Settlers kill Palestinian in Masafer Yatta
International Solidarity Movement – Palestine | July 28, 2025
Israeli settlers murdered activist and dear friend Awda Hathaleen and critically injured Ahmad Hathaleen today during a settler invasion on the village of Umm al-Khair. Another member of the community, Ibrahim Al-Faqir also died as a result of a severe stroke during the attack.
The deadly attack took place after illegal Israeli settlers, including internationally sanctioned settler Yinon Levi, invaded the Bedouin village, located in the Masafer Yatta region. They were using an excavator in an attempt to destroy Palestinian infrastructure, including the communities’ water pipes. When residents gathered to stop the demolition, the excavator intentionally hit Ahmad in the head, causing serious injury and loss of consciousness.
Eyewitnesses said Levi then shot Awda in the chest causing critical injuries. He was evacuated to the Soroka Medical Center, where he was pronounce dead on arrival. A relative of Awda confirmed his death to the International Solidarity Movement.
Israeli forces later arrived at the scene, arresting 7 Palestinians and 2 internationals at the request of Levi.
Levi is under international sactions for crimes against Palestinian communities. In January of this year, Donald Trump reversed US sanctions on Levi and other settlers. Israel has never brought criminal proceedings against him despite years of violence and terrorizing Palesitian communties.
Awda, 31 years old, was a teaching staff member at al-Saray’a Secondary School in the Bedouin desert of Masafer Yatta. He was a father of three children, the eldest of whom is 6 years old.
On behalf of his community, Awda was relentless in his pursuit to tell the world of Israel’s campaign of ethnic cleansing and violence against the people of Umm al-Khair, including the confiscation of land, choking of water supplies and poisoning of trees and livestock.
For many years the ISM has stood in solidarity with the Bedouin community in Masafer Yatta, who live under constant threat of ethnic cleansing. Umm al-Khair is one of the many villages in Area C under total Israeli control, meaning almost every structure has a demolition order. Meanwhile Israel provides the neighbouring illegal settlement of Carmel with running water from pipes built over Umm al-Khair land. An ISM spokesperson said: “Awda was an incredibly kind friend and couragous member of his community. He was forced to live his short life under the constant threat of violence and displacement, yet he never gave up hope for justice and a free Palestine.”
In the hours before he was killed, Awda sent an urgent call to action, “If they cut the pipe the community here will literally be without a drop of water”. The international community must now take up Awda’s call to take action to protect the village of Umm al-Khair and the residents of the wider Masafer Yatta region against Israel’s escalating campaign of ethnic cleansing. Settlers generally walk free, and continue to harass Palestinian communities. Sanctions against individual violent settlers are not enough. The international community must demand accountability.
UK Introduces Online Speech Monitoring Police
By Cam Wakefield | Reclaim The Net | July 28, 2025
If you’re in the UK and you’ve ever dared to type a mildly spicy opinion about immigration into the vast and idiotic circus that is social media, you might now be under surveillance by a shiny new government outfit with a name so Orwellian it sounds like it was cooked up during a slow afternoon in North Korea’s Ministry of Truth.
The UK has officially launched a National Internet Intelligence Investigations team, a title that manages to be both comically vague and terrifyingly specific.
This is the stuff that authors of dystopian novels have been warning people about for decades.
The Frankenstein of a task force, stitched together from officers across the country and headquartered in Westminster’s National Police Coordination Centre, has been given the noble mission of snooping through your posts, likes, and digital mutterings for any whiff of “anti-migrant sentiment.”
The government has decided that free thought is a public safety risk.
Gone are the days when bobbies on the beat focussed on burglaries, stabbings, or the occasional drunken scuffle. Now, they’ve been upgraded, or rather, downloaded, into an era where your keyboard is the weapon and your opinion the crime.
The Home Office insists this is all very necessary. According to a leaked letter, the Telegraph obtained, from Dame Diana Johnson, Policing Minister and part-time press-release poet, the squad will focus on “exploiting internet intelligence” to help local police forces anticipate unrest.
“Exploit.” Not “monitor,” not “observe,” but exploit.
It’s all part of a grand, techno-utopian fantasy where public order is maintained not by policing actual crimes, but by interpreting emojis and out-of-context Facebook posts.
Supporters of this initiative are quick to remind us that tensions are rising over immigration. Protests have flared up from Norwich to Bournemouth, with citizens wondering why their local hotels now resemble temporary refugee camps paid for with their tax funds.
Many Brits are asking uncomfortable questions, questions that the current government would apparently prefer whispered, if not deleted altogether.
Which brings us neatly to the absurd theatre of this whole operation: the idea that public discontent can be managed not by addressing policy failures, but by stalking Instagram stories and dispatching undercover agents to Nextdoor forums.
Essex Police actually sent officers to the home of journalist Allison Pearson over something she posted online. Meanwhile, a mother named Lucy Connolly received a prison sentence longer than some violent offenders after sharing a message deemed offensive following the Southport attacks.
Naturally, the political opposition is smelling blood. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp has weighed in.
“Two-tier Keir can’t police the streets,” he fumed, “so he’s trying to police opinions instead.”
He’s not wrong. This isn’t law enforcement; it’s law enforcement theatre, a stage production in which your tweets are the script and the cops are the critics.
Nigel Farage, Reform Party leader, ever the populist thundercloud, put it in even starker terms: “This is the beginning of the state controlling free speech. It is sinister, dangerous, and must be fought.”
Let’s rewind for a moment. During the pandemic, the government rolled out “disinformation teams” that quietly monitored online content and flagged anything that strayed too far from the Approved Messaging Bible. They assured people it was for their safety. They always do.
