The whitewashing of Western crimes in Syria
By Sonja van den Ende | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 18, 2025
After the fall of Syria and the partial collapse of the Axis of Resistance, a predictable smear campaign has been launched in Western media, which, like for Russia, is based on distortion and lies.
It is a well-oiled Western psyops campaign to make the public believe that after Hitler, Bashar al-Assad was a feared dictator, just like they do with Putin and, before that, Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.
The world was surprised when, on December 8, 2024, the most feared terrorists took over the old Syria, a semi-secular state form, and immediately turned it into a caliphate.
But for the American imperial planners, their European allies, and their terrorist proxies, including those in Ukraine, there was no surprise. They knew about it. The NATO-sponsored terrorist militia was trained by the CIA in Idlib, and provided with drones by Ukraine, drones that are produced in Ukraine, from semi-finished products from a company in the Netherlands called Metinvest B.V.
Large parts of the Syrian army did not defect, as the Western media and so-called experts claim. About 9,000 soldiers are still held captive in the Syrian desert, or in the Sednaya prison, held by the terrorists.
Not only the terrorists but the American army is in charge everywhere in Syria. American rulers secretly prepared for the occupation of Syria, as they did with Iraq. They primed the terrorists in Idlib for the final offensive with Operation Dawn of Freedom.
The operation included the Turkish-financed and supported so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA), which falls under the umbrella of the U.S., also known as the Syrian National Army. As early as 2016, Turkey began to assemble a new coalition of so-called Syrian rebel groups, including many former FSA fighters, in an attempt to create a more cohesive and effective opposition force. This coalition consists of the terrorists most feared by the Syrian people, who have been massacring civilians since 2011. Among others, the Syrian National Army includes Chinese Uyghurs, notorious for their brutality among head-choppers.
Little known by the Western public is that the so-called Syrian National Army was active in Karabakh during the 2020 war between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Turkey provided military support to Azerbaijan by supplying the terrorists of the Syrian National Army. This proxy army of international mercenaries, controlled by the U.S. and Turkey, has been fighting in Ukraine for the NATO-backed Kiev regime. The most brutal of its senior members is Abu al Shishani, who has been hiding in Ukraine for years – despite his U.S. handlers declaring him dead in 2017.
Of course, the Western terrorist sponsors wash their hands of blood. After all, there are supposed to be no real U.S. “boots on the ground” in Syria, they will argue, but there is an army base coordinating the terrorists who fight for them. The same applies to Turkey.
Turkey has two faces: it is a member of NATO while trying to realize, under Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a political aspiration for a great Ottoman empire based on Islam. Some say it is utopian or a lie, but it is not. The Syrian people know this very well; for 14 years, this has been going on and, unfortunately, has come true.
Then there is the other “superpower” in the region, the tiny Zionist apartheid project called Israel. No one, not even the International Atomic Energy Agency, knows what its nuclear weapons arsenal is, and it has never signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Since 2022, Israel has become a fully-fledged fascist regime, the most ultra-right government in the history of the colonialist project, which carries out the agenda of the settlers. These settlers are dangerous terrorists and, like ISIS (Daesh), use religion, racism and murder as weapons against all other beliefs and opinions. Yet the United States and its European lackeys continue to brazenly back the Zionist rogue state. The U.S. has supplied it with $20 billion in military aid over the past year despite the genocide in Gaza.
One of the seven political parties that govern Israel is the Otzma Yehudit Party. This party advocates for the deportation of those they consider to be the “enemies of Israel”, such as the Arabs. The party has been described in the international press and also in Israel itself as an extremist, ultra-nationalist, fascist, and racist organization.
One of the supporters of this party is Daniella Weiss, who watched with her extremist settler friends as “Gazans” were murdered on a boat off the coast of Gaza and cheered. She and her group are invited to the inauguration of Donald Trump, who himself is a Zionist and his entire incoming administration consists of nothing but Zionists.
After the attack of the U.S. and Turkish-sponsored terrorists in the north of Syria, Israel attacked the south, in Dara’a, which was agreed upon, planned and coordinated with the U.S. and Turkey. Dams and bridges were blown up, and large-scale bombardments on the Syrian army were carried out. Large parts of the army were captured and imprisoned, left in the desert, or the former prison Sednaya. They surrendered; the superior force was too great. Remnant army forces, mainly from the “Tiger Forces”, are fighting the terrorists in the hills around Hama and Latakia.
The Western media was there suspiciously quickly, after a day or so, visiting Sednaya for photo-ops. All kinds of so-called Western journalists arrived in Syria, mainly to promote the narrative that the terrible regime was gone, Syria was “free”, and Assad had turned the former Sednaya prison into a “human slaughterhouse”.
Many fake stories, especially by CNN, about so-called prisoners who were hung on ropes, photos were distributed, which later turned out to be photos from a museum in Iraq. There were also stories about prisoners in underground dungeons, yet no proof of this has ever been found.
