring natives over illegal immigrants,
national sovereignty over subordination to international organizations
(the UN) or superstates (the EU), the voting power of ‘deplorables’ over
the tyranny of a small unelected elite, and common-sense
environmentalism over radical climate ideology.”
The plan made sense. But instead of following it, the new coalition
soon joined the governments of other Western European countries in
condemning Israeli actions in Gaza. Eventually, Wilders decided he’d had
enough. On June 3, as noted, he brought down the government,
explaining: “I signed up for the strictest asylum policy, not for the
downfall of the Netherlands.” The next day – and this, mind you, in a
nation where the legislators tend to be colorless technocrats who are
disinclined to engage in displays of eloquence – he unleashed on the
House of Representatives an impromptu speech of rare power. It was
provoked by Labor Party chief and EU macher Frans Timmermans, who, as reported
by the RAIR Foundation, stood up in the House to accuse Israel of “war
crimes,” “ethnic cleansing,” and “genocidal violence” – and, in
addition, to charge Wilders, in the words
of the Jewish News Syndicate, with “cozying up to the ‘far right’
Israeli government.” To which Wilders retorted, in part, as follows:
I’m proud as a peacock that I support Israel. I’m proud of that. It’s not a disgrace. You’re a disgrace, making well-nigh anti-Semitic statements about a country that’s fighting for its existence.
Because that’s what it’s doing. Israel is fighting an existential battle….
And now I’m telling you, Mr. Timmermans, via you, Mr. Chairman: Israel is fighting our battle…If Jerusalem falls, then Athens, Paris, and Amsterdam are next.
They are fighting our battle. And if our mothers, in the West, can
sleep peacefully, it is because the mothers of Israeli soldiers are
awake, wondering whether their children will come out of the battle
alive.
And that was just part of it. Again, Dutch politicians don’t often
talk this way. Yes, the Dutch are famously good at speaking their minds,
even if it means being exceedingly blunt and offensive. But rarely if
ever do they do it with the flair and fire and fury, and the tough,
bold, uncompromising spirit, that Wilders displayed at that lectern.
After all, compromise, not courage, is the time-honored watchword for
Dutch politicians – and, for that matter, for Dutch businessmen and
other Dutchmen engaged in give-or-take with one another. Compromise! But
on his convictions about Islam and on his devotion to Israel – and,
above all, on the paramount question of human liberty – Wilders has
stubbornly refused, year in and year out, to yield an inch. To be sure,
when he agreed to be part of the coalition government a year and a half
ago, he made what you might characterize as a sort of compromise,
accepting the promises of his coalition partners. But when it became
clear that they had betrayed him and were not about to change their
tune, he brought down (to shift metaphors) the whole house of cards.
Now what? In the 2023 election, Wilders more than earned the right to
be named prime minister. He deserves that prize now. No one else can or
will do what needs to be done to save the Netherlands. If the powers
that be persist in withholding that post from him – and that includes
the cowardly constitutional monarch, King Willem-Alexander, whose
haughty disdain for Wilders (his inferior, but his better) has been
public knowledge since long before he assumed the throne – then it will
be a bad joke to speak of the Netherlands as a democracy.
Bruce Bawer is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
The emergency service stressed that there were national blood shortages and asked those with type O blood to come and donate.
People take cover in public shelter following missile attack from Iran on Israel, at Tel Aviv, Israel June 13, 2025(photo credit: REUTERS/ITAY COHEN)
Since the start of Operation Rising Lion, 204 people have been wounded by Iranian attacks and three killed, according to Magen David Adom on Saturday evening.
Of
the 204 wounded, two are seriously wounded, seven are moderately
wounded, and 159 were lightly wounded. An additional 33 were treated for
anxiety.
The
incoming attacks have forced MDA to deploy all MDA ambulances and
intensive care vehicles, emergency motorcycles, and rapid response
vehicles, which were fully staffed.
A total of 35,000 of the organization's employees and volunteers were prepared for response.
A
rescue personnel walks next to a damaged vehicle at an impact site
following missile attack from Iran on Israel, in Ramat Gan, Israel, June
14, 2025 (credit: RONEN ZVULUN/REUTERS)
At each impact site in Tel Aviv, Ramat Gan, and Rishon Lezion
At
the scene of an impact in Tel Aviv, 13 people were evacuated for
treatment for moderate wounds, and an additional 11 were evacuated in
mild condition.
In Ramat Gan,
30 people were wounded at an impacted site, including a 74-year-old in
critical condition. The elderly woman was later pronounced dead at the
hospital.
A 65-year-old man was also evacuated in serious condition.
At
the site of the Rishon Lezion crash, 29 wounded people were evacuated. A
73-year-old man was pronounced dead at the scene after being found in
critical condition.