Now, in what appears to be the spiritual sequel to that damp squib of a policy, we’re being served a reheated version, garnished with civil unrest panic and a dash of woke paranoia. And it arrives just as the Online Safety Act lumbers into force, a lumbering beast of a bill that seems hellbent on turning the UK into a digital kindergarten, where only soft voices and pre-approved opinions are allowed.
The Free Speech Union has already sounded the alarm after users discovered protest videos involving asylum hotels were mysteriously unavailable in the UK. Not removed by the platform. Not censored by other users. Just: poof, gone, as if reality itself had been deemed problematic.
Where does this all end? Are we one government memo away from officers arresting people for sarcastic memes? Will sarcasm itself soon be listed as a hate crime?
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: a state that polices speech will eventually police thought. And a government that fears its people’s opinions is a government that knows it has failed them.
The US Is Buying Ukraine 33,000 Modules to Create AI-Powered Drones
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | July 28, 2025
Ukraine will soon receive tens of thousands of drone modules powered by artificial intelligence and resistant to electronic warfare.
According to the Financial Times, the Department of Defense is funding the sale. The drone kits are produced by the US-German software company Auterion. Chief executive Lorenz Meier said the firm received a $50 million contract from the Pentagon for the order.
Meier said Auterion would complete the delivery of Skynode S modules to Ukraine by the end of the year. He explained the modules are “strike kits” that allow the drone to operate autonomously. Meier referred to the system as the “next evolution in warfare.”
“What we are providing is leapfrogging what’s on the battlefield right now, which is to go to AI-based targeting and swarming,” he added. Auterion claims drones equipped with the module can hit targets one kilometer away.
Drones have become a pivotal weapon in the Ukraine war. Russia is firing hundreds of drones into Ukraine most nights. Ukrainian President Zelensky has rolled out a plan to build thousands of interceptor drones to combat the Russian salvos.
Preliminary reflections on the war between Cambodia and Thailand
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 28, 2025
The current clash between Thailand and Cambodia is more than an isolated episode of instability; it is a direct reflection of the accumulated tension between two civilizations descended from ancient empires. The battleground, the temple of Preah Vihear, goes beyond a mere territorial dispute: it is a spiritual, political, and historical symbol that has reemerged as a focal point of a conflict with deep roots. Behind the artillery fire and border skirmishes lies an old rivalry dating back to the decline of the Khmer Empire and the rise of Ayutthaya — a clash between two legacies that helped shape Southeast Asia.
Located in the Dângrêk Mountains, the temple of Preah Vihear was initially built in the 9th century by King Jayavarman II, founder of the Khmer Empire, with the purpose of worshiping Shiva and consolidating the doctrine of devaraja, the divine kingship of the ruler as an absolute sovereign. Although Cambodia’s historical path later embraced Theravāda Buddhism, the temple never lost its symbolic value. For Cambodians, it represents the spiritual continuity of their nation. For Thais, descendants of the conquering Ayutthaya Empire, the site retains elements of a shared heritage they also claim as their own. Throughout the 20th century, and especially following the colonial border demarcations imposed by European powers, this small enclave became a persistent flashpoint, reigniting nationalist passions on both sides.
But it is not just history that fuels the present. The current context contains explosive elements. Thailand, though formally part of BRICS+ and economically aligned with China, still maintains strong ties with the West and is embroiled in a complex internal struggle for power between civilians and the military. The recent suspension of Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, following embarrassing leaks related to the border conflict, has undermined the authority of the civilian government and brought the military back into the spotlight. The Thai army, frequently involved in coups and weakened by recent scandals, may have seen in this confrontation an opportunity to reassert its position before the national public. Launching a limited offensive against a weaker neighbor like Cambodia could be interpreted as an attempt to boost morale and reclaim control over the nationalist narrative.
On the other side, Cambodia remains a strategic partner of China in the region, deepening its economic and military dependence on Beijing. Infrastructure projects like the canal linking Cambodia’s interior to the sea — bypassing the delta controlled by Vietnam — carry significant geopolitical implications. Beijing sees Phnom Penh as a loyal ally in the Southeast Asian chessboard, reinforcing Cambodia’s resolve not to yield to Thai pressure — especially when what’s at stake is a symbol of national identity. Despite the imbalance in military capabilities, Cambodia is relying on international diplomacy and historical symbolism to hold its ground.
This escalation, therefore, is not the product of external manipulation (though such influence exists and plays a role), but of an autonomous process deeply embedded in the national psyches of both peoples. It is a conflict where religion, military pride, domestic politics, and civilizational memory interlace in complex ways. The temple on the contested border is not just a stone structure atop a mountain, but a mirror of Southeast Asia’s soul — a soul torn between a glorious past and a turbulent present.
In times of global security crises, historical and local tensions more easily erupt into open conflict. The conflict in Asia is not a direct result of NATO–Eurasia tensions, but it is influenced by them — and thus, it could soon become a new theater for great power confrontation.
The outcome remains uncertain, but what is clear is that the ghosts of history continue to shape the present.
Pentagon Eyes Ukraine as Drone Testing Ground After Alaska Failures
Sputnik – 28.07.2025
WASHINGTON – The US Department of Defense (DOD) views Ukraine to be a potential polygon for drone testing after it ran into difficulties during the June trials in Alaska, Defense News reported, citing sources in Pentagon.
Earlier this summer, five US companies underwent drone testing in Alaska to see if their prototypes were able to withstand GPS disruption and if they were ready to transition to the military services.
“Providing an opportunity for these companies to assess their products in a contested environment against a notional threat is really valuable, one, for the DOD to assess their product in that way. But it’s also important for the companies to see where they’re succeeding or where they’re falling short so they can make tweaks and have a better product,” one of the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) officials told Defense News.