Certainly, everything was prepared for the “journalists”; they were already waiting in Jordan, primed to cross into Syria when the “surprise fall” happened.
Years ago, there was a report made by Amnesty International called the “Slaughter House”, but now, in 2025, no evidence has been found for this fake report. What has become clear is that a large number of the prisoners were ISIS (Daesh) members, who have now been released and are imposing a terror regime on minorities such as the Alawites, Christians, and Kurds.
The West is now professing innocence and wants good relations with what they call the new government. All kinds of Western politicians have visited the terrorist leader Abu Mohammed al-Golani. He is dressed up in a new suit and his beard is trimmed. The West wants to send the Syrian refugees back from Europe. There are also flight connections again. The airport of Damascus is changed into a mosque. Is the new caliphate going to send its terrorists on holiday? To do what? Commit attacks, perhaps? Russia, in particular, must be careful, especially after the mass murder at the Crocus City shopping complex last March when 145 people were killed by Daesh-linked terrorists. Many terrorists in the new Syria are from the Caucasus and have years of experience.
Transferring terrorists to Idlib after the fall of Aleppo in 2016 was never a good idea. History has proven it.
The U.S. and its European partners want to freeze the conflict in Donbass, which can result in the same problem as in Syria. That was the biggest mistake by Assad and the former government, which took too humane a position on terrorists.
Pharma Spends Billions on Drug Ads, Fears Trump Administration Will Try to Ban Them
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 16, 2025
Drug companies report their biggest concern with the incoming Trump administration is the fear that the government will try to ban direct-to-consumer drug ads, according to a new report from The Lever that examines the industry practice.
Companies said such a ban would “almost certainly” lead to a drop in drug sales, according to a recent report by industry research firm Intron Health, which claims the return on investment for drug ads is as high as 100%-500%, depending on the drug.
The U.S. and New Zealand are the only two countries that allow drug companies to advertise directly to consumers.
When President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.), was running as a presidential candidate, he promised to ban the ads through an executive order on his first day in office.
When he tapped Kennedy, founder and former chairman of Children’s Health Defense, to lead HHS, Trump criticized drugmakers and Big Food companies, saying they “have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation.”
If confirmed, Kennedy would oversee the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which sets policies on direct-to-consumer advertising by pharma.
“We see this as the biggest imminent threat from RFK and the new Trump administration,” the Intron report’s authors wrote.
The Lever predicted the chances the administration can successfully ban these ads are “slim,” but said Big Pharma’s reaction shows how dependent the industry — and the media conglomerates it supports — has become on advertising drugs to consumers.
Critics say the ads “misinform patients and underemphasize treatment risks,” in part because they don’t provide all the information a patient needs to make an informed decision.
The ads also lead to unnecessary drug prescriptions, which The Lever said raises healthcare costs for consumers and taxpayers.
Most heavily advertised drugs don’t provide meaningful therapeutic benefit
Direct-to-consumer marketing in the U.S. began in 1981, with limited success at first because the FDA required drugmakers to list all possible side effects in the ads, according to The Lever’s short history of the practice.
Under the Clinton administration in 1997, the FDA relaxed its policies, allowing drugmakers to list only “major risks” in their ads, paving the way for a new and massive wave of television advertising for prescription drugs.
Spending on ads shot up 330% between 1996 and 2005, reaching $4.2 billion by 2004, and continued to grow after that.
Between 2016 and 2018, drugmakers spent $17.8 billion on ads for more than 550 drugs. Most of these drugs treat chronic medical conditions like arthritis, diabetes and depression.
According to a 2021 report by the congressional watchdog Government Accountability Office, 60% of the $560 billion that Medicare and its beneficiaries spent on drugs went to the advertised drugs.
The Lever claimed there are benefits to such advertising. Citing a paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research, it suggested that advertising can “somewhat” educate consumers and extend drug care to “undertreated patients.”
However, the report said advertising also increases the number of patients that request an advertised medication and the likelihood their prescriber will give it to them, whether they need it or not.
The ads also lead to greater use of higher-cost drugs over generics, even when those drugs offer no greater benefit.
The Lever cites a 2023 study in JAMA Network Open that assessed the “therapeutic value” — whether a drug led to improved clinical outcomes — of the top 73 most heavily advertised drugs. The study found that only 1 in 4 advertised drugs had a high therapeutic value.
Study author Neeraj Patel told The Lever :
“Many consumers might assume that the drugs they see all the time on TV are for cutting-edge therapies that are groundbreaking advances over the other treatment options on the market …
“Our study suggests that assumption is usually wrong: Heavily advertised drugs often do not necessarily provide meaningful therapeutic benefits as opposed to other therapeutic options.”