An
additional five people were treated at the site for wounds inflicted by
shrapnel, and 94 people who were traveling to a protected area.
From
the scene of the impact site in Rishon Lezion, 29 of the wounded were
evacuated, including a 60-year-old woman who was rescued with no signs
of life.
MDA,
on request by the Health Ministry, is also transferring nursing
patients, ventilated patients, premature babies, and others from the
places where they are to protected sites using MDA's special intensive
care buses, an intensive care unit, and ambulances.
The
emergency service also stressed that there were national blood
shortages and asked those with type O blood to come and donate.
Global March to Gaza announced on Instagram that there had been "unprovoked violence against a peaceful global delegation", including people being "detained, harassed, physically harmed and deported."
An Italian delegation of
political, academic, and human rights figures hold banners and protest
during their visit to the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and the
Gaza Strip, amid the ongoing conflict in Gaza between Israel and Hamas,
in Rafah, Egypt, May 18, 2025.(photo credit: STRINGER/ REUTERS)
Violent clashes broke out between Egyptian authorities
and foreign pro-Palestine activists taking part in the 'Resistance
Convoy' to Rafah on Friday and Saturday. Most of the clashes occurred
while activists staged a sit-in outside the Ismailia checkpoint.
Global March to Gaza
announced on Instagram that there had been "unprovoked violence against
a peaceful global delegation", including people being "detained,
harassed, physically harmed and deported."
"The
group, comprised of people from over 80 countries, are expecting to be
safely transferred to Cairo and have their passports returned."
The
group, however, said that if this does not happen, and Egypt attempts
to "forcibly" deport members, it would then launch Plan B involving "a
non-violent protest."
"In
the event of this outcome, the leadership of the march will initiate a
hunger strike, refusing food as a form of peaceful resistance."
Protests against Egyptian locals
Footage
from organizing groups shows keffiyeh-clad activists clashing with
Egyptian locals, who can be seen lobbing clubs and water bottles at them
as they attempt to advance. Other videos show local Egyptians grabbing
at the seated activists, and screams and shouts can be heard.
In
one clip posted by @paliboy_83, thousands of activists can be seen
chanting 'Free Palestine' while waving various flags, such as Swiss and
Algerian, before being attacked by what he claims are "Egypt's police in
civilian clothing."
German activist Mohammad Al-Zubide said, "These people were sent specifically by the Egyptian police to suppress and beat us."
"The Egyptian government has stopped peaceful foreign nationals
at the Ismailia checkpoint to prevent them from proceeding towards the
Rafah border. Authorities have confiscated passports and compelled many
to turn back by force."
The
grandson of Nelson Mandela, Mandla Mandela, who is participating in the
convoy, released a video on social media announcing that he had been
detained for about an hour from Cairo and his passport had been
confiscated.
"We are held here at one of the checkpoints without being permitted to proceed."
Multiple
Western activists have appeared on Instagram claiming that they were
attacked and had their passports taken and now are stuck in Egypt.
One
German-sounding activist released a video saying, "this is an
emergency, we have just been violently dragged into the buses here at
the first checkpoint on the way to Ismailia. We were sitting quietly and
not doing anything. And all of a sudden, several people stormed in and
they started to push people and attack them violently outside. I have
seen a woman that was beaten in her face. They didn't leave time to grab
the luggage or anything."
She claimed that secret service people had boarded the bus, before shutting down the video: "we are in danger, we need help.
"There
are babies and women, the women are trying to feed their dying babies
and their breasts are empty," he tried to persuade the police. "Do you
know what that smells like, do you know what that sounds like?"
He
continues by asking them to stand with their "brothers and sisters in
Palestine" before getting on his knees and saying "I will beg you to
allow us to march to Palestine."
The Egyptian authorities, standing in a line, do not reply.
A
woman tells the Welsh activist "they are waiting for orders, they can't
hear you," to which he replies "I know, but they don't have to follow
orders."
US
career diplomat Hala Rharrit - who resigned over Biden's position on
the war in Gaza - was detained on arrival at Cairo airport, passport
taken and interrogated, she announced on Instagram.
"I
would have hoped for a warmer welcome," she said "especially
considering this March was fully coordinated with Egyptian authorities
by the organizers well in advance."
Global
March reposted the words of a participant who accused Egypt of being
"utterly complicit in the genocide of the Palestinian people."
It
then reposted the supposed emergency WhatsApp message from an Irish
citizen saying "guys, keep eyes on us, we are in a bus with a guy who
beat us and is on the phone to a very white zio looking person." Global
March for Gaza claimed the Irish citizen "urgently needs help."
March to Gaza's Greece wing praises its members for remaining "calm despite the pressure and violence by the Egyptian police."