Commercial companies, especially small ones, do not have access to test spaces that are similar to field conditions, so the Pentagon needs to provide such conditions if it wants to achieve new technologies fast and efficiently, the report said.
“If we want to succeed, we have to embed engineers with warfighters, and we have to be out in the field testing. We have to do it all the time,” DIU’s Trent Emeneker was quoted as saying by Defense News.
To solve this issue, Emeneker proposed testing drones on the Ukrainian front lines, adding that “there’s no better place in the world” to do it. However, according to the report, it is difficult for the Department of Defense to officially send start-ups to Ukraine for in-country testing after US President Donald Trump assumed office, and the political tension between the current administration and the Ukrainian government increased.
On Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he had reached an agreement with US President Donald Trump on the supply of Ukrainian-made drones worth $10-30 billion to the United States.
Is Europe pushing for Palestinian statehood or Palestinian surrender?
By Malek al-Khoury | The Cradle | July 28, 2025
Since its inception in 1948, Israel has never operated within fixed borders. Expansion has always been its doctrine – not constrained by law, but propelled by force and endorsed by unwavering western support. Israel has refused to define its boundaries for almost eight decades because its very identity is rooted in a colonial ambition that has never truly ended.
From the Nakba (Catastrophe) to the Naksa (Setback), from territorial invasions to the annexation of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank, the occupation state has continued to redraw its borders according to power, not legitimacy.
This expansionist project has only grown stronger with the rise of the messianic-nationalist current inside Israel, which sees full control over “Greater Israel” as a historical right that cannot be compromised.
Today, 77 years since the Nakba, Israel has advanced to full-throttle expansion mode – dispossessing Palestinians, destroying entire towns and villages, entrenching illegal Jewish settlements, and enforcing apartheid. Yet paradoxically, European states like France and the UK are preparing to recognize a “Palestinian state” precisely when Palestinian political geography is at its most fragmented, and when the Zionist project is at its most aggressive.
So what does this recognition actually mean? Is it a strategic achievement for Palestinians, or a diplomatic ruse that rebrands surrender as success?
A state without borders, a project without restraint
The 1917 Balfour Declaration marked the formal launch of a settler-colonial project in Palestine. What followed was not immigration but calculated dispossession – from British-facilitated land seizures and massacres, to the mass expulsions of the 1948 Nakba, which ethnically cleansed over 750,000 Palestinians.
This was not mere colonialism. It was ethnic replacement: Land was seized under imperial protection, then militarily conquered. This campaign never ended. It continued with the occupation of Gaza, Jerusalem, and the West Bank, and escalated after 1967. Israel’s goal has never been coexistence. It has always been Jewish supremacy.
The 1947 UN Partition Plan (Resolution 181) granted over 55 percent of historic Palestine to the Zionist movement, despite Jews owning just six percent of the land. The Zionist movement accepted this on paper to gain international legitimacy, then immediately violated its terms, occupying 78 percent of the territory by force.
To this day, the occupation state has not adopted a formal constitution, and the reason is that basing itself on the Partition Plan would have constrained its expansionist ambitions. The Zionist doctrine never recognized final borders, instead establishing a state with no official frontiers – because its ambitions stretch beyond Palestinian geography to include parts of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt.
The internal debate in Israel over declaring a “Jewish state” is not merely a legal argument, but an attempt to solidify an exclusionary and replacement-based identity – one that legally enshrines racial discrimination and denies Palestinians their status as an indigenous people.
Resistance realignment: 7 October and the Two-State shift
The earthquake triggered by Operation Al-Aqsa Flood shook not only Israel but also the political discourse of the Palestinian movement. Strikingly, Palestinian factions – including Hamas – have begun explicitly voicing support for the “Two-State Solution” after years of insisting on liberating historic Palestine in its entirety.
In an unprecedented statement, senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya said in May 2024:
“We are ready to engage positively with any serious initiative for a two-state solution, provided it entails a real Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital and without settlements.”
This tactical adaptation signals a significant shift. Key Palestinian actors are now openly considering a truncated state. Is this a reflection of changing power dynamics? Or an imposed realignment under regional and international duress?
Recognition as Leverage: France, Saudi Arabia, and normalization
Last week, in a post on X, French President Emmanuel Macron said:
“Consistent with its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine. I will make this solemn announcement before the United Nations General Assembly this coming September … We need an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages, and massive humanitarian aid for the people of Gaza. We must also ensure the demilitarization of Hamas, secure and rebuild Gaza. And finally, we must build the State of Palestine, guarantee its viability, and ensure that by accepting its demilitarization and fully recognizing Israel, it contributes to the security of all in the region. There is no alternative.”
France’s anticipated recognition of a Palestinian state in September is not driven by principle, but is a hard, cold geopolitical maneuver. It would appear that Paris is seeking closer ties with Riyadh, which has tethered normalization with Tel Aviv to progress on the Palestinian file. French recognition is thus a calculated signal to Saudi Arabia – not a gesture of solidarity with Palestinians.
In this equation, Palestine becomes currency. Its statehood is not affirmed as a right, but dangled as a precondition in normalization deals between Arab monarchies and the occupation state.
Strategic alignments: The Ankara–London Axis
With a third of MPs calling on British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to recognize Palestine, pressure is also piling on London.
In a statement, Starmer said:
“Alongside our closest allies, I am working on a pathway to peace in the region, focused on the practical solutions that will make a real difference to the lives of those that are suffering in this war. That pathway will set out the concrete steps needed to turn the ceasefire so desperately needed, into a lasting peace. Recognition of a Palestinian state has to be one of those steps. I am unequivocal about that.”
