Showing posts sorted by date for query PIGS. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query PIGS. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Saturday, May 02, 2026

Seth Rogen's new film shows children how tyrants like Trump manipulate the masses

Animal Farm/ Screenshot

April 29, 2026 
ALTERNET

Editor's Note: The story has been updated to include additional information about the "Animal Farm" animators.


In the age of President Donald Trump, American children need to see "Animal Farm."

Based on satirist George Orwell's classic 1945 novella of the same name, “Animal Farm” loosely adapts the original’s plot into an age-appropriate animated film. Directed by Andy Serkis, written by Nicholas Stoller and starring Seth Rogen, Gaten Matarazzo, Woody Harrelson, Glenn Close and Laverne Cox, it tells the story of a livestock rebellion in which pigs, sheep, chickens, cows and other animals overthrow their farmer and take over his farm. When Orwell first wove this tale more than 80 years ago, it reflected his disillusionment with left-wing politics: A democratic socialist himself, Orwell was dismayed and horrified as the Soviet Union descended into tyranny after the corrupt Joseph Stalin ran Leon Trotsky out of the government.

Flash forward to the 21st century and it’s shocking: The exact same dynamics that Orwell despised in the leftist anti-establishment define the right-wing populism promulgated by Trump. Given that the main filmmakers and stars are explicitly anti-Trump themselves, it is reasonable to surmise that these parallels are deliberate.

As depicted in the Angel Studios version, a boar named Napoleon (Rogen) orchestrates a coup against a pig named Snowball (Cox), a liberal-coded pig (and a character that, in Cox's hands, seems more like Hillary Clinton than Trotsky) who is smart and sincerely means well but cannot conceal her patronizing attitude toward the masses. Discovering and resenting her condescension, the other animals turn on Snowball and follow Napoleon’s lead, who panders to them while secretly plotting to sell them out for his personal profit.

If all of this reminds you of Trump, again, I doubt that was an accident. Just as Orwell criticized Stalin and his supporters for being no better than the aristocrats they deposed, Serkis and Stoller recognize that Trump’s appeal similarly depends on their supporters failing to see how their supposed liberators are exactly like other oppressors. In true Trump-ian fashion, Rogen’s Napoleon wheedles, bribes, gaslights and bullies as necessary to convince a population which craves economic and social justice that he will provide it. Behind the scenes, however, Napoleon ruthlessly funnels all of the farm's wealth and power to himself and his cronies.

I enjoyed everything about "Animal Farm": It's clever, colorful and well-served by its talented cast, especially Rogen as a Napoleon who mixes Trumpist values with Rogen-esque shtick. My positive view on “Animal Farm," however, is not the consensus opinion. Most of my fellow Rotten Tomatoes critics panned “Animal Farm,” complaining (to quote The Wrap’s William Bibbiani) that “the changes [from the book] aren’t an improvement. Most of them only call attention to the power of Orwell’s novella, and the comparative powerlessness of this new version.” To an extent, Bibbiani is correct: Orwell wrote his book for adults while Serkis made his film for young people, and therefore the book is more incisive, layered and thought-provoking than the motion picture.

Yet just because a movie doesn’t live up to a great book, that doesn’t mean the movie itself isn’t also great. Indeed, in this case, trying to faithfully adapt the source material would likely have backfired. I think of Victor Hugo's novel "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," which in my opinion is superior to the nevertheless-excellent animated Disney film. While I won't spoil the book's plot by revealing the changes, suffice to say that they are both substantial and justifiable, as the Disney film had to remove much of the dark source material so the final product would be suitable for young people. Serkis and Stoller faced the same challenge and rose to it, thereby achieving something quite impressive with this motion picture. For “Animal Farm,” the filmmakers needed to tell an entertaining and kid-appropriate story that nevertheless, like Orwell's novella, effectively explains through its plot how tyrants manipulate their citizens. “Animal Farm” accomplishes this so deftly that I suspect some of critics are taking that feat for granted. Unlike the two previous cinematic iterations of "Animal Farm" — a 1954 animated film and a 1999 live-action adaptation — this one works overtime to be appropriate for kids of all ages.

So yes, Rogen’s Napoleon and his goons are broadly characterized, their machinations easy for all but the tiniest tots to comprehend. Yes, the movie is full of cutesy images, catchy songs, toilet humor and other accoutrements one usually sees in mainstream animated family fare. This is as it should be: “Animal Farm” can appeal to children as much as any “Despicable Me" movie (and, like that franchise, this one looks like it was drawn by Illumination, although Aniventure and Imaginarium Productions made it, with Angel Studios distributing). Importantly, though, "Animal Farm" is crystal clear in transmitting Orwell’s main message: That one should distrust charismatic leaders who promise to help the masses, then manipulate and bully so that they can become dictators themselves.

We live in an era in which Americans need to trust their brains, eyes and ears instead of listening when told to respect corrupt and self-aggrandizing leaders. At a time when Trump is using every conceivable tool to become an American Napoleon — trying to steal elections, exacerbate racial divisions, profit from power and silence critics (especially after the attempts on his life) — kids need to watch “Animal Farm" so they can learn its crucial lesson: Think for yourself, not as the powerful want you to.

Frankly, their parents should learn that lesson too. Democracy depends on it.

Wednesday, April 29, 2026

Russia: Why Did ‘Intelligence Service’ Sponsor Attacks On French Places Of Worship? – Analysis


Agoudas Hakehilos Synagogue sprayed with green paint, Paris, 31 May 2025. 
Photo Credit: Ariel Weil/X


April 29, 2026 
F18News
By Felix Corley

Three court verdicts in Serbia in December 2025 confirm that an unspecified Russian intelligence agency sponsored acts to desecrate Jewish and Muslim places of worship in and around Paris earlier in 2025. The three Serbian men pleaded guilty and were sentenced for their part in these and other attacks in France as well as Germany. One was jailed for 18 months, the other two given house arrest. Criminal cases against other members of the group continue.