The
branch reported being given an ultimatum by Egyptian authorities to
"either leave in 15 or you will be expelled" The activists chose to stay
they decided to stay, "until the Egyptian police forces launched
violent attacks against members of the Greek delegation and also the
internationals."
The
Canadian delegation was similarly detained including someone named Dr
Yipeng, who confirmed that their papers had all been taken at the
Ismailia checkpoint.
UN
Special Rapporteur for Gaza and Palestine, Francesca Albanese, released
a message of support for the marchers and urged Egyptian authorities
"to use maximum restraint.
Defrin said that the IDF has full freedom of operation in the airspace above Tehran.
An IDF visual on its attacks on the Iranian capital of Tehran, released June 14, 2025 (IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)
IDF Spokesperson Brig.-Gen. Effie Defrin
on Saturday revealed that over 70 aircraft operated in the heart of
Tehran for over two hours straight and attacked over 40 targets during a
press conference on Saturday.
Defrin
said that this was the deepest the military had operated in Tehran, and
that the IDF has full freedom of operation in the airspace above
Tehran, Defrin said.
He also denied the Iranian claim that an Israel Air Force fighter jet was downed by Iran.
Iranian
air defenses firing following an Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, June
14, 2025 (credit: MAJID ASGARIPOUR/WANA (WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY) VIA
REUTERS)The IDF said that it targeted dozens of
missiles and missile launchers in Iran that were directed at Israel
shortly after the press conference.
This follows earlier comments from Israeli security officials that said that the IAF is now capable of operating without obstruction as far as Tehran, following what was described as the destruction of a majority of Iran's air defense systems.
Expanding Israel's operational range, shortened flight paths to Iran
The
reported elimination of Syria’s military capabilities, including those
of Hezbollah, has further expanded Israel’s operational range and
shortened flight paths to Iran.
Until approximately two years ago, the IAF faced severe limitations in operating over Lebanon and Syria. IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir's
statement on Saturday, "The road to Tehran has been paved," reflects
the IDF’s present air dominance and signals a strategic shift.
According to military officials, the pace of air operations is expected to accelerate.
Sadly, what Ramaphosa actually intends, despite his grand terminology, is that there will be a redistribution of wealth and asset ownership in the form of either expropriation without compensation and/or a mandatory transfer of equity in businesses held by minorities to the black majority. NDR policies allow for this, and in fact the ANC Constitution mandates such actions....
The ANC's National Democratic
Revolution strategy compels dominating the Judiciary; it reads:
"judicial independence to be undermined, in part by vesting most
appointments to the bench in an ANC-dominated Judicial Service
Commission." It was therefore not unexpected that the Constitutional
Court might rule in support of the slogan, "Kill the Boer".
Sadly, what Ramaphosa actually intends, despite his grand
terminology, is that there will be a redistribution of wealth and asset
ownership in the form of either expropriation without compensation
and/or a mandatory transfer of equity in businesses held by minorities
to the black majority. NDR policies allow for this, and in fact the ANC
Constitution mandates such actions....
A partial solution might be, as suggested by the commentator Rob
Hersov, is that the US and other Western nations should bypass the ANC
and instead support the Democratic Alliance (DA) -- the official
opposition at one stage (now part of the coalition) and the 2nd largest political party.
The DA is a centralist-conservative entity which runs the Western
Cape Province – a state thriving in every way. Perhaps when it becomes
known how successful the Western Cape under the DA has become,
particularly with US and other outside investment, then demand for
structural changes elsewhere might arise. In the interim, ominous dark
clouds hang over the future of beautiful South Africa and its vibrant
and amazing people.
Pictured: US President Donald Trump meets with South African
President Cyril Ramaphosa in the White House in Washington, DC, on May
21, 2025. (Photo by Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)
There was a moment with a glimmer of hope for beleaguered South Africa. That moment appeared on May 21, 2025, with a meeting
at the White House between US President Donald J. Trump and his South
African counterpart, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. The
purpose of the meeting was to 'reset' the relationship between them
after violently racist and anti-Western policies adopted by the largest
political party in South Africa, the African National Congress (ANC),
which heads a coalition government, were criticised by President Trump.
While Ramaphosa focused on trade at the meeting –- probably believing
he could get away with neo-Marxist policies by tempting Trump with
trade opportunities, such as availability of critical minerals -- Trump
instead brooded on the deep injustice
against the country's white minorities. Many onlookers believe they
deserving what they are getting as a result of sometimes hundreds of
years of discrimination against the Blacks, or "Coloureds," by South
Africa's White European settlers.
The expectation of many South Africans was not related to trade as such but, rather, hopes that the 142 racist laws
against minority Whites would be repealed due to pressure from Trump,
and that the ANC would withdraw its fatuous changes against Israel at
the International Court of Justice. There were also hopes that the
slaughter of white farmers would be addressed; that horrendous rape and
murder rates against all ethnic groups would be dealt with; that private
property, especially farms, homes and other land, would escape official
expropriation without compensation, and many other iniquities, such as poverty corruption and crime, which might be repaired with urgent outside intervention.