Britain, too, is not moving toward recognition out of moral clarity, but to reinforce its post-Brexit strategic axis with Turkiye. Ankara, a key trading partner of Israel and political backer of Hamas, views the recognition of Palestine as a tool to elevate its regional stature and energy leverage. For London, deepening ties with Turkiye promises economic and geopolitical dividends. The result is a converging Paris–Riyadh and Ankara–London recognition track.
Thus, two informal axes are forming: Paris–Riyadh and Ankara–London, both converging on the recognition of a Palestinian state. Yet neither axis approaches it from a principled belief in Palestinian rights, but rather through the lens of power, influence, and realpolitik.
The Palestinian state: Recognition without sovereignty
Even if every European country were to recognize Palestine, it would amount to little more than symbolism without enforcement. There would be no defined borders for the state, no control over its own territory, and no halt to the settlement expansion or annexation policies pursued by the occupation state.
Tel Aviv rejects the premise entirely. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that any future Palestinian state would be “a platform to destroy Israel,” and that sovereign security control must remain with Israel. He has repeatedly ruled out a return to the conditions that existed prior to 7 October.
The reality is that 68 percent of the West Bank, classified as Area C, remains under full Israeli control. More than 750,000 settlers are embedded across that territory, under the full protection of the occupation army. How can a state exist on occupied, fragmented land, under constant siege, and without sovereignty?
“I’ve just returned from a lecture tour around the world, and I can confidently say Israel’s global image and position are at their lowest point in history,” writes Israeli journalist Ben-Dror Yemini.
Yet despite this, Netanyahu’s far-right government is doubling down – pushing for full annexation of the occupied West Bank, eyeing new territorial footholds in Sinai, southern Syria, even Jordan, while maintaining military positions in south Lebanon.
Israel’s global brand may be eroding, but its strategic project is advancing.
If Israel is expanding and entrenching, while the Palestinian movement scales back demands and regional states normalize ties, what exactly has been achieved?
Resistance factions that once rejected Tel Aviv’s existence now propose statehood on its terms. European recognition comes with no teeth. Settlements grow. Displacement continues. This is not liberation. It is the burial of the dream under the guise of diplomacy.
The interim solution will become the final arrangement. The Palestinian “state” becomes a diplomatic euphemism – an empty structure praised in speeches, but denied on the ground.
Hamas denies operating camp in Aley, asserts Lebanese sovereignty
Al Mayadeen | July 28, 2025
Hamas has firmly denied claims circulating in the media that the Lebanese Army dismantled a Hamas armed training camp in Aley, Lebanon, and called on journalists to prioritize accuracy and professional integrity in their coverage.
In a statement, the Palestinian Resistance movement responded to reports circulated by some media outlets, newspapers, and websites claiming that “the Lebanese army dismantled an armed training camp in the Aley region belonging to Hamas.”
Hamas firmly denied having any armed training camp in the mentioned area or elsewhere in Lebanon, emphasizing that it has no intention of establishing such facilities in the first place.
The movement further emphasized its strong commitment to cooperation and coordination with the Lebanese state and its relevant authorities, as this contributes to maintaining civil peace and strengthening the fraternal Palestinian-Lebanese relationship. It also asserted respect for Lebanese sovereignty under all circumstances.
Hamas also called on all media outlets to adhere to accuracy and objectivity, ensuring that their reporting is guided by professional responsibility to avoid potentially severe repercussions that could further escalate tensions in Lebanon at the hands of the Israeli enemy.
Yemeni army announces ‘new phase’ of attacks on Israel-linked ships
Press TV – July 27, 2025
The Yemeni Armed Forces have announced plans to escalate military operations against Israel in response to the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
In a statement issued on Sunday evening, the Yemeni Armed Forces called on nations around the world to exert pressure on the Israeli regime to cease its aggression and lift the blockade on Gaza to prevent further escalation.
They emphasized that their decision to intensify attacks on Israel stems from their moral and humanitarian obligation to address the suffering of the Palestinian people.
The Yemeni Armed Forces highlighted the rapid developments in occupied Palestine, particularly in the Gaza Strip, where the ongoing conflict has resulted in the deaths of thousands of Palestinians amid a prolonged siege and military assault.
They said that in light of the continued, horrific massacres occurring in our contemporary history, Yemen finds itself facing a profound religious, moral, and humanitarian responsibility toward the oppressed people who are subjected daily to relentless killing and destruction by air, land, and sea bombardments.
The severe blockade has led to starvation and thirst in steadfast and proud Gaza, which is unacceptable to any human being, especially Arabs and Muslims, the statement read.
Consequently, the Yemeni Armed Forces said they have decided to escalate military support operations and implement a fourth phase of a naval blockade against Israel. This phase includes targeting all ships belonging to any company that engages with Israeli ports, regardless of the company’s nationality, in locations accessible to the Yemeni armed forces.
The Yemeni Armed Forces have issued a warning to all companies to cease dealings with Israeli ports immediately upon the announcement of this statement. Failure to comply will result in their vessels being targeted anywhere within reach of Yemeni missiles and drones.
The Armed Forces reiterated their call for countries to intervene to prevent this escalation, urging them to pressure Israel to halt its aggression and lift the blockade on the Gaza Strip. “There is no free person on this earth who can accept what is happening,” they stated.
The actions of the Yemeni Armed Forces reflect a moral and humanitarian commitment to stand against the injustice faced by the Palestinian people. They declared that all military operations would cease immediately upon the cessation of aggression against Gaza and the lifting of the blockade, the statement said.
The Yemeni army condemned the persistent aggression against Gaza, attributing it to what they described as the shameful silence of the Arab, Islamic, and international communities.
Since the onset of the conflict in Gaza, the Yemeni Armed Forces have launched numerous attacks on vessels bound for Israel and have targeted locations deep within the occupied Palestinian territories using missiles and drones.