Obstacles to ending direct-to-consumer ads
The Lever said it is “relatively unlikely” Kennedy will be able to ban the ads, partly because efforts to merely restrict drug advertising have been defeated in courts on First Amendment grounds.
The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal made similar predictions. However, The Defender reported that a wider field of experts disagree on whether such a ban is legally or constitutionally feasible.
During Trump’s first administration, a federal judge blocked an HHS rule requiring drugmakers to include prices in their TV commercials, saying it exceeded the agency’s statutory authority.
“Kennedy could continue to push for cost transparency or require FDA review of all drug ads,” The Lever noted, “but any such reform attempts would likely be slow-going and challenged by the industry.”
Big Pharma’s lobbying arm, which spent $294 million lobbying last year on issues like drug ads, is also an obstacle.
TV and radio broadcasters are also expected to fight a drug ad ban because Big Pharma is one of the top advertising spenders. Last year, the National Association of Broadcaster industry lobbying group spent $8.8 million lobbying on issues including direct-to-consumer advertising, according to lobbying records.
Prescription drugs accounted for 30.7% of ad minutes across evening news programs on ABC, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and NBC last year through Dec. 15, according to the WSJ.
The Lever proposed less drastic measures to “mitigate” some of the negative impacts of this advertising rather than banning it altogether.
For example, the FDA could require pharmaceutical companies to include disclaimers about the effectiveness of the drugs versus other drugs already on the market. Or drug companies could offer a “Drug Facts Box” label, that would provide one-page summaries of the risks and benefits of new drugs.
The agency could also extend its requirement, instituted in 2023, that TV and radio drug ads use “consumer-friendly” and “understandable” language to disclose potential side effects, applying it to over-the-counter medicines, dietary supplements or other products, which also account for hundreds of millions of advertising dollars.
“Even if all of those drug ads filling the TV and computer screens aren’t likely to go away soon, advocates hold out hope that regulators could at least require them to be more informative and comprehensible,” The Lever reported.
Related articles in The Defender:
- Can the Trump Administration Ban Big Pharma Advertising? Experts Weigh In
- ‘Ask Your Doctor’: Can’t Someone in Congress Make These Endless Drug Ads Disappear?
- ‘Dangerous’: Global PR Giant Launches Provocative HPV Vaccine Ads Targeting Gen Zers
- ‘Brought to You by Pfizer’: Pharma Giant Spends More on Ads, News Sponsorships, Than Research
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.
Trump unable to end Ukrainian conflict – media
By Lucas Leiroz | January 16, 2025
Western media apparently does not believe in Donald Trump’s ability to end the war in Ukraine. After months of desperate campaigning against the US president-elect, accusing him of being “pro-Russian” and neglecting the Ukraine issue, Western mainstream outlets are now claiming he never had such ability or intention, and that his campaign promise was simply “bluster.”
Reuters published an article on January 15 claiming that Trump’s promise to end the conflict between Ukraine and Russia “in 24 hours” was a bluff with no basis in reality. According to the news agency, people close to the president-elect said that any negotiations or agreements are still long away, and that an end to hostilities is not possible in the near future.
“Advisers to President-elect Donald Trump now concede that the Ukraine war will take months or even longer to resolve, a sharp reality check on his biggest foreign policy promise – to strike a peace deal on his first day in the White House. Two Trump associates, who have discussed the war in Ukraine with the president-elect, told Reuters they were looking at a timeline of months to resolve the conflict, describing the Day One promises as a combination of campaign bluster and a lack of appreciation of the intractability of the conflict and the time it takes to staff up a new administration,” Reuters’ article reads.
The assessment coincides with some recent statements in which Trump has expressed frustration at not being able to advance his diplomatic plans before his inauguration. He repeatedly said he plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin “long before” six months of his presidency, but at the same time has expressed some skepticism about the future of the conflict. For example, Trump recently said that it would be easier to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza than in Ukraine – which proved true, given the end of hostilities between Israel and Hamas announced on January 15.
“I think, actually, more difficult is going to be the Russia-Ukraine situation [than Gaza] (…) I see that as more difficult. (…) I don’t think it’s appropriate that I meet (Putin) until after the 20th, which I hate because every day people are being – many, many young people are being killed,” Trump said.
Reuters’ journalists, citing their sources, claim that despite the apparent impossibility of achieving a quick peace, there is a consensus among members of Trump’s team on the need to take some emergency measures, such as canceling Ukraine’s accession process to NATO, as well as trying to “freeze the battle lines”. In addition, Trump’s advisers warn the president to demand “security guarantees” for Ukraine, which they consider to be an important and necessary step to create the conditions for a peace agreement.
“While the exact contours of a Trump peace plan are still being mulled, Trump’s advisers generally support taking the possibility of NATO membership for Ukraine off the table, at least for the foreseeable future, and freezing the current battle lines. Most high-ranking Trump advisers also support giving Ukraine a material security guarantee, such as the creation of a demilitarized zone patrolled by European troops. So far, the Trump team’s attempts to end the war have proceeded in fits and starts, underlining the degree to which campaign promises can run into the reality of complex diplomatic negotiations,” the article adds.