Although Trump and his well-informed advisors did their utmost to
bring these issues to public attention in the presence of President
Ramaphosa and his team, it was probably of little avail in swaying
Ramaphosa and the ANC from their path. This became evident soon after
Ramaphosa's return to South Africa as a sort of hero, praised for daring to stand up to Trump.
Much of the Western world should now be aware of television clips which Trump shoe Ramaphosa, showing
"footage of 100,000 EFF supporters in pseudo-military garb and
promising to 'kill the Boer, kill the farmer.'" At the meeting,
Ramaphosa was unable to coherently justify why such pointed hate-speech
is permitted in South Africa and why the leader of the EFF, Julius
Malema, has not been arrested. The reason is that the highest Court
bizarrely ruled that the slogan does not portend killing of white
farmers at this time but relates to the struggle for majority rule.
Specifically, "on 27 March 2025, the Constitutional Court ruled
that the Economic Freedom Fighter's (EFF's) chanting or singing of
'Kill the Boer' does not qualify as hate speech, inciting violence or a
call to genocide, and it's totally okay and legal for them to do so."
The explanation for this astounding ruling is that the courts are
stacked with ANC-nominated candidates through the Judicial Services
Commission, a committee open to influence
by the ANC – the leading political party. The ANC's National Democratic
Revolution strategy compels dominating the Judiciary; it reads:
"judicial independence to be undermined, in part by vesting most
appointments to the bench in an ANC-dominated Judicial Service
Commission." It was therefore not unexpected that the Constitutional
Court might rule in support of the slogan, "Kill the Boer".
A further reason for Ramaphosa's reluctance to fully engage with
President Trump at the meeting over the farm murders and chants of "Kill
the farmer" other than lamely to say,
it was "not government policy," is that it was part of the ANC's agenda
to rid the country of whites. Sounds shocking, but here is proof:
"In the 1980s, the ANC's armed wing uMkhonto weSizwe had
'a declared policy' of attacking and trying to kill farmers. 'In the
early 1990s, it also covertly trained its paramilitaries ... in how to
attack farmsteads. Over 1,000 people were killed and many more seriously
injured, in thousands of attacks on farms during the first decade of
ANC rule.'"
Just because there was a policy stated 40 years ago, does not mean that it is necessarily being enforced, but since then, as many now know from the meeting with Trump, attacks have relentlessly continued.
Once Ramaphosa returned, it was reported
that "Notwithstanding the video, Mr Ramaphosa declared the visit a
success for opening a path to consider a new trade deal between the two
countries." It quickly became clear he had paid not slightest attention
to the rampant murder of white farmers or the racists laws against the
white minority, as brought to his, and the world's, attention by President Trump.
Despite Ramaphosa and the ANC's belief in the success of their mission, apparently
"the exchange delivered no economic deal, it exposed to the world some
of the grimmest aspects of life in this country, and it has exacerbated
tensions in the GNU (the government of national unity)." Evidently not quite a success for the ANC.
After the White House episode, it was business as usual for the ANC, which, through their compliant government mouthpiece, declared:
"President Cyril Ramaphosa has concluded a successful
working visit to the United States of America at the invitation of
President Donald Trump".
Ramaphosa's performance at the Oval office garnered praise from the leftist legacy media, including the BBC which reported:
"[T]he events this week, ostensibly meant to bully,
ridicule and embarrass Ramaphosa around the world, actually reminded
many South Africans of what he brings to the government and the country
-- a constant, stable and predictable centre."
So much for the BBC.
What it published
about the meeting is typical of such propaganda. Ramaphosa and his
ideological predecessors in the ANC have a predetermined agenda to
fulfil. They present an amiable, innocent, front while they "slowly boil
the frog" – an analogy used by the ANC leader himself. The late Dr
Oriani-Ambrosini reflected on his meeting with Ramaphosa some years ago:
"In his brutal honesty, Ramaphosa told me of the ANC's
25-year strategy to deal with the whites: it would be like boiling a
frog alive, which is done by raising the temperature very slowly. Being
cold-blooded, the frog does not notice the slow temperature increase,
but if the temperature is raised suddenly, the frog will jump out of the
water. He meant that the black majority would pass laws transferring
wealth, land, and economic power from white to black slowly and
incrementally, until the whites lost all they had gained in South
Africa, but without taking too much from them at any given time to cause
them to rebel or fight."