‘Tough Thing to Defend’: FDA Holds Heated Debate on ‘Untested, Unapproved’ Fluoride Supplements for Kids
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 24, 2025
The decision whether or not to prescribe unapproved fluoride supplements to children needs to be based on data — “It can’t be done with opinion,” Dr. George Tidmarsh said Wednesday during a public meeting held by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to solicit public input on safety concerns associated with the supplements.
Tidmarsh was tapped this week to lead the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, which regulates over-the-counter and prescription drugs.
In May, the FDA moved to ban fluoride supplements after a systematic review of recent science by top government scientists, published in January in JAMA Pediatrics, reported that early fluoride exposure was linked to a decrease in children’s IQ scores.
During Wednesday’s meeting, Tidmarsh said:
“That’s a huge issue. Everybody should be concerned about that. What this is saying is that the fluoride in water was causing a cognitive decrease in the younger children. And the randomized studies say that there is no benefit. So that’s a tough thing to defend.”
“Our job here is to use evidence,” he added, citing the recently updated Cochrane Review on fluoride, which found that water fluoridation offered little to no protection against cavities in children.
Although the FDA never approved fluoride supplements, which come in tablets and lozenges, doctors have for decades routinely prescribed them to children — including babies as young as 6 months old — to prevent cavities.
Research has shown for more than two decades that any benefit to teeth from fluoride comes from topical applications — like toothpaste — not from ingesting the drug.
The supplements are known to cause dental fluorosis, a tooth discoloration that is a marker of fluoride overexposure. Overwhelming evidence now shows that ingesting fluoride is linked to lower IQ in children, neurobehavioral issues and thyroid problems.
Fluoride advocates say safety studies exist, but don’t cite them
Wednesday’s day-long meeting, facilitated by the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA, turned contentious at times, as researchers presented evidence of fluoride’s risks to children’s health and debated whether to pull the supplements from the market.
Eighteen speakers argued for and against the supplements, including top researchers on fluoride’s toxic effects. Speakers included Kyla Taylor, Ph.D., an epidemiologist at the National Institutes of Health and an author on the National Toxicology Program’s recent report and JAMA study showing that fluoride exposure for pregnant mothers and infants is linked to lowered IQ among children.
Christine Till, Ph.D., a professor from York University in Toronto and author of a highly cited 2019 study that reported similar findings, shared research on fluoride’s damaging effects on the thyroid.
Commenters also included pro-fluoride lobbyists and advocates, such as Dr. David Krol, with the American Academy of Pediatrics, and Dr. Scott Tomar, with the American Dental Association (ADA).
In his opening remarks, Tidmarsh warned about the need for data in response to presentations by supplement advocates, including Dr. James Bekker, a pediatric dentist and a member of the Utah Dental Association.
Bekker said, “We’ve got to have a balance. We’ve got to have a situation where the right amount of fluoride is present during development. As we look at ways in today’s world of achieving that balance, supplements play a very important role.”
“When we don’t have fluoride, there are certain things that happen that are very disturbing,” Bekker added. “We have an increase in tooth decay, and we have an increase in the use of emergency services to receive care for dental emergencies.”
However, Tidmarsh called out Bekker, comparing the lack of evidence in his presentation with the presentation by Dr. Bill Osmunson, a dentist associated with the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), who pointed out that no randomized controlled studies had ever been conducted on the supplements.
Bekker countered that he didn’t want to overwhelm people with information. “That data is very available. It’s important to understand that,” he said, citing no specific studies.
‘Just take them off the market’
The move to ban the supplements comes on the heels of a federal court decision last September that water fluoridation at current U.S. levels poses an “unreasonable risk” of reduced IQ in children and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must take regulatory action to address that risk.
Since then, more than 60 communities and two states — Utah and Florida — have voted to stop adding fluoride to their water. The EPA is appealing the decision.
Water fluoridation has been practiced in the U.S. for decades, long advocated by lobbying organizations like the ADA. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) continues to celebrate it as one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th century.
As water fluoridation comes under threat, fluoridation advocates have taken up the cause of defending the untested, unapproved supplements.
“Honestly, it’s ridiculous that we are even having this discussion — the supplements have never been tested, they have never been approved, and we know that early fluoride exposure can harm children,” Dr. Griffin Cole, conference chairman of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, told The Defender after the meeting. “Just take them off the market.”
Cole, who presented data on fluoride’s neurotoxicity, said these debates had become tiresome because fluoride advocates repeat the mantra that it is “safe and effective,” and are unresponsive to evidence of fluoride’s harm.
“I can understand why most people who aren’t informed in fluoride science would simply succumb to business as usual,” he said.
Advocates call supplements ‘safe and effective’ despite no safety testing
Dr. Charlotte Lewis, a pediatrician and one of the panelists who defended supplements, was slated to comment on the content of the presentations about fluoride’s risks. Instead, she argued that systemic absorption of fluoride is paramount.
“I want to make sure you understand that when we drink fluoridated water, we are allowing ourselves both a topical and a systemic source of fluoride. And both of these are important.” She said systemic ingestion is particularly important for young children.
Lewis said researchers arguing there is little to no benefit to swallowing fluoride are “biased.”
“What we’ve seen today is people cherry-picking studies and making conclusions without presenting us with the complete data that we need,” she added.
Those observations followed Taylor’s presentation, in which she explained that the National Toxicology Program and the JAMA publication presented an analysis of every available study, and they made all of their data publicly available.
Cole responded to Lewis, quoting her own Pediatrics in Review paper, in which she concluded the disadvantages of supplements were “substantial,” the benefits of fluoride were primarily topical and not systemic, that fluoride supplements cause more dental fluorosis and that their routine use is inconsistent with the way fluoride works — which is topically.