In fact, this all seems like a real waste of time on the part of Trump’s advisers. Whether Ukraine’s NATO membership process continues or ends does not change anything in the conflict, since it is already certain that Kiev will not be allowed to join. It is a consensus among Republicans and Democrats that NATO should not admit Ukraine as a member, but rather use it as a proxy in the war. Although Biden and the Democrats show a supposed “support” for such membership, this seems to be a mere rhetorical tool, without any practical meaning.
In the same sense, it is pointless to talk about “freezing the lines” or “giving guarantees to Ukraine”, since only the Russians can decide on these matters. Moscow will not freeze the front lines at least until all of its reintegrated territories are liberated and fully protected by demilitarized border zones.
Moreover, it is not Kiev that is in a position to demand “guarantees”, since Russia is the aggressed side in this war, with the special military operation having begun in 2022 precisely as a response both to NATO expansion and to the massacre of Russians that Kiev has been carrying out since 2014. The position to demand security guarantees belongs to the Russians, not to Ukrainians or Westerners.
In the end, it seems that the Western media is beginning to admit what analysts have been saying since the elections: Trump’s promise to end the war was never feasible. It is not the US that is in a position to demand an end to hostilities, since only the winning side can end a conflict. In fact, the war will end only when Moscow assesses that its strategic objectives have been achieved.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
MAINSTREAM STOKES FEAR OVER BIRD FLU
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | January 10, 2025
Legacy media and world health agencies continue to ratchet up the bird flu fear factor, despite the fact not a single human death has been caused from the virus. With mere days left for the Biden Administration in office and stockpiles of outdated H1N1 vaccines at the ready, skeptics are concerned it’s not just coincidence.
‘Monster’ Fauci should be jailed – Joe Rogan
RT | January 10, 2025
Hollywood star Mel Gibson and presenter Joe Rogan have claimed that former chief medical adviser Anthony Fauci should face prosecution, as they discussed his influence on the American healthcare system over the years. The popular American podcast host labelled the ex-government official a “monster.”
Fauci became the public face of the federal government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic both under President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden. The imposition of restrictive measures and the scientist’s reported involvement in suppressing the theory that the virus may have originated from US-funded gain-of-function research in China have made Fauci a controversial figure.
Gibson was a guest on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast on Thursday. Both men wondered how Fauci was “still walking around,” or “at least free” after his actions during the pandemic.
They were discussing the 2021 book by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. titled ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’. The author, a healthcare campaigner turned politician, described Fauci as an official in cahoots with big pharmaceutical corporations, who had abused his power for decades. The HIV/AIDS epidemic in the US was one of the main topics of the book.
”That book is an accurate depiction of what Anthony Fauci did during the AIDS crisis, which probably was an AZT crisis,” Rogan claimed.
He was referring to the antiretroviral medication azidothymidine. It was the first to be used en masse in the late 1980s to suppress HIV and had serious side effects. Kennedy claimed that Fauci, in his role as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), improperly endorsed AZT and downplayed its side effects while undermining possible alternative treatments.
”I drove up to San Francisco and I listened to it and I had road rage,” Gibson said, recalling his reaction to the book.
”If this is true, what the f**k is going on and how is that monster still loose?” Rogan asked. Meanwhile, the outgoing Biden administration is considering “giving him a full pardon – it’s like f**king crazy.”
Fauci’s name came up as the two were criticizing mainstream media for its “complicity” in protecting for-profit healthcare in the US. Gibson recalled how Rogan was attacked by news outlets for taking the drug ivermectin after testing positive for Covid-19 in 2021.
The medicine is widely used to treat parasites in humans in Africa. But the media dismissed it as a “horse dewormer” – the drug’s usual application in the US – as they urged the public to vaccinate against Covid-19.
Louisiana Man Who Had Bird Flu Dies — But Cause of Death Is Unclear
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 7, 2025
A Louisiana man in his 60s who was hospitalized with the first severe case of bird flu in the U.S. has died, the Louisiana Department of Health announced Monday. According to STAT News, it’s the first bird flu-related death in the U.S. — and all of North America.
The man, who has not been named, was older than 65 and had underlying medical conditions not specified in the health department’s announcement. He was hospitalized with severe respiratory illness after contracting the H5N1 bird flu virus last month from exposure to wild birds and a backyard flock of birds.
Louisiana health officials didn’t provide details about when the man died or what treatment he received. According to the health department, no other bird flu cases have been identified in Louisiana.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) maintains its position that bird flu poses a low risk to public health.
In a statement published by The Washington Post, the CDC said, “While tragic, a death from H5N1 bird flu in the United States is not unexpected because of the known potential for infection with these viruses to cause severe illness and death.”
