Vaccination Data on Amish Children Screened for 2010 Autism Study Was Never Made Public
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 2, 2026
Controversy is swirling around a 2010 study on autism rates among the Amish, after President Donald Trump on Monday posted a graphic citing the study.
Trump’s post on Truth Social claimed, “No published case has explicitly documented an unvaccinated Amish child with autism.”
The social media post cited a study, conducted in 2008 and 2009 by researchers who screened 1,899 Amish children in Indiana and Ohio for autism. The researchers confirmed seven cases of autism among the children.
The study concluded that among the Amish children in the study, the autism rate was roughly 1 in 271 — far lower than the national rate, which at the time was estimated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as 1 in 91.
According to Trump’s post, the study authors collected vaccination histories for the children but “did not report any confirmed case” of autism as “completely unvaccinated.”
The post drew a mix of cheers and fact checks, according to health writer Sayer Ji.
Ji called Trump’s post “factually imperfect” but “genuinely important.”
The post contained factual inaccuracies — for instance, it stated that the Amish have been around for 330 years. However, although the Amish broke away from the Mennonites 333 years ago in 1693, Amish settlements in the U.S. didn’t begin until the 1720s.
Trump’s post also drew attention to the verifiable fact that the Amish tend to have lower vaccination rates and lower autism rates, compared to the mainstream.
Ji praised the president for highlighting the 2010 study. “Whatever else you think of the man, he [Trump] pointed at the study,” Ji wrote.
Children’s Health Defense (CHD) CEO Mary Holland told The Defender she was pleased that Trump highlighted the relative absence of autism among the Amish, who typically have lower vaccination rates than mainstream communities.
“It’s high time we start dealing with reality — the current vaccine schedule causes brain injury called autism. Let’s be humble enough to learn from the Amish,” Holland said.
What did the 2010 Amish autism study show?
Trump’s post cites a 2010 study conducted by human genomics researchers from the University of Miami and Vanderbilt University, according to a conference abstract about the study.
However, contrary to Trump’s post, the study was never published in a peer-reviewed journal.
The study’s abstract, dated May 22, 2010, appeared on the website for the International Meeting for Autism Research, a research gathering held by the International Society of Autism Research.
The study authors appeared to have presented the study at the May 2010 meeting. There is no online record of the study’s full report.
The abstract’s methods section states that the researchers collected the children’s vaccination data. However, the results section doesn’t state whether the seven Amish children in the study who were identified as having autism were vaccinated or unvaccinated.
The abstract states:
“Preliminary data have identified the presence of ASD [autism spectrum disorder] in the Amish community at a rate of approximately 1 in 271 children using standard ASD screening and diagnostic tools although some modifications may be in order.”
The authors wrote that “further studies are underway” to address the cultural norms and customs that may affect how parents talk about their children’s behavior when interviewed by researchers.
It is unclear if the study authors looked at whether the seven children with autism had been vaccinated.
The study’s lead author, listed as J. L. Robinson, did not respond to The Defender when asked if the researchers ever ran a vaccination-stratified analysis of the seven confirmed autism cases, and why the researchers never published the study.
The Defender asked Margaret Pericak-Vance, Ph.D., director of the John P. Hussman Institute for Human Genomics at the University of Miami and one of the study’s authors, the same questions. However, the inquiry was directed to the university’s public relations director, who did not respond by deadline.
Ji searched online public records to see if the study authors ever spoke again publicly about the study or submitted it for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, but found nothing.
That is significant, Ji told The Defender. “I searched for and could not find any public statement by any of the six authors, in sixteen years, on why the paper never appeared or what became of the data. That absence is the finding.”
Ji said he isn’t accusing the study authors of intentionally burying their data on the Amish children’s vaccination histories. “I am not alleging that any of the six destroyed data or acted in bad faith — I have no evidence of that.”
But their data were effectively “buried,” in that the data were never published and never appeared in a future study.
Ji acknowledged that even if the study had explicitly linked all seven autism cases to not vaccinating, the study wouldn’t prove that unvaccinated children do not get autism, because seven is too small a number to power a statistical model.
But the data would still be helpful because they “would fill a hole in the record and tell us whether the screening infrastructure can be rebuilt at scale,” he said. “A statistician could do it in weeks if the files exist.”
The study authors did not respond when The Defender asked if they still had the original research files for the study.
Given that the study appeared to use federally funded research dollars, according to the abstract, the public deserves to know what happened to the files, Ji said.
Trump focused on uncovering autism-vaccine link
Trump’s post referencing the 2010 study comes amid a roiling debate about vaccines and autism. In May, Trump pressed U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to do more to investigate a possible link between vaccines and autism, according to a July 27 Wall Street Journal report.
Last month, Trump signed an executive order calling for sweeping changes to U.S. vaccine policy, including reducing the number of diseases for which kids receive routine childhood vaccines from 18 to 11.
According to The Associated Press, Trump is “fixated on connecting autism to vaccines.”