As the three men had reached a plea agreement with prosecutors and the verdicts were issued on the basis of those agreements, they did not appeal (see below).

In May 2025, the three men were part of a group that sprayed green paint on three synagogues in Paris during the Jewish Sabbath. Green is a colour associated with Islam. Among those condemning the attacks was the mayor of Central Paris, Ariel Weil. “We know where ‘militant’ acts begin, but we don’t know where they end,” he wrote (see below).

In September 2025, the three men were part of a group that planted severed pigs’ heads outside nine mosques in and around Paris. Islam considers pigs to be unclean. The person in charge of the prayer room at Anwar El-Madina Mosque said he was “very shocked”. “Every time an event like this happens, worshippers wonder if they really are safe when they come to pray,” he told a local news outlet (see below).


The verdicts, which the Higher Court in Smederevo provided to Forum 18, state that the group’s actions were intended to “incite religious and national intolerance”, especially between the Jewish and Muslim communities, and to “destabilise the situation” in Germany and France (see below).

Orders, instructions and money for actions were given to the group by “structures of the intelligence service of the Russian Federation”. The verdicts do not specify which Russian intelligence agency sponsored the attacks or identify the members of the Russian intelligence service who organised this group (see below).

French intelligence obtained internal Kremlin documents showing that the Russian presidential administration had “directly approved” the desecration of Jewish monuments in May 2025, the Paris-based investigative portal Mediapart noted in December 2025. A French intelligence summary shows that “[Russia’s] presidential office is striving to heighten tensions between these two communities on [French] territory by exploiting divisive debates to sow division in French society and weaken national solidarity” (see below).

French investigators focused on the possible Russian sponsorship of the operations. “Investigators have focused on the former Unit 29155 of the GRU, even though they do not yet have concrete evidence of Russia’s involvement,” French newspaper Le Monde wrote in September 2025. GRU Unit 29155 is known to have been involved in sabotage, destabilisation operations and assassinations in a range of European countries (see below).


Forum 18 asked the Direction générale de la sécurité intérieure (DGSI), part of France’s Interior Ministry dealing with internal security:

– Whether the French authorities believe that the Russian Federation was the initiator, organiser or sponsor of any of the 2025 attacks on Jewish and Muslim places of worship;
– If so, whether this was the finding of the prosecutor’s office, the DGSI or another state agency;
– If there is not conclusive evidence, on what likelihood the French authorities believe that the Russian Federation was behind these acts;
– Whether it could share details of any findings about the incidents.

“We acknowledge receipt of your request and thank you for your interest,” the DGSI responded on 1 December 2025. “After careful consideration, we regret to inform you that we are unable to proceed further with it.”

Forum 18 wrote to Russia’s Foreign Ministry, the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), the Defence Ministry (on behalf of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces (GRU)), and the Russian Embassy in the Serbian capital Belgrade on 22 April 2026. It asked why the Russian state is instructing and financing the carrying out of attacks in Western Europe, including on places of worship.

The SVR’s press bureau responded on 27 April but failed to answer Forum 18’s question, stating only that “In response to your inquiry, we wish to inform you that official comments from the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) regarding current issues are regularly posted on the Service’s website (www.svr.gov.ru) in the section titled ‘The SVR of Russia Is authorised to state’. At this time, no additional information is available for publication”.

Forum 18 had received no response from the other agencies by the end of the working day in Moscow and Belgrade of 27 April.

Russian forces have destroyed places of worship in fighting in Ukraine and confiscated places of worship of communities they do not like in occupied parts of Ukraine (see below).

The 2025 attacks on the Paris synagogues and mosques are the first known attacks at Russian instigation on places of worship elsewhere in Europe. Russian-sponsored attacks – often using locally-recruited criminals – have targeted opposition politicians and sites helping Ukraine to fight against Russia and its occupation of Ukrainian territory (see below).

Andrei Soldatov, a Russian investigative journalist and Russian security services expert, says the Russian intelligence agencies would attack targets such as places of worship “to raise the costs of providing security for the European security agencies”. “After such attacks, which are not very costly to organise (and they don’t need to be successful), the security agencies have no choice but to increase security measures, i.e. expand the lists of potential targets for attacks which need to be protected,” he told Forum 18 (see below).

Predrag Petrović, research director of the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy, described the convictions of the three Serbian men as “a very inconvenient fact for the authorities in Serbia. They had to do something, first arrest these people, and now pass a verdict.” He pointed to “strong anti-Western and pro-Russian sentiment in Serbia” as one of the reasons he sees as to why Russian security services recruit Serbian nationals for operations such as the targeting of places of worship (see below).


3 Paris synagogues sprayed with green paint


On the night of Friday 30 May to Saturday 31 May 2025, attackers sprayed green paint onto the facades of three Paris synagogues: the Grande Synagogue des Tournelles, the Agoudas Hakehilos Synagogue and the Synagogue de Belleville. Green is a colour associated with Islam.

Also sprayed with green paint on the same night were the city’s Shoah Memorial and a restaurant in Paris’ historic Jewish neighbourhood of Le Marais, the French Interior Ministry said on 31 May 2025.

The attacks took place on the Jewish Sabbath, which runs from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday.

“Whatever the perpetrators and their motives, these acts do not aim just at walls: they violently stigmatise French Jews, their memory and their places of worship,” the Representative Council of Jews in France (CRIF) declared on 31 May 2025. “The CRIF strongly condemns these acts and hopes that the perpetrators will be arrested as soon as possible.”