According to STAT News, 67 cases of bird flu have been recorded in the U.S. since last year. The Post reported that in almost all cases, the patients experienced “mild illnesses” such as respiratory symptoms or pink eye, and all except the Louisiana man recovered. Most who became ill are poultry or dairy farmworkers.
Media reporting on bird flu ‘reminiscent of the fearmongering’ during COVID
Mainstream media has widely attributed the Louisiana man’s death to bird flu, but experts who spoke with The Defender struck a note of caution.
“We do not have details on the type of hospital he was in for many weeks, treatment received, and what the ultimate cause of death was in his case,” cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough told The Defender.
“This is not the same as saying the patient died of bird flu. [The Louisiana Health Department] conspicuously stops short of making that claim. If the health department reporting the case is not willing to declare bird flu to be the cause of death, it is irresponsible for anyone else to draw this conclusion,” internal medicine physician Dr. Clayton J. Baker told The Defender.
Baker said such messaging on the part of some media outlets “is reminiscent of the fearmongering that was so prevalent during COVID-19, where numerous patients who actually died ‘with COVID’ were classified as ‘COVID deaths.’”
Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher told The Defender that, because there are few details about the Louisiana man’s death and the underlying conditions he previously experienced, “it’s entirely possible that this patient died because of his other conditions, with bird flu infection pushing him over the edge.”
“Regardless, we can expect the biopharmaceutical complex to use this case as a tool to fear-monger and push for bird flu vaccinations,” Hulscher said.
Speaking on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Dec. 29, 2024, Dr. Leana Wen, the former commissioner of the Baltimore City Health Department and a professor of public health at George Washington University, called for more testing — and for the Biden administration to approve the bird flu vaccine before leaving office.
“There actually is a vaccine developed already against H5N1,” Wen said. “The Biden administration has contracted with manufacturers to make almost 5 million doses of the vaccine. However, they have not asked the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] to authorize the vaccine.”
Dr. Meryl Nass, founder of Door to Freedom, questioned the need for a bird flu vaccine. “Why would you use a vaccine in humans that has not been shown to work or be safe, for a disease that has only killed one elderly sick person and does not spread person-to-person?” Nass asked?
In October 2024, New York City health officials held a tabletop simulation of a bird flu outbreak.
Existing bird flu vaccines not designed for current bird flu variant
According to CNN, a genetic analysis the CDC performed last month determined that the virus that infected the Louisiana man mutated, enhancing its ability to infect the upper airways of humans.
“Those same changes were not seen in the birds the person had been exposed to, officials said, indicating that they had developed in the person after they were infected,” CNN reported.
According to the Post, “Bird flu viruses normally attach to a cell receptor that is rare in human upper airways,” making it difficult for most strains of bird flu to spread from person to person.
The mutated version of the virus found in the Louisiana man does not appear to have spread. “Genetic analysis of the virus in wild birds and poultry in Louisiana, including poultry on the patient’s property, and in other parts of the United States, did not detect similar viral changes,” the Post reported.
According to the Post, “Such changes would be more concerning … if they were also found in animals or within a few days of the start of symptoms, because that would suggest the virus was already acquiring these mutations.”
Nass said that the “longer a virus is able to reproduce inside a body, the more mutations you will find, and some are sure to improve its ability to infect human cells. The same thing occurred with COVID. It had no clinical significance then, either,” Nass added.
CNN reported that the Louisiana man was infected with the D1.1 clade of the bird flu virus — a strain that is currently circulating in wild birds and poultry, but not in dairy cattle that have been infected with bird flu. In November 2024, a teenager in the Canadian province of British Columbia was infected with this strain but recovered.
“Since we only have the Louisiana elder and the British Columbia teen who have come down with this particular strain of bird flu, it is not possible to say anything about the clinical illness, the propensity to infect others due to contact with wild birds, or even the risk of death,” Nass said.
Brian Hooker, Ph.D., chief scientific officer for Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender the mutation seen in the Louisiana man may be man-made.
“The type of mutation seen in the man’s H5N1 isolates is reminiscent of research that is being done by Yoshihiro Kawaoka, Ph.D. at the University of Wisconsin and Jessica Belser, Ph.D. at the CDC. Both researchers are attempting to humanize the virus so it can spread via respiratory droplets,” Hooker said.
Kawaoka and Belser are known for their involvement with gain-of-function research, where the transmissibility and virulence of pathogens are enhanced.
Dr. Richard Bartlett, an emergency room director and former Texas Department of Health and Human Services advisory council member, told The Defender that existing bird flu vaccines have not been designed for the D1.1 clade. He said:
“My understanding is that this is a different clade than bird flu vaccines that have already been purchased by governments around the world. In other words, they missed the mark. With vaccines it’s all or nothing. The winning treatment strategy will be early treatment.