That is what has transpired. In this way, fulfilment
of the ANC's National Democratic Revolution (NDR) strategy has been
accelerating towards its conclusion, fooling many in the process. The NDR
is the ANC's plan for transforming South Africa into their version of a
Utopia. This policy is seldom mentioned publicly but Ramaphosa's
determination in upholding racist policies against whites and the
proposed expropriation of white-held land without compensation,
unfortunately appears to be an objective of the NDR.
Ramaphosa remains unrelenting on the racist economic "empowerment laws" (known as BBBEE) and aimed at whites. Ramaphosa has stated,
"I find it very worrying that we continue to have this notion that
broad-based Black economic empowerment" is holding the economy back.
"It is the partial and exclusive ownership [by Whites] of
the means of production in our country that is keeping this economy
from growing....What do you want to see happening? Do you want to see
black people continuing to play the role of labourers, drawers of water,
hewers of wood and consumers only?... Black people must play a
productive role as well" and should be able to become rich."
The ANC thus doubles down on its agenda of redistribution of wealth
through forced means, despite abundance evidence that their BBBEE
regulations are a total failure. After 30 years of uninterrupted rule,
the ANC has reputedly become a corrupt organisation absolutely determined to impose its agenda on an unwilling populace – and Ramaphosa himself has been credibly suspected of corruption.
A heartbreaking failure at governing, the ANC has been unable, in
general, to economically empower South Africans. Consequently,
unemployment runs about 35% with higher rates for youths (those under 25) nearing 50%, while the economy is "on the brink of collapse" and leading to a near-failed State.
"South Africa is undergoing a 'fundamental transformation' to accelerate economic growth," Ramaphosa claimed at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland in 2025.
"We have introduced bold economic reforms to overcome
persistent challenges and unlock the vast potential of our country and
its people. As we confront the challenges of the present, social
partners have been working together, in various forms and forums, to
drive a programme of inclusive growth and transformation."
Sadly, what Ramaphosa actually intends, despite his grand
terminology, is that there will be a redistribution of wealth and asset
ownership in the form of either expropriation without compensation
and/or a mandatory transfer of equity in businesses held by minorities
to the black majority. NDR policies allow for this, and in fact the ANC Constitution mandates such actions:
"The mineral wealth beneath the soil, the Banks and
monopoly industry shall be transferred to the ownership of the people as
a whole; All other industry and trade shall be controlled to assist the
wellbeing of the people; Restrictions of land ownership on a racial
basis shall be ended, and all the land re-divided amongst those who work
it to banish famine and land hunger."
None of this, however, should be surprising when the foundational springs of ANC's policies are examined. These include their Constitution, the National Democratic Revolution document, their Freedom Charter, the papers of their 50th National Conference: Strategies and Tactics, and other policy
documents. Despite their fine suits, fancy cars, and often pleasant
demeanour (in the case of Ramaphosa), ANC leaders remain unrepentant,
unapologetic, and irredeemable.
The Institute of Race Relations, a respected NGO since 1929, summarised the ANC's NDR plan as follows:
"The NDR is a Soviet-inspired strategy which seeks to
provide 'the most direct route to socialism', as the SACP puts it.
Socialism, in turn, is 'a transitional social system between
capitalism...and the fully classless, communist society' which is the
final NDR objective.
"The democratic 'breakthrough' achieved in 1994 paved the way for the
second stage of the NDR. This, in keeping with Lenin's strategy for
total emancipation, aims to take South Africa from a predominantly
capitalist economy to a socialist and then communist one. Particularly
vital to the NDR is the notion of 'colonialism of a special type' or
CST. According to this concept, South Africa's white minority is an
illegitimate colonial oppressor while the black majority is its
exploited victim."
The obvious solution to South Africa's problems is regime change
through a democratic process. Even so, this is a complex scenario due to
vociferous pretenders such as the EFF and MK – political parties even
more radically leftist and Marxist than the ANC - waiting in the wings.
Further, the ANC probably control the Police and Military through their cadres, thereby creating further complications in the hopes for a change of regime.
A partial solution might be, as suggested
by the commentator Rob Hersov, is that the US and other Western nations
should bypass the ANC and instead support the Democratic Alliance (DA)
-- the official opposition at one stage (now part of the coalition) and
the 2nd largest political party.
The DA is a centralist-conservative entity which runs the Western
Cape Province – a state thriving in every way. Perhaps when it becomes
known how successful the Western Cape under the DA has become,
particularly with US and other outside investment, then demand for
structural changes elsewhere might arise. In the interim, ominous dark
clouds hang over the future of beautiful South Africa and its vibrant
and amazing people.
Nils A. Haug is an author and columnist. A Lawyer by
profession, he is member of the International Bar Association, the
National Association of Scholars, the Academy of Philosophy and Letters.