Then Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau said on X that he was disgusted by these “despicable acts targeting the Jewish community”.

Also condemning the attacks was the mayor of Central Paris, Ariel Weil. “We know where ‘militant’ acts begin, but we don’t know where they end,” he wrote on X.

Three Serbian citizens – including Bogdan Djinovic – were arrested in Antibes in south-eastern France on 2 June 2025 as they tried to leave the country. They were charged three days later over the attacks which investigators said had been designed “to serve the interests of a foreign power”.

Pigs’ heads placed outside 9 Paris area mosques


On the night of Monday 8 September to Tuesday 9 September 2025, attackers placed severed pigs’ heads outside the doors of 9 mosques in central Paris and the surrounding suburbs. Among the places of worship targeted were mosques in Paris (including Anwar El-Madina Mosque), Malakoff, Montreuil (Islah Mosque), Montrouge and Gentilly. The pigs’ heads were discovered by Muslims coming to pray.

Islam considers pigs to be unclean.

The person in charge of the prayer room at Anwar El-Madina Mosque said he was “very shocked”. “Every time an event like this happens, worshippers wonder if they really are safe when they come to pray,” he was quoted by BFM news channel on 10 September 2025.

“An investigation was immediately opened,” the then Paris Prefect of Police, Laurent Nuñez, noted on 9 September 2025. “Everything is being done to find the perpetrators of these abhorrent acts.”

French police began investigating possible links between the desecration of the mosques and Russian intelligence.

Kremlin approval for anti-Jewish operations?


French intelligence obtained internal Kremlin documents showing that the Russian presidential administration had “directly approved” the desecration of Jewish monuments in Paris in May 2025, the Paris-based investigative portal Mediapart announced on 2 December 2025.

A French intelligence summary seen by Mediapart says the Russian authorities were trying to stoke tensions between France’s Jewish and Muslim communities. The summary says that the attacks show that “[Russia’s] presidential office is striving to heighten tensions between these two communities on [French] territory by exploiting divisive debates to sow division in French society and weaken national solidarity”.

Serbian court verdicts identify Russian intelligence as sponsors

Following reports from France that a farmer from Normandy had reported Serbian citizens buying pigs’ heads, the Serbian authorities investigated possible suspects. The Serbian authorities arrested 11 suspects in the Smederevo area in late September 2025 in a joint operation by the police and the Security and Intelligence Agency, Serbia’s Interior Ministry announced on 29 September 2025. They were ordered held for 48 hours for questioning.

“They carried out these activities between April and September 2025,” the statement declared, “by throwing green paint on the Holocaust Museum, several synagogues and a Jewish restaurant, by sticking stickers with ‘genocidal’ content, by placing pig heads near Muslim religious buildings, all in the Paris area, as well as in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, by placing concrete ‘skeletons’ with written messages.”

Three of the suspects – Aleksandar Savić, Filip Petrović and Nemanja Ćevap, all from the town of Velika Plana – entered into a plea agreement with prosecutors in December 2025. Following this, the Higher Court in Smederevo found the three men guilty of espionage (Criminal Code Article 315, Part 3), inciting racial discrimination (Criminal Code Article 387, Part 4) and criminal association (Criminal Code Article 346, Part 3) in separate court decisions (seen by Forum 18) on 22 and 24 December 2025.

On 22 December 2025, the Court sentenced Savić to a year and a half in prison, according to the verdict seen by Forum 18. The Court ruled that only such a jail term could sufficiently influence the defendant not to commit criminal offences in the future, and only such a sentence would achieve the purpose of punishment. The time spent in detention, from 28 September 2025 until the verdict was pronounced and came into force, was taken into account in calculating his remaining prison term.

On the same day, 22 December 2025, the Court sentenced Petrović to one year’s house arrest. Two days later, on 24 December 2025, the Court sentenced Ćevap to six months’ house arrest.

As the three men had reached a plea agreement with prosecutors and the verdicts were issued on the basis of those agreements, they did not appeal.

The other eight suspects are not in custody, Radio Free Europe’s Serbian Service noted on 6 March 2026.


Instructions, money from “structures of the intelligence service of the Russian Federation”

The group was active from April to September 2025. Those who conducted the attacks had travel and accommodation paid for. They were also promised 1,000 Euros each for completing the various attacks in Paris in spring 2025 (including the attacks on 3 synagogues) and 1,500 Euros each for completing the attacks in and around Paris in September 2025 (including the attacks on 9 mosques). They had to photograph the sites to prove they had conducted the attacks.

The group was led by two individuals – who remained unnamed – who received instructions from Russian intelligence. One of them – identified by Police only as M.G. – was said to be a Serbian citizen. The other was identified only with the nickname “Hunter”. The verdicts do not reveal how many members the group had.

M.G. was identified as Momčilo Gajić. He was later found to be living in Moscow, Balkan Insight noted on 27 March 2026.

The Smederevo verdicts, which the Court provided to Forum 18, state that the group’s actions were intended to “incite religious and national intolerance”, especially between the Jewish and Muslim communities, and to “destabilise the situation” in Germany and France.

Orders, instructions and money for actions were given to the group by “structures of the intelligence service of the Russian Federation”. The verdicts do not specify which Russian intelligence agency sponsored the attacks or identify the members of the Russian intelligence service who organised this group.

The Serbian Interior and Foreign Ministries, the Security and Intelligence Agency, and the Russian Embassy in Belgrade did not respond to RFE’s questions about the activities of the Russian intelligence service in Serbia.

GRU involvement?


French investigators focused on a Serbian national whom they suspected led the actions against the Paris synagogues and mosques, the French newspaper Le Monde noted on 27 September 2025. Judicial sources told the paper that an arrest warrant had been issued.