“The question is, will the National Institutes of Health, CDC, World Health Organization [WHO] and government leaders — that are not doctors or scientists — repeat their mistakes? Will they push one option only? Vaccinate or bust? Are they slow learners? In 2009, we had the H1N1 pandemic with a highly contagious and very dangerous flu virus. Not one person was vaccinated, and the pandemic was over in nine months.”
According to the WHO, there have been nearly 900 human bird flu cases worldwide since 2003, and roughly half of those patients died. But according to CNN, “Because severe cases are more likely to be reported than mild ones, mild illnesses probably aren’t being factored into that figure.”
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.
Climate Bombshell: New Evidence Reveals 30 Year Global Drop in Hurricane Frequency and Power
By Chris Morrison | The Daily Sceptic | January 4, 2025
Last month a small but powerful cyclone named Chido made landfall in Mayotte before sweeping into Mozambique, causing considerable damage and leading to the loss of around 100 lives. Days after the tragedy, the Green Blob-funded Carbon Brief noted that scientists have “long suggested” that climate change is making cyclones worse in the region, while Blob-funded World Weather Attribution (WWA) at Imperial College London made a near-instant and curiously precise estimate that a Chido-like cyclone was about 40% more likely to happen in 2024 than during the pre-industrial age. Not to be outdone, Green Blob-funded cheerleader the Guardian chipped in with the obligatory “cyclones are getting worse because of the climate emergency”. Almost unnoticed, it seems, among all the Net Zero dooming and grooming was a science paper published during December by Nature that found no increase in the destructive power of cyclones – the generic term for typhoons and hurricanes – in any ocean basin over the last 30 years. In the South Indian basin, the location of cyclone Chido, there was a dramatic decrease in both frequency and duration in recent times.
Reality rarely gets much of a look-in these days when fanatical Net Zero activism is afoot, but the paper, written by a group of Chinese meteorologists, makes its case by considering the facts and the data. The scientists apply a “power dissipation index” (PDI) which they consider superior to single measure indicators since it combines storm intensity, duration and frequency. The graphs below show the cumulative index for tropical cyclones across all ocean basins along with a global indication.
Downward trends in the cumulative PDI can be seen in a number of Pacific regions, while the trend holds steady in the North Atlantic. The southern Indian ocean downward trend is particularly pronounced while the overall global line is also heading in a similar direction.
So why does all this scientific twaddle get written by the green activists in mainstream media? Much of it arises from the new pseudoscience that claims it can tie individual weather events to human-caused climate change. Press releases peddling climate Armageddon are issued days after a natural disaster and are eagerly reprinted by activist journalists promoting the Net Zero fantasy. The distinguished science writer Roger Pielke Jr. is a fierce critic of this new pseudoscience, which he calls weather attribution alchemy. In a recent Substack post in the aftermath of Chido, he noted that the WWA at Imperial College simply assumes the conclusion that it seeks to prove by accepting that every storm is made stronger because of warmer oceans. Using this explanation, continues Pielke, it is straightforward to conclude that the storm was made more likely due to climate change. Or as Imperial states: “The difference in the storm intensity and likelihood of this storm intensity between the counterfactual climate and today’s climate can be attributed to climate change.”
As the new Chinese paper shows, the matter is not quite so simple. Pielke notes that tropical storms encounter numerous environmental influences such as vertical wind shear and storm-induced ocean surface cooling, even when they remain over warmer waters. “Such complexities mean that simple storyline attribution – warmer oceans predictably mean stronger storms – is inappropriate when used to characterise the behaviour of individual storms,” he argues. Pielke also comes down hard on the statistical evidence backing the WWA claims. Even if storms such as Chido were more likely in the future, it would take a very long time to detect a significant change using the threshold 90% confidence set down by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). And by very long time, he means thousands of years.
“Perhaps that is why assumptions are favoured over evidence,” suggests Pielke.
There were plenty of assumptions on display in a now routine end-of-year weather report from the BBC headed: ‘A year of extreme weather that challenged billions.‘ Written by Esme Stallard, it claims that record-breaking heat brought extreme weather including hurricanes and month-long droughts. Pride of place is given to Dr. Friederike Otto, lead of WWA and Senior Lecturer in Climate Science at Imperial, who claimed: “We are living in a dangerous new era – extreme weather caused unrelenting suffering.” “The impacts of fossil fuel warming has never been clear or more devastating than in 2024,” she added.
The redoubtable Paul Homewood is unimpressed with Stallard’s opening line about increasing extreme weather and has filed a complaint with the BBC. Stallard goes on to list a handful of random events, “but fails to provide any evidence that these are anything other than natural events which happen all the time”, states Homewood. “Nor is any evidence provided that such events have been getting more frequent or extreme over time,” he adds.