During a Sept. 22, 2025 press conference, Trump said, “There are certain groups of people that don’t take vaccines and don’t take any pills that have no autism. … The Amish, as an example, they have essentially no autism.”
According to Ji, the 2010 Amish study does not prove that vaccines cause autism.
However, the story of what happened to the 2010 study reveals that when data are collected that could potentially contribute to answering the question of whether vaccines cause autism, that data “doesn’t become available,” Ji said.
In Ji’s view, studies looking at Amish autism rates should examine many factors, including vaccination status, exposure to glyphosate, acetaminophen, ultrasound, diet, endogamy and access to healthcare.
The full results should be made public, regardless of what the studies find. “That isn’t anti-vaccine. It’s science.”
The connection between lower vaccination and autism rates among the Amish was something that investigative journalist Dan Olmsted spent years documenting.
Olmsted, founder of Age of Autism, authored “Age of Autism: Mercury, Medicine, and a Man-Made Epidemic” (2011) and “Denial: How Refusing to Face the Facts about Our Autism Epidemic Hurts Children, Families, and Our Future” (2017) before he passed away in early 2017.
Where did Trump get the graphic he posted?
The Amish continue to be central to ongoing national debate on vaccines. In New York, Amish are threatening to leave the state due to the state’s school-based vaccine mandate, according to an Aug. 26 New York Post report.
Pennsylvania, which is home to the largest Amish population in the U.S., has been making headlines for its current measles outbreak and ongoing investigation of measles-related deaths.
Steve Kirsch created the graphic that Trump posted to social media. On Aug. 14, Kirsch posted the graphic on X with the statement, “Baffling, isn’t it? Autism is only found in vaccinated Amish kids. I wonder why?”
Kirsch told The Defender he created the graphic using ChatGPT.
He instructed ChatGPT to create a graphic based on the 2010 study and based on his understanding that there is no evidence that an unvaccinated Amish child has ever been diagnosed with autism.
“Nobody has ever heard of an unvaccinated Amish child with autism,” Kirsch told The Defender.
Kirsch said he referred to the study as “published” in the graphic because the International Society of Autism Research posted the study’s conference abstract online. He acknowledged that the study itself was never published.
The White House did not respond to our comment request by the deadline.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
CNAS Wonk Proposes Bombing China’s Artificial Intelligence
Critics argue that an attack on China has the potential to start a nuclear war
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | September 6, 2026
Jacob Stokes, a former White House official, has suggested taking military action against China to prevent it from winning the race for AGI, or Artificial General Intelligence. AGI is a hypothetical AI system that could learn, reason, adapt, and solve problems across a broad range of intellectual tasks at roughly human or greater capability.
Stokes served on the White House national-security staff under then–Vice President Joe Biden during the Obama administration. He is a senior fellow and deputy director of the Indo-Pacific Security Program at the CNAS.
Center for a New American Security, established in 2007 by Michèle Flournoy, is associated with the Democratic Party. Flournoy held the position of deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy during President Bill Clinton’s administration and served as under secretary of defense for policy under President Barack Obama.
Previously, CNAS was led by CEO Victoria Nuland, who acted as undersecretary of state for political affairs from 2021 to 2024 within the Biden administration’s State Department. According to the Washington Post, CNAS is regarded as Washington’s primary think tank on military matters.
In a CNAS report titled Superpowers and AGI, Stokes argued that Washington should consider extreme scenarios in which China might achieve AGI first, including diplomatic pressure, espionage, cyber operations, sabotage, and military action against data centers.
On September 3, during an online event, Stokes stated that multiple US agencies, including the Department of Defense and the National Security Agency, should evaluate the intelligence required to substantiate such actions, according to the South China Morning Post.
Stokes and other analysts believe conventional bombs may be used to destroy the physical hardware China needs to train future AI models. It is speculated that the destruction of China’s AGI infrastructure would delay Chinese development by a few years, thus giving the US an advantage.
Although China is very advanced in frontier AI, it does not appear to possess AGI. The best current assessment is that China is probably slightly behind the United States in top-end model capability, while matching or exceeding it in some areas, including efficiency, deployment, open models, robotics, and industrial integration.
Critics argue that an attack on China has the potential to start a nuclear war between the two superpowers. William Hartung of the Project on Government Oversight characterized an attack on Chinese data centers as “the height of recklessness.” He warned that it could trigger a war with “tragic consequences for all concerned.”
Others question whether bombing data centers would actually halt Chinese AI development. China’s AI ecosystem is spread across numerous companies, universities, government labs, cloud providers, chip facilities, and research teams.
Hu Xijin, the former editor-in-chief of China’s state-backed Global Times, warned that if the United States attacked Chinese data centers, Chinese retaliation would not be limited to US targets in the Asia-Pacific region. Instead, it could include missile strikes on the US mainland. A Global Times editorial described the proposal as a “dangerous delusion” and argued that treating civilian data centers as military targets was “indistinguishable from terrorism.”
There is no indication that the Trump administration has officially supported, accepted, or directly addressed Jacob Stokes’ suggestion to prepare for the dismantling of Chinese AGI infrastructure. As of September 6, 2026, reports suggest that neither the Department of Defense nor the NSA has provided an official response to the proposal.