The paper also noted the possible Russian sponsorship of the operations. “Investigators have focused on the former Unit 29155 of the GRU, even though they do not yet have concrete evidence of Russia’s involvement,” Le Monde wrote.

GRU Unit 29155 is known to have been involved in sabotage, destabilisation operations and assassinations in a range of European countries.

Why target places of worship?


Russian forces have destroyed places of worship in fighting in Ukraine and confiscated places of worship of communities they do not like in occupied parts of Ukraine.

The 2025 attacks on the Paris synagogues and mosques are the first known attacks at Russian instigation on places of worship elsewhere in Europe. Russian-sponsored attacks – often using locally-recruited criminals – have targeted opposition politicians and sites helping Ukraine to fight against Russia and its occupation of Ukrainian territory.

With no Russian acknowledgment that it was behind the attacks on places of worship – and other sites – in Paris it is unclear why they were targeted.

Andrei Soldatov, a Russian investigative journalist and Russian security services expert, says the Russian intelligence agencies would attack such targets “to raise the costs of providing security for the European security agencies”.

“After such attacks, which are not very costly to organise (and they don’t need to be successful), the security agencies have no choice but to increase security measures, i.e. expand the lists of potential targets for attacks which need to be protected,” Soldatov told Forum 18 on 23 April. “It’s costly, both in human resources and technology. And it distracts the counterintelligence resources from dealing with Russian activities while raising the security costs in general – as a punishment for staying on the Ukrainian side in the war.”

Why choose Serbian attackers?


Predrag Petrović, August 2024

Voice of AmericaPredrag Petrović, research director of the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy, says the Serbian authorities were reluctant to see the cases go to court. “This is a very inconvenient fact for the authorities in Serbia. They had to do something, first arrest these people, and now pass a verdict.” He pointed to three main reasons he sees as to why Russian security services recruit Serbian nationals for operations such as the targeting of places of worship.

Petrović told Forum 18 that the first is the “strong anti-Western and pro-Russian sentiment in Serbia”. “Under the rule of the Serbian Progressive Party, this sentiment has not only been maintained and politically exploited, but also significantly amplified through pro-government media.”

Secondly, a large proportion of Serbia’s population lives in difficult economic conditions. “Many blame this on Western-imposed liberal reforms and so-called globalist elites,” Petrović noted. “This creates a fertile ground for recruitment, as economic frustration and political resentment lower the threshold for engagement in such activities.”

Thirdly, “Serbian and Russian security services have developed increasingly close cooperation in recent years”, Petrović added. “Russian services have provided support to Serbian authorities in countering what they label as ‘colour revolutions’, that is, democratic change movements.”

Petrović describes political backing for the Serbian authorities – “helping the ruling party remain in power” – as a “significant service provided by Russian intelligence”. “In return, Serbian law enforcement responds to Russian malign operations and organised crime only when it has no other choice – typically when confronted with evidence from abroad and forced to act to avoid greater damage,” he told Forum 18.


Decline In Prey Increases Risk Of Jaguar Extinction In Atlantic Forest
In the Green Corridor, ongoing conservation initiatives such as the Iguaçu Jaguar Project and long-term efforts to combat illegal hunting help maintain a prey base capable of sustaining viable jaguar populations CREDIT: Iguaçu Jaguar Project


April 29, 2026 
By Eurasia Review

In addition to habitat loss and illegal hunting, the jaguar (Panthera onca) faces another threat that increases its risk of extinction in the South American Atlantic Forest: food scarcity.



A study by Brazilian researchers found that the availability of jaguar prey is reduced, even in the protected areas of the biome, which covers approximately 15% of Brazil and extends across 17 states in the South, Southeast, and Northeast regions, as well as parts of Argentina and Paraguay.

Jaguar prey species, including peccaries (Tayassu pecari), agoutis (Dicotyles tajacu), and deer, are hunted by humans and have dwindled to numbers that likely cannot support viable jaguar populations in the Atlantic Forest. The researchers warn that if this situation worsens, the biome, which currently has fewer than 300 jaguars, could become the first in the world to lose a top predator.

The results of the study, which was supported by FAPESP were published in an article in the journal Global Ecology and Conservation. The study also involved researchers from the Cananeia Research Institute (IPeC), the Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation (ICMBio), as well as its National Center for the Research and Conservation of Carnivorous Mammals (CENAP/ICMBio), the State University of Mato Grosso (UNEMAT), and the Iguaçu Jaguar Project – Pro-Carnivores Institute.

“We found an alarming situation of low abundance of key prey species for the jaguar even in protected areas of the Atlantic Forest, where national and state parks are located and where one would expect the situation in terms of the animal’s conservation to be better,” Katia Ferraz, a professor at the Luiz de Queiroz School of Agriculture at the University of São Paulo (ESALQ-USP) and coordinator of the study, tells Agência FAPESP. “Most likely, the decline of these prey species is one of the main causes of the critical conservation situation facing the jaguar in this biome,” she notes.

Field survey

The researchers combined information on the jaguar’s diet and feeding habits with data obtained through an on-site survey of the feline’s prey species. They did this using camera traps distributed across nine protected areas in the Atlantic Forest. Based on the data, they estimated the abundance and biomass of 14 prey species in these areas, which have varying levels of jaguar populations, and made comparisons between them.

The analyses revealed that the largest feline in the Americas primarily feeds on large prey, particularly wild pigs and deer. These prey were more abundant and had higher biomass in the Green Corridor than in the Coastal Atlantic Forest regions, such as the Serra do Mar, where jaguars are absent or occur at very low densities. The data reveal a striking difference in biomass between the Green Corridor (638 kg) and the coastal regions (8.2 kg).