Michael Connett, lead attorney for plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the EPA, also read from Lewis’ paper during the meeting:
“The preponderance of strong research evidence supports the relative advantages of fluoride toothpaste over fluoride supplements, and this led Canada, England, Australia, New Zealand, and the European Union to recommend against regular use of fluoride supplements in favor of promoting fluoride toothpaste use in young children. The United States should do the same.
“FDA should ban these unapproved drugs from the market.”
Faced with her own research conclusion, Lewis conceded, “I personally think there’s a lot of disadvantages to supplements,” and said she would like to see the U.S. move to a model that promotes fluoride toothpaste.
Several public commenters raised concerns about the health impacts of fluoride. Then representatives from the ADA, American Academy of Pediatrics, other professional medical organizations, several dentists and dental hygienists submitted comments to the FDA advocating for the supplements to remain available.
They stated that the tablets have been proven “safe and effective.” None commented on the fact that they have never been studied.
Fluoride supplements carry ‘more risk than benefit,’ study says
The FDA facilitator referred to fluoride supplements by their official classification, “orally ingestible unapproved prescription drug products containing fluoride,” underscoring the fact that the drugs have never been subjected to an FDA approval process to determine if the benefits outweigh the risks.
The supplements were launched in the 1940s and later effectively grandfathered into the regulatory process. They never underwent the testing for safety and effectiveness typically required by FDA-regulated drugs, and the agency never granted them formal approval.
Before 1938, sodium fluoride had never been used in dentistry. Instead, it was commonly used as a roach and rodent poison. In 2016, FAN filed a citizens’ petition demanding the removal “of unapproved, unsafe, unnecessary, and ineffective sodium fluoride-containing” supplements from the market.
The petition cited a letter the FDA sent to Kirkman Labs, a fluoride supplement manufacturer, informing the company that it couldn’t sell its products because they were new, unapproved drugs not generally recognized as “safe and effective” to prevent dental decay.
The agency concluded that fluoride tablets didn’t meet the “generally recognized as safe” classification.
During public comments on Wednesday, Jay Sanders, FAN education & outreach director, cited a review in the Journal of Public Health Dentistry that found fluoride supplements “when ingested for a preeruptive effect by infants and young children in the United States, carry more risk than benefit.”
Sanders also noted that the CDC and the National Resource Council have both concluded that fluoride predominantly works topically, not systemically.
“A non-FDA approved drug with poor efficacy and with the potential to permanently damage the brain and disrupt the endocrine system should not be dispensed to children in the United States,” he said.
Tidmarsh underscored that understanding the risk-benefit analysis was key. “We’re not talking about taking a drug off the market that was already FDA-approved. In that context, we need to make sure there is a rigorous analysis.”
He added that makers of these drugs could always do real safety and efficacy testing on the products and submit them to the FDA for approval. “If we decide to take sodium fluoride supplements off the market, there’s nothing that would prevent a group from doing the rigorous studies and bringing it back to the FDA.”
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.
FLAWED STUDY CLAIMS ALUMINUM IN VACCINES IS SAFE
The HighWire | July 24, 2025
As industry voices scramble to defend aluminum in childhood vaccines, a new Danish study is held up as “proof” of safety, until you look closer. Exclusions, flawed comparisons, and the lack of U.S. relevance raise serious questions. Is the science settled, or just carefully curated?
Calls for journal to retract Danish study after corrected data show link between aluminum in vaccines and autism
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 24, 2025
The authors of a recent Danish study widely reported on by mainstream media claimed they found no link between the aluminum in vaccines and autism.
However, corrected data added after the study’s original July 15 publication date show the authors got it wrong — in fact, the data in the study of 1.2 million children clearly indicate a link between aluminum in vaccines and autism, according to scientists with Children’s Health Defense (CHD) who reviewed the study and the corrected data.
On July 17, the Annals of Internal Medicine, which published the Danish study, added a disclaimer stating that it “included an incorrect version of the Supplementary Material at the time of initial publication.”
The updated materials are available with the link to the study at “Correction: Aluminum-Adsorbed Vaccines and Chronic Diseases in Childhood.”
CHD Senior Research Scientist Karl Jablonowski broke the news of the buried autism link on Monday’s episode of “Good Morning, CHD.” Today, Jablonowski told The Defender :
“According to the corrected data, nearly 10 (9.7) of every 10,000 children who were vaccinated with a higher dose of aluminum (compared to a moderate dose) developed a neurodevelopmental disorder — mostly autism — between ages 2 and 5.”
On Monday, The Defender reached out to lead author Anders Hviid, a professor and department head of epidemiology at the Statens Serum Institut, for comment on the allegation that the corrected data show a link between increased aluminum exposure and autism. In response, we received an automated email from Hviid stating that he was “out-of-office for the summer,” until Aug. 11.
The study’s corresponding author, Niklas Worm Andersson, M.D, Ph.D., an epidemiology researcher at the Statens Serum Institut, did not respond to a request for comment.
On July 14 — a day before the study was published and three days before the journal issued a correction — Hviid told numerous media outlets that the study showed aluminum in vaccines does not cause autism.
As of press time today, the authors of the study had not revised their findings to concur with the corrected materials that contradict the findings they shared with media outlets.
NBC News, which reported on the uncorrected version of the study on July 14, criticized U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for saying during a 2024 “Joe Rogan Experience” interview that the aluminum in vaccines is “extremely neurotoxic.”
Last month, Kennedy appointed new members to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) vaccine advisory committee. Last month, during the first meeting of the new members, they voted to remove thimerosal, a preservative that contains mercury, from vaccines. On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it formalized the recommendation.
Reuters reported that Kennedy also considered asking the committee to examine vaccines that contain aluminum, but to date, the CDC has not announced any new recommendations related to aluminum.