Nonetheless, the administration has taken the extensive U.S.-China AI rivalry very seriously. Its approach has focused on ensuring American supremacy in AI, military integration, intelligence gathering, cyber defense, technology regulations, and diplomatic efforts – not openly on preemptive strikes or sabotaging Chinese data facilities.
Eight Arab and Muslim states reject Israeli displacement plans for Gaza
Palestinian Information Center – September 6, 2026
GAZA – Eight Arab and Muslim countries have condemned remarks by far-right Israeli ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Israel Katz on plans to forcibly displace Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.
The foreign ministers of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Pakistan, Türkiye and Qatar said in a joint statement released on Sunday that such Israeli plans violate international and humanitarian law and pose a direct threat to the Palestinian people’s legitimate and inalienable rights.
The ministers voiced rejection of any Israeli attempt to displace Palestinians from or within the occupied territory, warning against transforming extremist rhetoric on forced displacement into official state policy.
The ministers warned that the displacement of Gazans would destabilize the region and derail global peace efforts, undermining US president Donald Trump’s plan to end the Gaza war, which clearly rejects forced population transfers.
The ministers stressed that Gaza is an integral part of the occupied Palestinian territories, calling for preserving the unity of Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem.
They reiterated their countries’ support for a two-state solution establishing an independent Palestinian state along the June 4, 1967 lines, with east Jerusalem as its capital.
They urged the international community and UN Security Council to oppose Israeli attempts to impose a new demographic or geographic reality in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Lebanese man tells RT how Israeli strike killed his bride
Saja Sharara lost her life when a missile struck the couple’s home just 48 hours after their wedding
RT | September 6, 2026
The husband of a 28-year-old Lebanese woman killed in an Israeli airstrike just two days after their wedding has told RT how he was speaking to his wife on the phone moments before their home was hit.
Saja Sharara was killed at the couple’s home in Arabsalim, southern Lebanon, on August 27. Six other people, including a child, were wounded.
Hussein said he called Saja after hearing about an Israeli strike nearby. Minutes later, she called him back and suddenly said: “A rocket, a rocket is coming towards us, Hussein.”
The connection was lost. “The rocket fell on her,” Hussein recalled. “And then I realized that it was over.”
Israel has not said specifically what it was targeting at the house. It said its wider attacks in the Nabatieh area targeted Hezbollah infrastructure in response to drones launched at IDF troops. No Israeli casualties were reported.
Israeli attacks on southern Lebanon have continued despite a US-mediated ceasefire. More than 4,000 people have been killed and over 12,000 wounded in Israeli attacks on Lebanon since March, according to Lebanese authorities.
Hussein said the continuing Israeli military presence and air operations mean there is no ceasefire in practice.
“There is no ceasefire as long as this enemy is on our land and the aviation is flying above us,” he told RT.
RT’s Steve Sweeney spoke exclusively with Hussein in southern Lebanon about the future he and Saja had planned together.
Is America preparing a tactical nuke for Iran?
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 6, 2026
The escalation trap is getting worse for Trump and his cabal of sycophants, as what was once a discussion which was linked to existentialism – the nuclear option – is now being dialled down to any kind of military option. Just a bigger bomb. The more Trump loses, the more Iran hits U.S. assets and allies in the Middle East, the longer the straits remain closed, and the higher gasoline and diesel costs reach in the U.S. – the more the idea of a ‘tactical’ nuke dropped on Iran becomes normal and even preferred.
But Trump is also getting madder. He is literally losing his mind, and his condition has worsened in his second term in office to the point where he is losing touch with any kind of reality. Before February 28th, the U.S. economy was not in bad shape. A lot of fundamentals were holding out. But now everything is spiralling out of control, and quite apart from blue-collar workers being hit with gas pump prices being well above $4, now diesel is being hiked – which only means that the cost of food, among other goods, is going to rise significantly, as trucking firms pass on the bill to producers, who pass it on to the consumer.
And as things start to get out of control, take a cursory glance at who is running Trump and who stands to gain if a nuclear bomb were used. It’s the same people who walked away from 9/11 laughing until their sides hurt. Israel. The Zionists are now pushing for the tactical strike option, as any escalation in the region – no matter who gets killed or whose country gets wiped out even of water – is not their worry or concern. These days, Netanyahu’s coterie can argue even more that Iran is probably making a nuclear bomb, as the one institution that Trump could turn to – the IAEA – can’t enter Iran and do its inspections. And so the default conclusion is that the U.S. president is going to be bullied again into making a cataclysmic error of judgment in hitting Iran.
The Zionists have been busy on both sides of the Atlantic. In the UK, it’s hard not to see how their money is now reaching Nigel Farage’s far-right party, which has just been hit by another dodgy funding scandal – presenting the leader of the party as bereft of any political morals of any creed in preference for filling his pockets with dirty cash. The Zionists control UK media, and it’s interesting to see how Farage gets a pretty easy time despite the graft scandals burying him. In the U.S., it’s a similar story. For a while now, J.D. Vance has been quite critical of how Zionists are shaping U.S. politics both internationally and even domestically, and has always been quite vague about how the U.S. should move forward in Iran. But now those who have crossed a threshold and are in the pockets of Israel’s lobby are going for him.
Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley recently accused him of not taking a clear stance on Israel – slamming him for trying to “be both.”
“Right is right. Wrong is wrong. In life, you must choose a side. You are either with the Tucker Carlson wing of the country or you are with the pro-Israel wing of the country,” she wrote on social media. “You can’t be both.”
Haley, a former GOP presidential candidate who isn’t overburdened with a high IQ, couldn’t even hide who was directing her and even giving her reference material to attack Vance – leading some to wonder if Israel’s lobby just writes her social media posts.
She continued her post with a quote from Nobel Prize-winning writer and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who said in his 1986 acceptance speech: “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim.”
Meanwhile, America’s trust around the world seems to have been eroded to almost nothing. Recently, the Netherlands just pulled out its gold reserves it used to keep in the U.S. The move followed Germany a few weeks ago, which did the same. EU leaders just don’t trust Trump and can see the de-dollarisation trend gaining ground while U.S. debt continues to mount. Trump can’t do anything, of course, as his immature ideas about governance have produced a series of policies which haven’t served the country’s interests but merely backfired – reminding many that he doesn’t have one or two failed businesses under his belt like many successful entrepreneurs, but scores, which would suggest that he doesn’t really understand business at all. A nuke, he might believe, would be a reset in the Middle East and perhaps a huge distraction away from terrible numbers back home. But the precedent it would set to Russia and China would only make Iran an even greater winner than it already is in the region. Trump simply has no idea what he is doing – and all the people who could advise him have been fired.
“We Are Being Drawn Into a War We Don’t Want to Fight”: What Jordan’s Alliance with Washington Is Costing It
By Muhammad Hamid ad-Din – New Eastern Outlook – September 6, 2026
The growing public discontent with the presence of American troops in Jordan, fueled by the regional conflict and Iran’s strategy, is putting the country’s government in a serious crisis of trust, forcing the authorities to choose between a strategic alliance with the United States and the internal stability of the state.
Some 4,000 U.S. troops, bases used for strikes against Iran, Iranian missiles crossing Jordanian skies, and American soldiers killed on Jordanian ground—all raise an increasingly urgent question: has the strategic alliance with Washington become a threat to the very existence of the country?
A Letter That Could Not Be Ignored
More than 200 Jordanian politicians, cultural figures, tribal leaders, and retired military officers did something extremely rare in Jordan—they publicly challenged their own government. In an open letter to the authorities, they demanded the withdrawal of foreign troops from the country, the cancellation or revision of the security agreement with the United States, and its submission to parliament for review.
“We affirm that their presence exposes Jordan to security, political, and economic risks that serve no national interest, and increases the likelihood of our country being dragged into a regional conflict in which it has no part,” the appeal stated.
The initiative was led by former minister and lawmaker Amjad Khazza al-Majali. Among the signatories were former secretary-general of the Islamic Action Front, Salem al-Falahat; 90‑year‑old political activist Sufyan al-Tell; retired military figures including Ali al-Habashneh; and former secretary-general of the Jordanian Communist Party, Saud Kbeilat.
The diversity of the signatories—from leftists to Islamists, from tribal chiefs to secular intellectuals—prevented the authorities from dismissing the letter as the work of a single political faction. But it would be an exaggeration to claim that it reflects the views of all Jordanians; on such sensitive matters, the kingdom simply does not conduct opinion polls, and open disagreement with the authorities has always been a risky undertaking here.
When an Ally Becomes a Target
Jordan has long been one of the United States’ main military partners in the Middle East. Some 4,000 American troops are stationed on its territory. However, the war between the U.S. and Iran, which resumed after the collapse of the June ceasefire, has turned that presence from an abstract diplomatic arrangement into a tangible threat.
Iranian missiles and drones aimed at Israeli or American facilities regularly cross Jordanian airspace. Some strikes hit installations used by U.S. forces. As a result, American soldiers are being killed—and this is no longer just news from another continent, but events occurring on Jordanian soil.
As The Jerusalem Post noted, the Iranian strikes against Jordan were a calculated move: Tehran sought to “sow discord within Jordan and create governmental chaos.” Professor Ronen Itzhak commented on the situation as follows: “This is exactly what Iran was trying to achieve by launching missiles at Jordan. Its goal is to pressure the Jordanian population into demanding the removal of the American presence.”
And Iran is succeeding. Every new attack reinforces the position of critics of the U.S. presence: the alliance with Washington is costing Jordan in direct security losses.
Storm in Parliament: Condolences to “Child Killers”
A particularly telling episode occurred in the Jordanian parliament in late July. Deputy Ali al-Khalayleh proposed sending official condolences to the U.S. Congress over the deaths of American servicemen on Jordanian soil.