The BBC story highlighted typhoons in the Philippines as well as hurricane Beryl and stated that such events may be increasing in intensity due to climate change. Official data do not show any evidence of them becoming more powerful over time, notes Homewood. Much play was made of a recent drought in the Amazon, but Homewood points out that the World Bank Climate Portal reveals that rainfall has increased in the area by 5% over the last 30 years. Throughout the report, observes Homewood, the BBC bases its claims on weather attribution computer models. “However, computer models are not evidence, and can be manipulated to provide whatever results are desired. That is why they are widely derided by the wider scientific community,” he states.
For Roger Pielke, extreme weather attributions are “puzzling”. The most charitable explanation for their proliferation is that there is a demand for them, including from many in the media. The demand will be filled by someone, he concludes. “A less charitable explanation is that there is a systematic effort underway to contest and undermine actual climate science, including the assessments of the IPCC, in order to present a picture of reality that is simply false in support of climate advocacy. We might call that pseudo-scientific gaslighting,” he suggests.
Last ditch media sanctions from the West against Russia are like a sick child crying for help
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 3, 2025
Many analysts will be wondering what Trump will do about Russian sanctions when gets into the Oval office, although there is some optimism that he will try and reverse them. He is cautious not to get into a debate about this subject, which leads me to suspect that this will be one of the bombshells he will drop on the Biden administration which left him the small gift of signing off over a billion dollars of military aid to Ukraine. What almost no Americans understand though, which is largely the fault of mainstream media, is that these military spending sprees are really all about feeding a dual-purpose racket which really has nothing to do with the actual war in Ukraine, which everyone now admits Russia is winning. On one hand, it is of course pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the 5 main arms manufacturers in the U.S. in a move which could arguably be called illegal state aid; on the other hand the kit which is sent to Ukraine from the U.S. – and the UK – is mainly being sold on a number of black markets, with only about 30 percent or thereabouts actually reaching Ukrainian troops. My own investigation has proved that the Zelensky cabal are selling off the heavy equipment like armoured personal carriers (APCs) and lorry loads of American made assault rifles to dealers in the international arms bizarre of Libya – where Middle Eastern terrorists, or their affiliates in the Sahel buy it at bargain prices.
And Trump certainly understands the racket and will want to stop it. Dropping the mother of all bombshells on the Biden legacy by scrapping the sanctions and blocking any more aid would be an effective way to do that.
But it’s the sanctions on Russia media which he should also give priority to, given that, with the state of western media being such a shambles, we had to rely on RT for example, in the UK and U.S., to ask the difficult questions and hold our administrations to account.
The recent news at the end of December that the EU is cracking down even further on Russia media and individuals who are active within it – journalists and others – is another parting shot which smacks of desperation. The West is under no illusions privately that it is losing the war in Ukraine and is wondering how it can tell a fairy tale story to its own voters so as to deflect blame with the sole purpose of staying in power. This is really what media sanctions are all about. Shutting down any narrative that could possibly hold you to account and expose the tawdry reality of the mess the West has made in Ukraine based on the military industrial complex gaining too much power and eating up elites in its path. The Biden administration will be remembered for this. A new dawn in just how much power these arms manufacturers have and what lengths they can go to, to get the big contracts. This will all come out in the Trump administration with documentaries about Biden and his son’s laptop and how Ukraine was a holiday camp for them to go to with empty suitcases and return with a few million dollars. Like a cash machine which keeps churning out cash due to a computer glitch. The lure of Ukraine and corrupt western elites is nothing new. But during Trump’s first term citizens of the West are going to see the dark side to the events which led up to Russia’s invasion. And it stinks.
Part of that racket, going back even to 2013 or 2014 was to try and shut down Russian media. In reality, it was simply RT which elites noticed was gaining popularity in many European countries from people who had lost all faith in their own media which had fallen into the grubby hands of the powerful elites and their dirty games long ago. It used to be the case that in Brussels, the hold that the powerful institutions had on journalists was so strong in such an abusive relationship that what we saw each day on TV and in the newspapers was pure EU propaganda on a scale that even the Soviet Union could not muster. There used to be however the contrast between Brussels and member states where the media were more robust and anti-establishment. But no more. Now the political journalists along with the defence correspondent in the UK for example are practically government propaganda agents who probably think they were journalists once. Their work is to keep the lies about Ukraine, as one example, flowing so that the public are distracted and can’t focus on what is under their nose. Sometimes the plain truth is so close to the person looking for it, that it can’t be seen. Distance is required. When RT operated in the UK, there was this certain environment which questioned more and provided an alternative viewpoint which was needed in any functioning democracy. Trump’s priority should be to finish the sanctions and adopt a more grown-up approach to resolving Ukraine as the Russians want a longer-term solution rather than quick fix buggerydoo. Ending the sanctions on Russian media would be a good message to western elites that have fed from the trough for so long with the lies which have been created that their time is up. Trump’s back.