“The results show a consistent pattern. Areas with greater prey availability, especially of medium- and large-sized prey such as wild pigs and deer, are also those where jaguars persist. Where the prey base is very limited, jaguar populations tend to be absent or extremely small,” notes Ferraz.
Easier access

According to the researcher, the low abundance and reduced biomass of the analyzed species were due to human presence. Prey were more abundant in areas that were more difficult to access and less abundant where illegal hunting was easier, indicating that this activity remains a core problem, even within conservation areas.

“We’ve observed that the low availability of prey is linked to increased human access to protected areas. In areas that are more easily accessible due to factors such as terrain and proximity to villages and urban centers, prey availability is lower,” says Ferraz. “This suggests a direct link to hunting pressure. In addition to the pressure on the jaguar itself, the predator, there’s very strong pressure on prey populations, leading to the decline of the feline,” she explains.

In the Green Corridor, protected areas are more connected and less accessible to human activity. Ongoing conservation initiatives, such as the Iguaçu Jaguar Project, and long-term efforts to combat illegal hunting also help explain why there is a prey base capable of sustaining viable jaguar populations.

In the coastal portion of the biome, such as the Serra do Mar, the low abundance of prey may reflect historical and still-persistent human pressure, despite the vast territorial extent and numerous ongoing conservation efforts, whether government-led or not. The authors of the study note that this reality is linked to the region’s proximity to major urban centers, such as Curitiba and São Paulo, and to the greater ease of access to protected areas.

According to the authors, this scenario poses a core challenge to environmental management. While some regions function as refuges that maintain ecological balance, others require intensive actions to control hunting, recover wildlife, and manage human use to prevent the permanent disappearance of the Americas’ largest predator in the Atlantic Forest.
Conservation oases

Of the areas evaluated in the study, Iguaçu National Park stood out as one of the last places in the Atlantic Forest with relatively high populations of predators and prey.


The successful conservation of jaguars in the park is due to a combination of human and ecological factors, including the work of the Iguaçu Jaguar Project and altitude. “Across all the areas analyzed, it was observed that the lower the altitude, as in the park, the greater the abundance of prey – a pattern also recorded in other areas of the Atlantic Forest,” explains Ferraz.

The Iguaçu Jaguar Project is based on three pillars: research, coexistence, and engagement. In the research area, applied studies are conducted to inform effective strategies on topics such as food ecology, vegetation corridors, and monitoring.

The engagement pillar aims to transform fear into understanding and fascination with jaguars, strengthening the bond between local communities and conservation efforts. The coexistence pillar involves working with communities surrounding the park to offer guidance on best practices for livestock management, preventing predation, and reducing misinformation. When there are reports of sightings or tracks, immediate guidance on safety and appropriate behavior is provided.

“Jaguars here in the region were nearly extinct. In 2009, we had between nine and 11 animals, and over the past 15 years, the population has nearly doubled,” says Yara Barros, the executive coordinator of the project. One of the actions that contributed to this result was precisely the increased effort to combat illegal hunting. “Hunting poses a major threat because people often enter the forest to hunt the animal’s prey and end up killing it as well,” she says.

The increase in agriculture and decrease in cattle ranching around the park may have also contributed to the recovery of the species, as the change in land use has reduced retaliatory killings. “We collaborate with communities in ten municipalities. A project technician visits rural properties not only when predation occurs,” says Barros.

According to Barros, coexistence is key: “We’re creating a tri-national network with partners from Paraguay and Argentina to share and replicate our experience,” she says.

Sunday, April 26, 2026

“A Picayune Detail:” Nazi Science Heads West



April 24, 2026

Werner von Braun (in suit) with the leadership of the Wehrmacht at Peenmunde, outside the Nazi slave labor camp for V-1 and V-2 rockets.

As Allied forces crossed the English Channel during the D-Day invasion of June 1944, some 10,000 intelligence officers known as T-Forces were right behind the advance battalions. Their mission: seize munitions experts, technicians, German scientists and their research materials, along with French scientists who had collaborated with the Nazis. Soon, a substantial number of such scientists had been picked up and placed in an internment camp known as the Dustbin. In the original planning for the mission, a prime factor was the view that German military equipment – tanks, jets, rocketry and so forth – was technically superior and that captured scientists, technicians and engineers could be swiftly debriefed in an effort by the Allies to catch up.

Then, in December 1944, Bill Donovan, head of the OSS, and Allen Dulles, OSS head of intelligence operations in Europe operating out of Switzerland, strongly urged FDR to approve a plan allowing Nazi intelligence officers, scientists and industrialists to be “given permission for entry into the United States after the war and the placing of their earnings on deposit in an American bank and the like.” FDR swiftly turned the proposal down, saying, “We expect that the number of Germans who are anxious to save their skins and property will rapidly increase. Among them may be some who should properly be tried for war crimes, or at least arrested for active participation in Nazi activities. Even with the necessary controls you mention, I am not prepared to authorize the giving of guarantees.”

But this presidential veto was a dead letter even as it was being formulated. Operation Overcast was certainly underway by July 1945, approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to bring into the US 350 German scientists, including Werner Von Braun and his V2 rocket team, chemical weapons designers, and artillery and submarine engineers. There had been some theoretical ban on Nazis being imported, but this was as empty as FDR’s edict. The Overcast shipment included such notorious Nazis and SS officers as Von Braun, Dr. Herbert Axster, Dr. Arthur Rudolph and Georg Richkey.

Von Braun’s team had used slave labor from the Dora concentration camp and had worked prisoners to death in the Mittelwerk complex: more than 20,000 had died from exhaustion and starvation. The supervising slavemaster was Richkey. In retaliation against sabotage in the missile plant – prisoners would urinate on electrical equipment, causing spectacular malfunctions – Richkey would hang them twelve at a time from factory cranes, with wooden sticks shoved into their mouths to muffle their cries. In the Dora camp itself, he regarded children as useless mouths and instructed the SS guards to club them to death, which they did.