The proposal sparked a storm. Other legislators fiercely attacked al‑Khalayleh. They called the United States “the biggest supporter of Israel, which has committed a massacre in Gaza,” and branded American soldiers “child killers.” “The Jordanian people are above such condolences,” their opponents declared.
What made the situation especially delicate was that al‑Khalayleh himself had earlier described the U.S. military presence in Jordan as “a walk with shepherds.” Now he was proposing that parliament express formal condolences to Washington—and he was jeered by his colleagues.
What matters is that opposition to American policy in parliament came not from fringe activists, but from elected representatives within an official political institution. This indicates that discontent with the U.S. alliance is penetrating the highest levels of Jordan’s political system.
Trump’s Double Game
U.S. President Donald Trump, for his part, also fanned the flames. After the deaths of American soldiers in Jordan, he effectively blamed Jordanian forces for incompetence. “If we had different air defense operators, this would not have happened,” Trump said, hinting that the Jordanians had failed to provide adequate protection for U.S. troops. “When you let others do your work… sometimes things go wrong,” the president added.
For Jordanian critics of the American presence, these words were yet another confirmation of their position: Washington itself does not consider Jordan a safe place for its troops and is ready to shift the blame for their deaths onto local authorities.
The Jordanian government, by contrast, could have used the same attacks as proof of the need to strengthen air defense in cooperation with the United States. But amid growing public dissatisfaction, that argument sounds increasingly weak.
Iran Plays on the Divide
Iran’s strategy in this conflict is anything but subtle, yet at the same time highly professional. Tehran consistently draws a distinction between the Jordanian people and the Jordanian government. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) issued a direct appeal to Jordanians, stating that Iran is “not hostile to Jordan” and that its grievances are only with the American military presence.
“America is using bases on Jordanian soil to wage aggression and commit massacres against our people. It is our legitimate right to strike the aggressor wherever he launches his attacks,” the Iranian military declared. And in the view of many analysts, Tehran has a point on this issue.
Moreover, Iranian propaganda went further: the IRGC claimed that information about the location of U.S. troops in Jordan had been provided by Jordanian civilians and military personnel themselves and expressed gratitude to the Jordanian people for their cooperation.
In this way, Iran is trying to deepen the rift between the authorities and society, using the Palestinian cause as a lever. Support for Palestine is deeply rooted in Jordanian society, and the war in Gaza and Washington’s backing of Israel have only intensified anti‑American sentiment. That is precisely why Iranian statements fall on fertile ground.
Media Blockade and Information Gap
Paradoxically, despite the significance of the letter and the many prominent signatories, major Jordanian media outlets did not publish it in full. Critics of the government saw this as evidence of severe restrictions on political and media space in Jordan. Analysts argued that the limited room for dissent means that the level of opposition visible in the media is likely lower than the actual discontent in society.
As a result, the letter was disseminated mainly through social networks and foreign media. The Jordanian government, for its part, sought to frame the conflict not as a geopolitical problem but as a matter of national security. Official statements emphasized border defense and Jordan’s refusal to take part in the war.
However, in the age of social media, traditional methods of managing information are working less and less effectively. Citizens see videos online, read international reports, and compare them with official statements. The growing gap between the official version and what people see with their own eyes is undermining trust in the authorities.
The Price of Alliance
Jordan’s economy was already under severe strain due to inflation, unemployment, and declining purchasing power. The conflict dealt an additional blow to the tourism sector, which accounts for up to 18% of the country’s revenues. In the first half of 2026, income from tourism and Jordanian expatriates fell by 12%, from American tourists by 25%, and from European tourists by 28%. At the same time, the United States provides Jordan with about $1.65 billion annually in economic and military aid.
King Abdullah II’s government finds itself between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, the alliance with the United States brings billions in aid and security guarantees. On the other hand, that same alliance turns the country into a target, undermines internal stability, and erodes citizens’ trust in the authorities.
As Professor Itzhak noted, “The King of Jordan has the sovereignty to make independent decisions in accordance with the constitution, so it is unlikely that he will change the country’s policy.” But the question is how much longer Jordanian society can endure being held hostage to a geopolitical game in which it has no voice.
The open letter from Jordanian public figures is not just a protest against foreign troops. It is a symptom of a deep crisis of trust between the authorities and society, between the government’s strategic calculations and the real interests of its citizens. War, the Palestinian question, the American military presence, and national sovereignty have become tightly interwoven—a knot that Amman is finding increasingly difficult to untie.
Traditional methods of managing public opinion are working less and less effectively in the age of social media. Jordanians are no longer passive recipients of official messages—they actively seek out alternative sources of information and compare them with government statements. And this growing comparison may prove to be the biggest challenge for the Jordanian government, because in today’s world, controlling the flow of information is far harder than controlling the country’s borders or its airspace.
Muhammad Hamid ad‑Din is a prominent Palestinian journalist
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
Trump Slaughters Wedding Guests, Zelenskyy Threatens Airliners
By Kevin Barrett | September 6, 2026
When Zelenskyy threatened to shoot down civilian airliners last week, Putin called it “state terrorism.” Putin is right, of course. But the expression he used, “state terrorism,” is a repetitiously redundant pleonasm.