Danish researchers ‘completely obfuscated what they really found’
According to the authors of the Danish study:
“This nationwide cohort study did not find evidence supporting an increased risk for autoimmune, atopic or allergic, or neurodevelopmental disorders associated with early childhood exposure to aluminum-adsorbed vaccines.”
However, after reviewing the corrected data, Brian Hooker, Ph.D., CHD’s chief scientific officer, told The Defender the authors “completely obfuscated what they really found — a statistically significant relationship between aluminum exposure and autism.”
The buried link appears on Figure 11 (page 19) of the corrected supplemental materials.
The original version showed that children who received a large dose of aluminum were not at greater risk of getting a neurodevelopmental diagnosis, including autism, than kids who received a small or moderate dose.
Yet the corrected version showed that kids who received a large dose had a statistically significantly higher risk of being diagnosed with autism or other “pervasive” developmental disorders compared to those who received a moderate dose of aluminum.
Jablonowski said he and Hooker determined that the results were statistically significant — meaning they couldn’t be attributed to chance — by looking at the confidence intervals for each statistic.
A confidence interval “shows the range of values you expect the true estimate to fall between if you redo the study many times.”
The corrected figure also showed that children who received a large dose of aluminum had a statistically significantly higher risk of Asperger’s syndrome compared to kids who received a small dose of aluminum. However, kids in the large-dose group weren’t at a higher risk of any other neurodevelopmental issues compared to kids who received a small dose.
The low-dose group included roughly only 42,000 children. That could make it difficult to detect a statistical signal, Jablonowski explained.
“It’s not surprising that we see a strong signal among the groups that had more participants but not among the group that had fewer participants,” he said.
The moderate-dose group consisted of about 700,000 children, while there were about 460,000 children in the large-dose group.
How did authors make autism link disappear from original figure?
The original version of the study reported 2,961 fewer diagnoses of neurodevelopmental outcomes than the corrected version.
It appears the study authors “deleted the sicker kids,” Jablonowski said. “Or at least, just their diagnoses.”
The study also included allergy and autoimmune diagnoses, but none of those statistics were missing. Only the number of neurodevelopmental diagnoses differed between the original results and the corrected ones.
That suggests the authors didn’t make a random mistake, but intentionally fudged the number, Jablonowski said.
In hope of shedding light on what happened to the missing data, Jablonowski emailed the journal’s editors on July 18, asking them to publicize the comments between themselves and the anonymous scientists who peer-reviewed the study.
The inconsistencies in the study are specifically in “the figures in the main manuscript and the figures in the supplemental material,” Jablonowski wrote to the journal. “I believe the nature of those inconsistencies may be understood by examining the reviewer comments and subsequent exchanges.”
The journal editors have not responded.
‘Glaring signs’ Danish authors ‘didn’t practice good science’
The authors have not released the study’s raw data, citing Danish privacy law.
This frustrates independent scientists like Jablonowski, who said having access only to the data that the authors statistically adjusted makes it difficult to accurately critique the study, and impossible to replicate it.
Andersson did not respond when The Defender asked if the authors could share a de-identified version of the data that wouldn’t violate privacy law.
Jablonowski said:
“So if the raw data can’t be shared and Andersson is not going to reveal their unadjusted data, the appraisal of this paper is solely based on trust that the authors are practicing good science in good faith and they do not need to be scrutinized.”
But there are “glaring signs that the authors didn’t practice good science,” he said.
There were other inconsistencies between the original and corrected supplemental material. For instance, the corrected version shows different results in multiple places when tracking the prevalence of Asperger’s syndrome among kids.
The authors may have been more inclined to produce results that favored vaccination, given that they work at the Statens Serum Institut, a government agency responsible for procuring and supplying vaccines for the national vaccination.
Hviid reported funding from the Novo Nordisk Foundation, which is directly linked to the pharmaceutical giant Novo Nordisk.
“The researchers are integrally involved in pushing vaccines and sweeping vaccine safety under the rug.”
Original study also riddled with flaws, critics say
Even before the corrected materials were added to the study, Hooker and Jablonowski noted a host of flaws.
For instance, the authors failed to mention there were increased risks of certain diseases for kids vaccinated with aluminum-containing vaccines, compared with kids who received no aluminum-containing vaccines.
Before Hviid went on summer break, he told The Defender in an email that his team didn’t include a control group of unvaccinated children who had no aluminum exposure because differences between unvaccinated and vaccinated children likely would have biased the results.
Instead, the team opted to compare groups of vaccinated children who were exposed to different amounts of aluminum, Hviid said.
Yet the study reported results for 15,237 children who were either unvaccinated or vaccinated only with a shot that contains no aluminum, such as the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. The MMR vaccine used in Denmark has no aluminum, according to the authors.
That creates a cohort of children unvaccinated with an aluminum-containing shot, Jablonowski said.
Hooker and Jablonowski compared the outcomes of children who didn’t receive an aluminum-containing vaccine with the outcomes of children who received aluminum-containing vaccines.
“Kids who received an aluminum-containing vaccine were 26% more likely to have atopic dermatitis” than kids who were unvaccinated or only got the MMR shot, Jablonowski said. Those kids were “50% more likely to have allergic rhinoconjunctivitis — and these are really strong, statistically significant signals.”
Jablonowski said the study authors might criticize the analysis he and Hooker conducted for failing to consider possible confounding factors.
“I’d be happy to redo the analysis and account for possible confounding factors, but I’d need the authors to release sufficiently detailed data,” Jablonowski said.
Calls grow for journal to retract study
The findings in the corrected study still maintain the authors’ claim that aluminum-containing vaccinations are not associated with all 50 of the negative health outcomes they analyzed. In fact, their analysis claims protection against 12 categories of disease, including autism.