This record did not inhibit Richkey’s speedy transfer to the United States, where he was deployed at Wright Field, an Army Air Corps base near Dayton, Ohio. Richkey went to work overseeing security for dozens of other Nazis now pursuing their research for the United States. He was also assigned the task of translating all of the records from the Mittelwerk factory. He thus had the opportunity, which he used to the utmost, to destroy any material compromising to his colleagues and himself.

Georg Rickhey arrest photo from 1947 for his role in running the Mittelwerk, the Nazi slave labor camp that produced V-1 and V-2 rockets.

By 1947, there was enough public disquiet, stimulated by the columnist Drew Pearson, to require a pro forma war crimes trial for Richkey and a few others. Richkey was sent back to West Germany and put through a secret trial supervised by the US Army, which had every reason to clear Richkey since conviction would disclose that the entire Mittelwerk team now in the US had been accomplices in the use of slavery and the torture and killing of prisoners of war, and thus were also guilty of war crimes. The Army, therefore, sabotaged Richkey’s trial by withholding records now in the US and also by preventing any interrogation of Von Braun and others from Dayton: Richkey was acquitted. Because some of the trial materials implicated Rudolph, Von Braun and Walter Dornberger, however, the entire record was classified and held secret for forty years, thus burying evidence that could have sent the entire rocket team to the gallows.

Senior officers of the US Army knew the truth. Initially, the recruitment of German war criminals was justified as necessary to the continuing war against Japan. Later, moral justification took the form of invoking “intellectual reparations” or, as the Joint Chiefs of Staff put it, as “a form of exploitation of chosen rare minds whose continuing intellectual productivity we wish to use.” Endorsement for this repellent posture came from a panel of the National Academy of Sciences, which adopted the collegial position that German scientists had somehow evaded the Nazi contagion by being “an island of nonconformity in the Nazified body politic,” a statement that Von Braun, Richkey and the other slave drivers must have deeply appreciated.

By 1946, a rationale based on Cold War strategy was becoming more important. Nazis were needed in the struggle against Communism, and their capabilities certainly had to be withheld from the Soviets. In September 1946, President Harry Truman approved the Dulles-inspired Paperclip project, whose mission was to bring no less than 1,000 Nazi scientists to the United States. Among them were many of the vilest criminals of the war: there were doctors from Dachau concentration camp who had killed prisoners by putting them through high altitude tests, who had frozen their victims and given them massive doses of salt water to research the process of drowning. There were the chemical weapons engineers, such as Kurt Blome, who had tested Sarin nerve gas on prisoners at Auschwitz. There were doctors who instigated battlefield traumas by taking women prisoners at Ravensbrück and filling their wounds with gangrene cultures, sawdust, mustard gas, and glass, then sewing them up and treating some with doses of sulfa drugs while timing others to see how long it took for them to develop lethal cases of gangrene.

Among the targets of the Paperclip recruitment program were Hermann Becker-Freyseng and Konrad Schaeffer, authors of the study “Thirst and Thirst Quenching in Emergency Situations at Sea.” The study was designed to devise ways to prolong the survival of pilots downed over water. To this end, the two scientists asked Heinrich Himmler for “forty healthy test subjects” from the SS chief’s network of concentration camps, the only debate among the scientists being whether the research victims should be Jews, gypsies or Communists. The experiments took place at Dachau. These prisoners, most of them Jews, had salt water forced down their throats through tubes. Others had salt water injected directly into their veins. Half of the subjects were given a compound called Berkatit, which was supposed to make salt water more palatable, though both scientists suspected that the Berkatit itself would prove fatally toxic within two weeks. They were correct. During the tests, the doctors used long needles to extract liver tissue. No anesthetic was given. All the research subjects died. Both Becker-Freyseng and Schaeffer received long-term contracts under Paperclip; Schaeffer ended up in Texas, where he continued his research into “thirst and desalinization of salt water.”

Hermann Becker-Freising as a defendant in the Medical Case Trial at Nuremberg.

Becker-Freyseng was given the responsibility of editing for the US Air Force the massive store of aviation research conducted by his fellow Nazis. By this time, he had been tracked down and brought to trial at Nuremberg. The multivolume work, entitled German Aviation Medicine: World War II, was eventually published by the US Air Force, complete with an introduction written by Becker-Freyseng from his Nuremberg jail cell. The work neglected to mention the human victims of the research, and praised the Nazi scientists as sincere and honorable men “with a free and academic character” laboring under the constraints of the Third Reich.

One of their prominent colleagues was Dr. Sigmund Rascher, also assigned to Dachau. In 1941, Rascher informed Himmler of the vital need to conduct high-altitude experiments on human subjects. Rascher, who had developed a special low-pressure chamber during his tenure at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, asked Himmler for permission to have delivered into his custody “two or three professional criminals,” a Nazi euphemism for Jews, Russian prisoners of war and members of the Polish underground resistance. Himmler quickly assented and Rascher’s experiments were underway within a month.

Rascher’s victims were locked inside his low-pressure chamber, which simulated altitudes of up to 68,000 feet. Eighty of the human guinea pigs died after being kept inside for half an hour without oxygen. Dozens of others were dragged semi-conscious from the chamber and immediately drowned in vats of ice water. Rascher quickly sliced open their heads to examine how many blood vessels in the brain had burst due to air embolisms. Rascher filmed these experiments and the autopsies, sending the footage along with his meticulous notes back to Himmler. “Some experiments gave men such pressure in their heads that they would go mad and pull out their hair in an effort to relieve such pressure,” Rascher wrote. “They would tear at their heads and faces with their hands and scream in an effort to relieve pressure on their eardrums.” Rascher’s records were scooped up by US intelligence agents and delivered to the Air Force.