Virtually all terrorism is state terrorism. So appending the word state in front of the word terrorism isn’t really necessary.
Case in point: Trump’s slaughter of Iranian schoolgirls, female volleyball players, and wedding guests. Such acts fit the definition of terrorism: politically-motivated attacks on civilians. The purpose of attacking civilians is to inspire fear or terror among them, so they will react in ways that further the terrorist’s political plans.
Terrorist Trump and his Israeli owners have made no secret of the fact that they intend to attack civilians and especially civilian infrastructure in Iran—which even the mainstream media acknowledges is a war crime—in hopes of spreading so much pain and misery and death that the Iranian people rise up against their government. But as Caleb Carr explained in his post-9/11 book The Lessons of Terror: A History of Warfare Against Civilians, such “punish-the-civilians” policies rarely work. Hitler’s buzz-bombs didn’t convince the British to rise up and overthrow Churchill, nor did the British and American firebombings of German cities cause the Germans to revolt against Hitler. On the contrary, such terrorist policies typically backfire: the people punished worst are dead, while the survivors feel selected by God or fate or destiny to unite behind their nation’s leadership and fight even more furiously against the foreign terror-mongers attacking their country.
And Iran—where a powerful cult of martyrdom is built into the majority religion—is the last country on earth that anybody is ever going to successfully terrorize into submission. Iran’s war on terror, specifically its war on Zio-American terror, is genuine, and likely to be far more successful than the ersatz US equivalent.
Civilian Casualty Ratios Keep Rising
The West likes to think it is growing increasingly civilized. But its wars grow ever-more barbaric and terrorist. In World War I, about half of the slightly over 20 million deaths were civilians. In World War II, just one generation later, nearly two-thirds of the 60 million deaths were civilians. The Vietnam terror war waged by the USA probably killed far more than the two million official death count, with more than three-quarters of the victims civilians. Likewise, the official death counts in the 9/11 wars against Iraq and Afghanistan—and the covert wars on Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, and of course Palestine—are almost certainly far too low, while the civilian-to-military casualty ratio just keeps getting higher, and is probably in the 80% or higher range. (For high-end casualty estimates that counter the official undercounts in these wars, read Gideon Polya.)
Let’s ask Gemini, which obviously comes with a pro-state bias, who the real terrorists are. Hey Gemini: How many civilians have died in all the wars beginning with World War I, and what percentage were killed by non-state actors?
Gemini: An estimated 110 million to 140 million civilians have died in all wars globally starting from World War I (1914) to the present day, with the vast majority—roughly 95% or more—killed by state actors (governments and their official militaries) rather than non-state actors.
Given Gemini’s bias, we can safely translate “95% or more” as “99%+.” I rest my case: Virtually all terrorism is committed by governments.
But that’s not the way the government’s propaganda apparatus sees it. They want you to believe that the world is a scary-scary place full of evil (non-government) terrorists plotting to bomb you or shoot you or crash your airliners or blow up your buildings. And they want you to run to the real terrorists—the government—for protection.
That’s why they chose 9-1-1 as the date code for their big 2001 psy-op. When you’re terrified and panicked and faced with senseless violence, who do you call? You call the government in hopes they will save you. The three digits 9-1-1 subconsciously represent the trust populations place in their “big mommy and daddy,” their government, to get them out of serious trouble. Specifically, the terrorist perpetrators of 9/11 wanted panicked Americans to volunteer their persons and/or their tax money, not to mention their fervent ideological and emotional support, to their Israeli-occupied government so it could “protect them from further such attacks” by invading the Middle East and destroying Israel’s enemies.
It was in fact Israel’s agents who blew up the Towers after flying remote-controlled planes into buildings. Through Epstein-style blackmail, financial control, and media domination, Israel infiltrated the US government like a parasite hijacking the brain of its host, sending Uncle Sam on a state terrorism spree whose only major beneficiary was the malignant Zionist entity itself.
But even people who imagine that 9/11 was done by al-Qaeda—the same al-Qaeda that the US created and has supported since its inception in the Afghan war against the USSR, the same al-Qaeda whose Syrian chief Trump recently invited to the White House and playfully sprayed with perfume—and who further imagine that al-Qaeda is a non-state entity as opposed to a US-Israeli front—ought to take a hard look at the statistics to get a sense of how nonexistent a threat “non-state terrorism” really is. As I wrote in Questioning the War on Terror:
Statistically, there are good grounds for wondering whether we should bother to worry about terrorism at all. Roughly 3000 Americans have been killed by (allegedly non-state) terrorists during the past century. In other words, a whole century’s worth of terror victims equals three days’ worth of cigarette fatalities, a week’s worth of deaths from bad medical treatment, or a month’s worth of automobile deaths. Shouldn’t we worry far more about cigarettes, doctors, and automobiles than about terrorists?