“These findings are not just counterintuitive — they are biologically absurd,” James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., wrote on Substack. “No plausible mechanism exists by which aluminum salts could prevent neurodevelopmental delay.”
Lyons-Weiler is the founder of IPAK-EDU, an adult online institution of higher learning run by the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge.
Lyons-Weiler and other critics are calling for the study’s retraction. He told The Defender the study’s “fatal methodological flaws … violate the principles of valid causal inference.”
Guillemette Crépeaux, Ph.D., associate professor at École Nationale Vétérinaire d’Alfort, told The Defender that the Annals of Internal Medicine should never have accepted the study — especially with its incorrect supplementary data. “Retraction should be the bare minimum,” she said.
Guillemette said she and her colleagues are writing a rebuttal to the study. They plan to submit it for publication later this summer.
Chris Exley, Ph.D., one of the world’s leading experts on the health effects of aluminum exposure, told The Defender, “There is no question in my mind that the authors of this study used the data available to them to come to an afore determined conclusion.”
In 2020, Crépeaux and Exley co-authored an article in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology that called for “independent, rigorous and honest science” on aluminum in vaccines.
Exley said the authors of the Danish study should make the data they used available for independent scrutiny. He said:
“I understand that they have already refused such requests and the compliant journal publishing the study is not prepared to press them on this issue. Surprise, surprise.
“Hviid and his band of conspirators are only interested in pedaling nonsense and nonscience to what they and others … believe is a gullible public. I think we have news for them. The times are changing, at long last.”
Related articles in The Defender
- Study Claiming No Link Between Aluminum in Vaccines and Autism Riddled with Flaws, Critics Say
- 4 Things the New York Times Got Wrong About Aluminum in Vaccines
- 5 Scientific Findings Explain Link Between Vaccines and Autism — Why Do Health Agencies Ignore Them?
- 36% Higher Risk of Asthma in Some Kids Who Had Vaccine-Related Aluminum Exposure, CDC Study Shows
- Study Showing 13% of Kids Have 2 or More Allergy-Related Conditions Overlooks Role of Aluminum and Vaccines
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.
Featured Video
Seyed M. Marandi: Iran Ready With Overwhelming Retaliation
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
After all I am a Proper Zionist Jew
October 27, 2009 | Gilad Atzmon
I am a Holocaust survivor
Yes, I am a survivor, for I have managed to survive all the scary accounts of the Holocaust: the one about the soap (1), the one about the lamp shades, the one about the camps, the mass shooting, the one about the gas (2) and the one about the death march (3). I just managed to survive them all.
In spite of all these fear inflicting stories, that were purposely installed in my soul since I opened my eyes for the first time, I have become a functional and even a successful human being. I somehow survived the horror against all odds. I even manage to love my neighbour. In spite of all the fearful, traumatic indoctrination I miraculously managed to master my cheering alto saxophone rather than the sobbing violin. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- US to Spend Over $740Bln for 7,800 Space Interceptors in Golden Dome System
- More Wars and Rumors of Wars
- THE VITAMIN K DEBATE: SHOTS, DROPS, AND THE DATA
- Is Trump poised to restart the Iran war?
- UAE fuelling African conflicts while evading accountability, SWP finds
- Saudi Arabia is pulling Europe toward a “Gulf Helsinki” deal with Iran — because Washington failed
- The Biggest Breast Cancer Advance in the Last Twenty Years
- Raffi Berg: BBC Middle East Editor Exposed as CIA, Mossad Collaborator
- Seyed M. Marandi: Iran Ready With Overwhelming Retaliation
- EBM: Evidence-Biased Medicine
- If Americans Knew
- As Evidence Mounts of Dogs Raping Palestinian Prisoners in Israeli Prisons, NYT’S Isabel Kershner Revives Unverified October 7 Rape Narrative
- Int’l Criminal Court Seeks Arrest Warrants for Ben-Gvir, Smotrich – Daily Update
- Settler attacks in West Bank hit a new low – Daily Update
- Medicine shortages amid siege leave people in peril
- Gaza’s students face a near impossible test to study abroad
- Israel kills a Hamas leader, plus 3 women, 1 child, and others (during “ceasefire”) – Daily Update
- We Can’t Curb Nuclear Proliferation If We Don’t Acknowledge Israel’s Nukes
- 43,000 people in Gaza suffered life-changing injuries since October 2023: WHO
- Israel’s 7 October narrative under fresh scrutiny after army accused of deleting footage
- Ex-CENTCOM chief headlines lavish Israeli-American Council gala
- No Tricks Zone
- Even The DNA Of Single-Celled Plankton Can Upend Alarmist Arctic Sea Ice Melt Claims
- Scandal: Although Climate Panic Is Canceled By IPCC, Europe’s Policymakers Continue With Their Crushing Policies
- How Once Hardcore Climate Alarmist Lucy Biggers Realized It Was All A Scam, Brainwashing
- German Expert: “No Climate Crisis” …”Warming Generally Better For Humanity”
- New Paleo Research: Modern ‘Climate Change’ Has Had No Apparent Impact On Precipitation Patterns
- 90% Subsidized… Bielefeld Germany’s €7 Million Hydrogen Garbage Truck Fleet Sits Idle
- New Study: Declining Trends In 1980-2023 Tropical Cyclone Frequency, Accumulated Energy
- 46 IPCC Scientists Break Rank, Publicly Challenge Long-Standing Dogmatic Climate Claims
- Another Study Links Warming To Cloud Forcing, Shortwave Radiation, Natural Atmospheric Circulation
- Wind Energy Is Toxic, Hazardous To Human Health, Scientific Review Shows
Aletho News 