The US intelligence officials viewed the criticism of people like Drew Pearson with disdain. Bosquet Wev, head of JOIA, dismissed the scientists’ Nazi past as “a picayune detail”; continuing to condemn them for their work for Hitler and Himmler was simply “beating a dead horse.” Playing on American fears about Stalin’s intentions in Europe, Wev argued that leaving the Nazi scientists in Germany “presents a far greater security threat to this country than any former Nazi affiliation they may have had or even any Nazi sympathies which they may still have.”

A similar pragmatism was expressed by one of Wev’s colleagues, Colonel Montie Cone, head of G-2’s exploitation division. “From a military point of view, we knew that these people were invaluable to us,” Cone said. “Just think what we have from their research – all of our satellites, jet aircraft, rockets, almost everything else.”

First page of a telegram denouncing the recruitment of Nazi scientists under Operation Paperclip sent to President Harry S. Truman on December 30, 1946 by the Council Against Intolerance in America, signed by Albert Einstein and others.

The US intelligence agents were so entranced with their mission that they went to extraordinary lengths to protect their recruits from criminal investigators at the US Department of Justice. One of the more despicable cases was that of Nazi aviation researcher Emil Salmon, who during the war had helped set fire to a synagogue filled with Jewish women and children. Salmon was sheltered by US officials at Wright Air Force Base in Ohio after being convicted of crimes by a denazification court in Germany.

Nazis were not the only scientists sought out by US intelligence agents after the end of World War II. In Japan, the US Army put on its payroll Dr. Shiro Ishii, the head of the Japanese Imperial Army’s biowarfare unit. Dr. Ishii had deployed a wide range of biological and chemical agents against Chinese and Allied troops, and had also operated a large research center in Manchuria, where he conducted bio-weapons experiments on Chinese, Russian and American prisoners of war. Ishii infected prisoners with tetanus; gave them typhoid-laced tomatoes; developed plague-infected fleas; infected women with syphilis; and exploded germ bombs over dozens of POWs tied to stakes. Among other atrocities, Ishii’s records show that he often performed “autopsies” on live victims. In a deal hatched by General Douglas MacArthur, Ishii turned over more than 10,000 pages of his “research findings” to the US Army, avoided prosecution for war crimes and was invited to lecture at Ft Detrick, the US Army bio-weapons research center near Frederick, Maryland.

Under the terms of Paperclip, there was fierce competition not only between the wartime allies but also between the various US services – always the most savage form of combat. Curtis LeMay saw his newly minted US Air Force as certain to prompt the navy’s virtual extinction and thought this process would be sped up if he were able to acquire as many German scientists and engineers as possible. For its part, the US Navy was equally eager to snare its measure of war criminals. One of the first men picked up by the Navy was a Nazi scientist named Theodor Benzinger. Benzinger was an expert on battlefield wounds, expertise he gained through explosive experiments conducted on human subjects during the waning stages of World War II. Benzinger ended up with a lucrative government contract working as a researcher at Bethesda Naval Hospital in Maryland.

Through its Technical Mission in Europe, the Navy was also hot on the trail of state-of-the-art Nazi research into interrogation techniques. The Navy’s intelligence officers soon came across Nazi research papers on truth serums, this research having been conducted at Dachau concentration camp by Dr. Kurt Plötner. Plötner had given Jewish and Russian prisoners high doses of mescalin and had watched them display schizophrenic behavior. The prisoners began to talk openly of their hatred of their German captors and to make confessional statements about their psychological makeup.

Dr. Kurt Friedrich Plötner, a Nazi medical medical doctor who conducted human experimentation on Jews and Soviet prisoners of war in German concentration camps and was recruited by the CIA under Project Bluebird.

American intelligence officers took a professional interest in Dr. Plötner’s reports. OSS, Naval Intelligence and security personnel on the Manhattan Project had long been conducting their own investigations into what was known as TD, or “truth drug.” As will be recalled from the description in Chapter 5 of OSS officer George Hunter White’s use of THC on the Mafioso Augusto Del Gracio, they had been experimenting with TDs beginning in 1942. Some of the first subjects were people working on the Manhattan Project. The THC doses were administered to targets within the Manhattan Project in varied ways, with a liquid THC solution being injected into food and drinks, or saturated on a paper tissue. “TD appears to relax all inhibitions and to deaden the areas of the brain which govern the individual’s discretion and caution,” the Manhattan Project security team excitedly reported in an internal memo. “It accentuates the senses and makes manifest any strong characteristic of the individual.”

But there was a problem. The doses of THC made the subjects throw up and the interrogators could never get the scientists to divulge any information, even with extra concentrations of the drug.

Reading Dr. Plötner’s reports, the US Naval Intelligence officers discovered he had experimented with some success with mescalin as a speech- and even truth-inducing drug, enabling interrogators to extract “even the most intimate secrets from the subject when questions were cleverly put.” Plötner also detailed research into mescalin’s potential as an agent of behavioral modification or mind control.

This information was of particular interest to Boris Pash, one of the more sinister figures in the CIA cast of characters in this early phase. Pash was a Russian émigré to the United States who had gone through the revolutionary years at the birth of the Soviet Union. In World War II he ended up working for OSS, running security for the Manhattan Project, where, among other activities, he supervised the investigation into Robert Oppenheimer and was the prime interrogator of the famous atomic scientist when the latter was under suspicion of helping leak secrets to the Soviet Union.