Dr. Haug holds a Ph.D. in Apologetical Theology and is author of
'Politics, Law, and Disorder in the Garden of Eden – the Quest for
Identity'; and 'Enemies of the Innocent – Life, Truth, and Meaning in a
Dark Age.' His work has been published by First Things Journal, The
American Mind, Quadrant, Minding the Campus, Gatestone Institute,
National Association of Scholars, Jewish Journal, James Wilson Institute
(Anchoring Truths), Jewish News Syndicate, Tribune Juive, Document
Danmark, and many others.
Pride Month didn’t die because of Trump—Pride died because it overplayed its hand, and the normies finally had enough.
As you may have noticed, celebrations of “pride” have been much more
subdued this Pride Month than they were in recent memory. The parades
this year are less conspicuous and bombastic. Corporate websites are
less obnoxious and explicit. And perhaps most notably, triumphant
in-store displays have disappeared almost entirely or, at the very
least, are much smaller and more restrained than in past years.
According to some in the mainstream media, all of this moderation—or
abandonment—of LGBT “pride” has the same root cause as all evils in
contemporary America: Donald Trump. The president is so mean, so nasty,
and so omnipotent that companies fear him and do whatever they can to
avoid incurring his wrath, including, apparently, forsaking longstanding practices, affiliations, and beliefs:
Businesses that used to smother their merchandise in rainbow flags
for the month of June have dramatically scaled back this year, many wary
of provoking an investigation by the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, Pride events across the US are facing budget shortfalls as corporate sponsors duck out.
Now, with all due respect to the president, the media, and the people
cited in the above article (some of whom are very smart, in fact), the
idea that Trump killed Pride Month is, well, kind of stupid. Not only is
the notion thoroughly ahistorical, but it also gets the causative
forces in American politics precisely backward.
For starters, it’s important to remember how and when the backlash against “pride” began in earnest.
Recall that on March 31, 2023, Bud Light was not only the most
popular beer sold by the world’s largest brewing company but was also
the most popular beer on the planet by sales. It was,
inarguably, America’s—and the world’s—go-to beer. The following day,
however, everything would change. Bud Light—and LGBT “Pride”—would
consciously choose to self-immolate.
The next day, Alissa Gordon Heinerscheid, Bud Light’s young, smart,
and talented vice president of marketing, launched her campaign to
remake the brand and to bring it into the 21st century. She worried the
beer she had been hired to keep at #1 was associated too closely with
the common folk. She fretted about its history of “fratty and
out-of-touch humor” and believed she had been tasked with making it more
“inclusive…and lighter and brighter and different.”
As part of that more “inclusive” strategy, Heinerscheid and her team
contracted with a young TikTok sensation named Dylan Mulvaney to promote
the brand in a short video. And so, on that fateful day, April Fool’s
Day 2023, Mulvaney, who is famously and flamboyantly transgender,
uploaded a video in which he/she, dressed like Audrey Hepburn in
“Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” sang the praises of the new, au courant Bud Light.
The rest, as they say, is history. Within a week, Bud Light’s sales
tanked, the result of a conservative-led boycott of the brand. Within a
month, it had lost precisely what it sought to protect, its vaunted
status as the nation’s best-selling beer. By Independence Day, Bud Light
was no longer even in the top 10 best-selling beers in America, having
fallen all the way down to 14th place.
And then the real collapse began.
As sales of Bud Light fell, so did the sales of the brewer’s other
brands. And so did AB InBev’s stock. From its high on April 6, the
company’s share price fell more than 18%. Before the bleeding finally
stopped in October, the share price had fallen by more than one-fifth.
Recall as well that two months after Bud Light’s disastrous fling
with Dylan Mulvaney, Target Corporation, a longtime LGBTQ ally, launched
its most aggressive Pride Month campaign ever, featuring children’s
Pride displays, a “tuck”-friendly swimsuit for men who wished to hide
their…uhhh…manhood, and designs from a UK brand that also produced “Satanic” designs.
Again, the backlash was swift and merciless. As with Bud Light,
Target was the object of considerable online and cable news outrage. The
company saw its sales fall dramatically in the face of a
conservative-led boycott and, in time, saw its share price collapse as
well. The nation’s “normies” had, once again, done what had never been
done before and what was once thought impossible: they had organized and
sustained a conservative boycott of a major corporation. They had been
pushed too far by what they saw as aggressive corporate politicization,
and they had successfully and spectacularly pushed back against it.
The truth of the matter is that Donald Trump didn’t have anything to
do with the death of Pride Month. “Pride” killed itself, as it was
destined eventually to do. It’s one of the Seven Deadly Sins for a
reason, after all, namely because it is inherently self-destructive.
“Pride,” as Proverbs famously puts it, “goes before disaster, and a
haughty spirit before a fall.” And fall they did.
Ever since these twin retail disasters, American companies have been
notably (and understandably) more circumspect about their efforts to
promote politically divisive themes, especially LGBT Pride.