And how does your chance of being killed by terrorists compare with your chance of being struck by lighting? It turns out that lighting is a vastly greater threat. There are on average about 1000 lightning victims per year in the USA, whereas the average number of terror victims per year—a number wildly skewed upward by the fluke of 9/11—is still only about thirty.
Are terrorists at least more dangerous than… bathtubs? Nope. It turns outthat your chances of drowning in your bathtub are more than ten times as great as your chances of being killed by a terrorist.
Should we declare war against lightning bolts and bathtubs? Should we install PA systems in our bathrooms reminding us that the threat level of bathtub drowning has been raised to orange? Should we create a new Department of Bathtub Security (DBS) empowered to do sneak-and-peak warrantless searches of our bathrooms to make sure that we’re using no-slip bathmats? Should we invade and occupy countries that we falsely blame for bathtub deaths? Would this be any crazier than what we’re doing now, allegedly due to the equally insignificant “terrorist threat”?
So the whole notion of terrorism as a supposedly non-state phenomenon is a scam, a hoax, and a psy-op. Grossly exaggerating the alleged threat posed by non-state terrorists is itself a form of state terrorism, in the sense that the state is using propaganda to terrorize its population for political purposes.
Imagine a sadistic criminal who ties up and tortures his victim, all the while insisting that his actions are motivated by a desire to protect the victim from an imaginary bogeyman. That criminal is the government, the victim is its population, and the imaginary bogeyman is the supposed threat of non-state “terrorists.”
War for a Multipolar World: The Real War on Terror
The covert World War III being waged today appears, on the surface, to be between the Zionist-oligarch-occupied world-domination-seeking West, on the one hand, and the partisans of the multipolar-world, led by China, Russia and Iran, on the other. But beneath the surface, there is a philosophical-ideological war. It isn’t as obvious as the capitalism-vs.-communism Cold War clash, but it’s real nonetheless.
The ideological dimension of World War III can be expressed as follows: Should governments gain legitimacy through terror, or through competent administration in service to the public good?
While no government perfectly embodies either ideal, Israel and its occupied USSA come close to being pure terror states. Both governments purport to be protecting their populations from “terrorist threats” and derive much of their perceived legitimacy from that purported protection. 9/11, and 10/7 (“Israel’s 9/11”) were the sacrificial spectacles that undergird the grossly mendacious ideological foundations of both terror states. Both terror states, built on foundations of state violence and lies, are having trouble maintaining public confidence.
China, for its part, does maintain popular consensus in part through somewhat mythologized but largely accurate accounts of its suffering at the hands of foreign aggressors, from the Opium War and the Century of Humiliation through the brutal Japanese occupation and subsequent US war on China through Korea. But its government primarily derives legitimacy not through violence and sacrifice, but through competent administration in the public interest.
If we ask Western-biased Gemini to contrast public confidence in the respective US and Chinese leadership, we find that worldwide China’s government inspires far more confidence, and that domestically:
United States: Public confidence in U.S. leadership and future direction faces continuous polarization, heavily influenced by shifting political administrations, domestic divisions, and foreign policy friction with traditional allies.
China: Domestic sentiment inside China reflects steady confidence in national economic power, technological growth, and rising global standing, which sustains government legitimacy and popular backing for Beijing’s international posture.
When Covert World War III finally ends with a multipolar victory, insha’allah, let us hope and pray that Chinese-style “competent administration” rather than Zio-American “terror lies in service to Girardian sacrifice” becomes the basis of a reasonably virtuous world authority capable of enforcing international law and punishing the real terrorists.
Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany
By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | September 6, 2026
There’s been a series of coordinated sabotage incidents targeting the German power grid infrastructure over recent weeks and months. The media initially reacted by pointing the finger at Russian involvement, but the evidence is pointing to another source.
“Climate extremism”
The hard evidence indicates no Russian involvement. Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt characterizes the new attacks as acts of “climate extremism,” citing confessory letters sent by a 48-year-old suspect claiming responsibility to protest fossil fuel use.
Attack 1. Turnow-Preilack substation / Jänschwalde (Brandenburg)
On Tuesday morning, September 1, high-voltage lines connected to the Turnow-Preilack substation—servicing the Jänschwalde (Brandenburg) power station region—were targeted using homemade launch devices. Authorities reported that the launch mechanisms used fireworks-style devices to shoot conductive wires into overhead power lines.
Attack 2. Bergheim substation (North Rhine-Westphalia)
Also on Tuesday evening, an attack occurred at a substation in Bergheim, near Cologne. Conductive materials were launched onto high-voltage lines, triggering a short circuit that forced five power generation units to shut down. Investigators recovered several launch devices and pyrotechnics near the scene. A 48-year-old suspect has explicitly claimed responsibility for this site in confession letters sent to authorities and news outlets. German security agencies highlighted key structural parallels between this device setup and the Turnow-Preilack substation incident, leading state security forces to probe links between the two.
Attack 3. Dormagen substation (North Rhine-Westphalia)
In another incident occurring last Thursday evening, a passerby alerted police after spotting suspicious device components aimed at a substation in Dormagen, south of Düsseldorf. Responding officers discovered pipes fitted with cables, timers, and launch mechanisms targeted directly at the high-voltage equipment. The attempt was thwarted before the mechanisms detonated or caused an outage.