In his capacity as head of security, Pash had supervised OSS officer George Hunter White’s use of THC on Manhattan Project scientists. In 1944, Pash was picked by Donovan to head up what was called the Alsos Mission, designed to scoop up German scientists who had been involved in atomic, chemical and biological weapons research. Pash set up shop at the house of an old prewar friend, Dr. Eugene von Haagen, a professor at the University of Strasburg, where many Nazi scientists had been faculty members. Pash had met von Haagen when the doctor was on sabbatical at Rockefeller University in New York, researching tropical viruses. When von Haagen returned to Germany in the late 1930s, he and Kurt Blome became joint heads of the Nazis’ biological weapons unit. Von Haagen spent much of the war infecting Jewish inmates at the Natzweiler-Struthof concentration camp with diseases, including spotted fever. Undeterred by the wartime activities of his old friend, Pash immediately put von Haagen into the Paperclip program, where he worked for the US government for five years, providing expertise in germ weapons research.

Kurt Blome as a defendant in the Medical Case Trial at Nuremberg. Blome conducted biological weapons research on Jewish concentration camp prisoners. After the war, he worked for the CIA’s MK-Ultra team and the US Army Chemical Weapons Unit.

Von Haagen put Pash in touch with his former colleague Blome, who was also speedily enlisted in the Paperclip program. There was an inconvenient hiatus when Blome was arrested and tried at Nuremberg for medical war crimes, including the deliberate infecting of hundreds of prisoners from the Polish underground with TB and bubonic plague. But fortunately for the Nazi man of science, US Army Intelligence and the OSS withheld incriminating documents they had acquired through their interrogation. The evidence would not only have demonstrated Blome’s guilt but also his supervising role in constructing a German CBW lab to test chemical and biological weapons for use on Allied troops. Blome got off.

In 1954, two months after Blome’s acquittal, US intelligence officers journeyed to Germany to interview him. In a memo to his superiors, H. W. Batchelor described the purpose of this pilgrimage: “We have friends in Germany, scientific friends, and this is an opportunity to enjoy meeting them to discuss our various problems.” At the session, Blome gave Batchelor a list of the biological weapons researchers who had worked for him during the war and discussed promising new avenues of research into weapons of mass destruction. Blome was soon signed to a new Paperclip contract for $6,000 a year and flew to the United States, where he took up his duties at Camp King, an army base outside Washington, D.C. In 1951, von Haagen was picked up by the French authorities. Despite the tireless efforts of his protectors in US intelligence, the doctor was convicted of war crimes and sentenced to twenty years in prison.

Boris Pash, head of security for the Manhattan Project and later head of the CIA “networks” program PB-7, which conducted kidnappings, interrogations and assassinations.

From the Paperclip assignment, Pash, now in the newborn CIA, went on to become head of Program Branch/7, where his ongoing interest in techniques of interrogation was given ample employment. The mission of Program Branch/7, which came to light only in Senator Frank Church’s 1976 hearings, was to oversee CIA kidnappings, interrogations and killings of suspected CIA double agents. Pash pored over the work of the Nazi doctors at Dachau for useful leads in the most efficient methods of extracting information, including speech-inducing drugs, electroshock, hypnosis and psychosurgery. During the time Pash headed up PB/7, the CIA began pouring money into Project Bluebird, an effort to duplicate and extend the Dachau research. But instead of mescaline, the CIA turned to LSD, which had been developed by the Swiss chemist Albert Hoffman.

The first CIA Bluebird test of LSD was administered to twelve subjects, the majority of whom were black, and, as the CIA psychiatrist-emulators of the Nazi doctors at Dachau noted, “of not too high mentality.” The subjects were told they were being given a new drug. In the words of a CIA Bluebird memo, CIA doctors, well aware that LSD experiments had induced schizophrenia, assured them that “nothing serious or dangerous would happen to them.” The CIA doctors gave the twelve 150 micrograms of LSD and then subjected them to hostile interrogation.

After these trial runs, the CIA and the US Army embarked on widespread testing at the Edgewood Chemical Arsenal in Maryland, starting in 1949 and extending over the next decade. More than 7,000 US soldiers were the unwitting objects of this medical experimentation. The men would be ordered to ride exercise cycles with oxygen masks on their faces, into which a variety of hallucinogenic drugs had been sprayed, including LSD, mescalin, BZ (a hallucinogen) and SNA (Sernyl, a relative of PCP, otherwise known on the street as angel dust). One of the aims of this research was to induce a state of total amnesia. This objective was attained in the case of several subjects. More than one thousand of the soldiers who enlisted in the experiments emerged with serious psychological afflictions and epilepsy: dozens attempted suicide.

One such was Lloyd Gamble, a black man who had enlisted in the air force. In 1957, Gamble was enticed to participate in a Department of Defense/CIA drug-testing program. Gamble was led to believe that he was testing new military clothing he was testing new military clothing. As an inducement to participate in the program, he was offered extended leave, private living quarters and more frequent conjugal visits. For three weeks, Gamble put on and took off different types of uniforms, and each day in the midst of such exertions was given, on his recollection, two to three glasses of water-like liquid, which was in fact LSD. Gamble suffered terrible hallucinations and tried to kill himself. He learned the truth some nineteen years later when the Church hearings disclosed the existence of the program. Even then, the Department of Defense denied that Gamble had been involved, and the cover-up collapsed only when an old Department of Defense public relations photograph surfaced, proudly featuring Gamble and a dozen others as “volunteering for a program that was in the highest national security interest.”

This is adapted and updated from a chapter in Whiteout: the CIA, Drugs and the Press.

Jeffrey St. Clair is co-editor of CounterPunch. His most recent book is An Orgy of Thieves: Neoliberalism and Its Discontents (with Alexander Cockburn). He can be reached at: sitka@comcast.net or on Twitter @JeffreyStClair3