Many corporations—with a push from conservative activist Robby
Starbuck—ended their participation with and sponsorship of the Human
Rights Campaign, the LGBT activist group that helped turn Pride Month
into a national event and actively punishes companies it perceives as
less than ideally supportive of its agenda.
And note that all of this—from the Bud Light debacle to the Target
disaster to Robby Starbuck’s humiliation of the HRC—took place while Joe
Biden was president and Donald Trump was a private citizen. Indeed, the
first two took place before Trump had even secured a single convention
delegate or Republican primary vote. In other words, the media can blame
him all they want for the death of Pride Month, but the timing is off.
Additionally, and more to the point, the media—and countless others,
including most Democratic elected officials—radically misunderstand how
American politics works. Trump didn’t cause the cultural backlash that
killed Pride Month. The cultural backlash that killed Pride Month also
caused Trump. Or at least it caused his re-election.
In my nearly three decades as a macro-political analyst for large
institutional investors, I have always insisted on the existence and
relevance of one simple truth that defines American politics and its
inevitable twists and turns: Washington is not where the biggest and
most important decisions are made in this country. Those decisions are
made in the states, cities, towns, school districts, churches, and
families of the nation. Washington is merely where the score is kept.
Or, as Andrew Breitbart more pithily put it, “Politics is downstream from culture.”
Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016 because the American people
rejected the foreign policy and cultural excesses of the Obama years.
Likewise, Trump was re-elected in 2024 because the voters rejected
Biden’s even more significant cultural excesses. Trump wasn’t elected to
convince normies to dislike Pride, Pride Month, or “woke” more
generally. He was elected because the normies had already come to loathe
them all on their own.
Photo: BUDAPEST, HUNGARY - MARCH 25: A
pride flag on the ground in front of the police wall during a protest
on March 25, 2025 in Budapest, Hungary. A new bill proposed by the
ruling coalition would criminalise any event that violates the country's
"child protection" laws, which would apply to the annual Budapest Pride
event. It would also allow authorities to use facial recognition
software to identify those attending. (Photo by Janos Kummer/Getty
Images)
Stephen R. Soukup is the Director of The Political Forum Institute and the author of The Dictatorship of Woke Capital (Encounter, 2021, 2023)
The unusual collaboration between Chinese vaccine researchers and neuroscientists raises questions about how early China knew about COVID-19’s neurological symptoms, which are unusual for these types of viruses.
One of the smoking guns in the
ongoing Trump administration probe into the COVID-19 cover-up is
evidence suggesting that the Chinese suspected the novel virus may have
neurological symptoms just weeks after it was officially identified,
despite the fact that coronaviruses, historically, primarily affect the
respiratory and digestive systems.
Specifically, two scientists listed as authors on the first Chinese
patent for a COVID-19 vaccine—that remarkably came about a month after
the virus crossed the border into the U.S.—are affiliated with a
neuroscience institute in Beijing that works closely with the Chinese
military.
The presence of these two researchers on the early 2020 vaccine
patent in China is puzzling to federal investigators probing the origins
of COVID-19, and its cover-up, because many of the virus’s long-term
neurological effects were not a focus of Western scientists until much
later.
Patent filed in China one month after COVID hits U.S.
The patent was filed on February 24, 2020, only about one month after
the first laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case appeared in the United
States and shortly before the World Health Organization declared the
spread of the virus a global health pandemic.
The patent was submitted by three Chinese entities—two located at the
Academy of Military Sciences in Beijing, the Institute of Microbe
Epidemy and the Institute of Military Medicine. The application describes the process Chinese vaccine makers would use to prepare a “COVID-19 protein vaccine” and “a drug for preventing or treating the COVID-19.”
Eleven Chinese scientists are listed as the inventors, including one
previously identified by Senate researchers probing COVID-19
origins—Zhou Yusen, director of the State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and
Biosecurity at the Academy of Military Sciences.
Aside from questions about how rapidly Zhou and his team were able to
file their patent, two of the scientists carry a perplexing affiliation
with the Institute of Military Cognition and Brain Sciences at the
Beijing Academy of Military Sciences. Little public information is
available about the two scientists, Yan Li and Gencheng Han, but another
published scientific paper
identifies both researchers as part of the institute. At the time,
before the spread of the new coronavirus was even considered a pandemic,
COVID-19’s neurological symptoms were largely unknown in the West.
This has raised the suspicions of federal officials, who are
questioning why scientists who specialize in neurology were not only
consulted but participated in developing the first COVID-19 patent.
Weaponizing neurology is part of China's larger plan
Additionally, the Institute of Military Cognition and Brain Sciences
is an opaque component of the Academy of Military Sciences and is home
to scientists pursuing research into the Chinese military’s growing
focus on achieving “mental/cognitive dominance,” which People’s
Liberation Army strategists believe is important for future military
conflicts.