During a joint briefing, Interior Minister Dobrindt and North Rhine Westphalia Interior Minister Herbert Reul confirmed that a manhunt was underway for the suspect following the discovery of suspected explosive materials at his residence and the seizure of his truck near the Hambacher Forst.
Major Berlin attack last January
On January, 2026, a major arson attack targeted the electricity infrastructure in southwest Berlin, resulting in one of the city’s longest and most severe power outages in decades. The fire destroyed five 110-kV high-voltage lines and ten 10-kV medium-voltage lines supplying several key substations across the region.
The sabotage cut off power and heating to roughly 45,000 to 50,000 households and over 2,000 businesses in the region. The loss of electrical heating created a major mid-winter public safety emergency. Hospitals and care homes were forced to switch to emergency generators and schools were closed for days while repair crews worked in frozen soil to rebuild the severed lines. Full power was not restored until January 7.
A confession letter posted on the far left-wing platform Indymedia claimed responsibility on behalf of theAntifa-friendly Vulkangruppe (Volcano Group). The letter framed the sabotage as a protest against fossil fuel consumption, corporate power use, and AI data centers. Berlin Mayor and Federal prosecutors designated the event as an act of political terrorism.
Police have little success
The ecoterrorist groups are difficult, to monitor, according to authorities. They operate via small, autonomous, clandestine cell structures without centralized leadership. They publish post-attack manifestos anonymously online, leaving little to no digital footprint prior to an incident. While German federal and state governments are treating the threat with urgency, critics say authorities are not taking the left-wing threat seriously enough.
In response to the January blackout in Berlin and prior high-profile grid sabotage, around 500 police officers raided 17 to 19 locations across Berlin, Hamburg, Brandenburg, and North Rhine-Westphalia. Sites searched included radical meeting spaces, such as the Kalabal!k anarchist library in Berlin, as well as residences linked to key suspects aged 28 to 36.
No arrests
Police seized dozens of laptops, phones, encrypted storage drives, and timers. However, no arrests were made during or immediately after the operation because prosecutors lacked sufficient direct, physical proof linking specific individuals to the active crime scenes.
Double standard
Federal prosecutors claim they need concrete evidence that a suspect was physically at the site or directly participated in constructing the device—mere association with radical spaces or possession of extremist literature is insufficient under German law – a standard that is rarely applied, however, when it comes to rightwing radicals.
Worse, even vocal conservative voices see their homes raided by the police before dawn for just making critical comments (all protected by “freedom of speech”) on social media. Here, German police and prosecutors are especially quick to raid homes, detain individuals indefinitely, confiscate property, close bank accounts and seize mobile devices.
Seyed M. Marandi: U.S. Intel Warns Iran Is Preparing a MAJOR Escalation
Dialogue Works | September 5, 2026
Anti-War Activists Are Getting ‘Debanked’ In The UK
The UK’s decent into authoritarianism continues
By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | September 5, 2026
The UK has been, for years, waging an all-out war on its own people, particularly on those who are anti-war and anti-Zionist.
Journalists like Richard Medhurst and Asa Winstanley have had their devices seized by UK “counterterrorism” authorities for their reporting on the Israeli genocide in Gaza, while thousands of peaceful activists have been arrested on terrorism charges for holding signs stating they support Palestine Action, a non-violent direct action group which was proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the UK government at the behest of the Zionist lobby.
The war on anti-war and anti-Zionist figures continues, with multiple anti-war figures recently losing their bank accounts within a short time period.
George Galloway, a former Labour MP, known for his staunch firebrand opposition to Zionism and empire, had his bank account closed without explanation, preventing him from receiving his parliamentary and old age pensions, which he paid into throughout his career.
On X, Galloway wrote: “39 years ago I opened a personal bank account with Bank of Scotland in Byres Rd, Glasgow. Yesterday, without explanation or notice, they closed my accounts. My parliamentary and old age pensions are paid into these accounts. The mortgage on our family home is paid out of them. The mortgage is with them. They haven’t heard the last of this.”
Shortly before Galloway was debanked, the independent news outlet The Canary reported that it had its Bank account closed for the second time within months, the first time being in July.
“This has meant that once again, some staff were not paid for August,” the outlet noted, adding that, like Galloway, it received no explanation for why it lost its Bank account.
Due to the debanking, the outlet was forced to “suspend operations” which “is a necessary step to protect what remains of the Canary and to give us the opportunity to rebuild on a stable foundation.”
It wrote that “recent events have created circumstances in which we have been left with no responsible alternative but to suspend the Canary’s operations with immediate effect,” adding that, “It is the direct consequence of the debanking of the Canary’s funds, the resulting financial disruption, and the serious internal consequences that followed.”
It seems clear that this is a coordinated effort, almost certainly spearheaded by the British state, to debank voices critical of Zionism and warmongering, in yet another attempt to shut them down.