Rep. Darin LaHood, R-Ill., a member of the House Intelligence
Committee, says that China is engaged in a comprehensive strategy to
replace the United States and that the cover-up of the early emergence
of COVID-19 is part of that scheme.
“China has a plan to replace the United States, and they're working
at it every single day. And I don't say that to scare people, that's the
reality. They want to beat us technologically, militarily, economically
and diplomatically. And the sooner we wake up to that, the better,”
Congressman Darin LaHood told the John Solomon Reports podcast on Wednesday.
“And we've seen evidence of this through Huawei and what China… has
done with Huawei, what we they've done with TikTok, what they've done
now with Deep Seek, what they did…in terms of lying and being deceitful
with the Wuhan virus,” he continued.
Possibly part of that effort: Chinese military strategists are actively developing new methods
for using neurology to gain advantages on the battlefield, according to
Elsa Kania, Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for New American
Security.
“On the battlefield, attempts to undermine an adversary could include
interfering with the adversary’s capacity for cognition, whether
through manipulation or out-right destruction, from disrupting the flow
of data to exploiting ideology or emotion,” she wrote in January 2020
for U.S. National Defense University magazine, Prism, which focuses on “emerging disruptive technologies.”
Kania concluded that this effort is connected to the Institute of
Military Cognition and Brain Sciences, where one researcher by the name
of Zhou Jin, who focuses on brain science and neural engineering, also
contributed to “an expert group on psychological warfare and cognitive
technology” through a high-level defense planning body in China.
Dr. Robert Kadlec, former Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and
Response at the Health and Human Services Department during the first
Trump administration, was the first to raise questions about the unusual
participation of neuroscientists in the early vaccine research and
patent process. Dr. Kadlec played a central role in Operation Warp Speed and held numerous executive and legislative branch positions in biodefense and intelligence matters.
In a report he wrote—"A Critical Review of COVID-19 Origins: Hidden
in Plain Sight”— first published last September, Dr. Kadlec called
Zhou’s collaboration with the brain institute “unusual for early vaccine
research.”
“Significantly, their published research provided limited, or no data
of neuropathology observed in the experimental animals, or the
neuroprotection afforded by the vaccine,” he wrote.
“Institute of Military Cognition researchers’ involvement in such
studies suggest an interest in the vaccine’s protection against
SARS-CoV-2 early in the outbreak before evidence of its neurological
effects were widely known,” Dr. Kadlec added later.
U.S.-based researchers, as recently as last year, found long-term neurological symptoms
in patients previously infected with the COVID-19 virus that can last
up to 3 months post-infection. These effects include neurocognitive
deficits and sleep disturbances, according to research from Duke
University.
Another 2022 study published in Nature, found that, following the acute phase of COVID-19 infection, patients are at an increased risk
of neurological symptoms such as ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke,
cognition and memory disorders, peripheral nervous system disorders, and
episodic disorders (i.e., migraine, seizures, etc.)
Some of the earliest research on COVID-19’s neurological effects came
after the Chinese scientists submitted their vaccine patent. One of the first studies
on these symptoms was published in April 2020 by a team composed of
mostly Chinese doctors who observed cases in Wuhan, China firsthand.
However, data collection for this study was ongoing just five days
before the vaccine patent was submitted.
More support for "lab leak" theory scoffed at by Fauci, Biden, legacy media
Suspected early knowledge of neurological systems and the unusual
circumstances surrounding the world’s first COVID-19 vaccine patent
could potentially provide further evidence to support the theory that
the novel coronavirus was not of natural origin, but instead
manufactured—for research or nefarious purposes—in a laboratory.
Investigators are also pursuing another lead that shows an elite team of U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency scientists concluded in the summer of 2020 that COVID-19 likely was genetically manufactured and escaped a Chinese lab rather than evolving in nature, Just the News reported on Monday. But, that conclusion failed to make it into the official government assessments of the lab-leak theory.
The long-hidden study was only recently released by U.S. intelligence
agencies responding to Freedom of Information Act requests, and is now
also at the center of the ongoing investigation.
A DIA National Center for Medical Intelligence presentation showed
the scientists concluded that the “SARS-CoV-2 Spike Appears to be a
Chimera,” using the scientific terms for the COVID-19 virus and the
“chimera" term for a genetically engineered pathogen that is a
combination of pieces from two separate viruses.
The study—using complex genome analysis—also traced the process used
for creating the new virus to an earlier manuscript that the Wuhan
Institute of Virology published a decade prior— pointing to ongoing
genetic research into coronaviruses at the laboratory, which has
collaborated closely with the Chinese military, according to the U.S. intelligence community’s own assessment.