Manufacturing Dissent
By Joshua Stylman | November 17, 2024
As I often do on Sunday mornings, I was drinking my coffee and scrolling through my news feed when I noticed something striking. Maybe it’s my algorithm, but the content was flooded with an unusual amount of vitriol directed at Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s nomination as HHS Secretary. The coordinated messaging was impossible to miss—talking heads across networks uniformly labeling him a “conspiracy theorist” and “danger to public health,” never once addressing his actual positions. The media’s concerted attacks on Kennedy reveal more than just their opinion of his nomination—they expose a deeper crisis of credibility within institutions that once commanded public trust.
The Credibility Paradox
The irony of who led these attacks wasn’t lost on me—these were largely the same voices who championed our most destructive pandemic policies. As Jeffrey Tucker aptly noted on X this morning:
The Coordinated Response
This hypocrisy becomes even more glaring in the New York Times’ recent coverage, where dismissive rhetoric consistently replaces substantive engagement. In one piece, they acknowledge troubling trends in children’s health while dismissively declaring “vaccines and fluoride are not the cause” without engaging his evidence. In another, Zeynep Tufekci—who notably advocated for some of the most draconian Covid measures—warns that Kennedy could “destroy one of civilization’s best achievements,” painting apocalyptic scenarios while sidestepping his actual policy positions.
Meanwhile, their political desk speculates about how his stance on Big Food might “alienate his GOP allies.” Each piece approaches from a different angle, but the pattern is clear: coordinated messaging aimed at undermining his credibility before he can assume institutional authority.
The Echo Chamber Effect
You can almost hear the editorial conveyor belt opening as senior editors craft the day’s approved reality for their audience. The consistent tone across pieces reveals less independent analysis than a familiar pattern—mockingbird media still in action. As I detailed in How The Information Factory Evolved, this assembly-line approach to reality manufacturing has become increasingly visible to anyone paying attention.
What these gatekeepers fail to grasp is that this smug dismissiveness, this refusal to engage with substantive arguments, is precisely what fuels growing public skepticism. Their panic seems to grow in direct proportion to Kennedy’s proximity to real power. This orchestrated dismissal is more than a journalistic flaw—it reflects a larger institutional dilemma, one that becomes unavoidable as Kennedy gains traction.
The Institutional Trap
The Times faces an emerging dilemma: at some point, they’ll need to address the substance of Kennedy’s arguments rather than rely on dismissive characterizations—especially if he assumes control of America’s health apparatus. Just this morning, MSNBC anchors were literally shouting that “Kennedy is going to get people killed”—yet another example of using melodramatics and fear instead of engaging with his actual positions. Their reflexive ridicule strategy backfires precisely because it avoids engaging with the evidence and concerns that resonate with parents and citizens across political lines. Each attempt to maintain narrative control through authority rather than evidence accelerates institutional credibility collapse.
Beyond Kennedy: Redrawing Political Lines
The NYT’s analysis about Kennedy potentially alienating GOP allies particularly highlights their fundamental misunderstanding of the shifting political landscape. As a lifelong Democrat who still champions many traditional progressive values, Kennedy transcends conventional political boundaries. His message—”We have to love our children more than we hate each other”—resonates precisely because anyone who dismisses this crusade to restore American vitality as mere political theater is blind to the groundswell of people who’ve grown tired of watching their communities crumble under the weight of manufactured decline.
This isn’t just about Kennedy—it’s about the media’s inability to address the legitimate concerns of a disillusioned public. When institutions refuse to engage with dissenting voices, they deepen mistrust and fracture the shared foundation necessary for democratic discourse. While RFK, Jr.’s message has resonated across political boundaries, the media’s inability to address core issues—like regulatory failures—reveals just how out of touch they’ve become.
The Art of Missing the Point
Consider this fact-check from the same article: The Times attempts to discredit Kennedy’s Fruit Loops example, but inadvertently confirms his central point: ingredients banned in European markets are indeed permitted in American products. By focusing on semantic precision instead of the broader issue—why US regulators allow unsafe ingredients—the media deflects from substantive debates.
Senator Elizabeth Warren declared this week: “RFK Jr. poses a danger to public health, scientific research, medicine, and health care coverage for millions. He wants to stop parents from protecting their babies from measles and his ideas would welcome the return of polio.” Yet this alarmist framing dodges the simple question Kennedy actually raises: Why wouldn’t you want proper safety testing for chemicals we’re expected to inject into our children’s bodies? The silence in response to this basic inquiry speaks volumes about institutional priorities—and their fear of someone with the power to demand answers.
A Referendum on Manufacturing Consent
Say what you want about Trump, but his “fake news” remarks struck a chord that resonates deeper with each passing day. People who once scoffed at these claims are now watching with eyes wide open as coordinated narratives unfold across media platforms. The gaslighting has become too obvious to ignore. As I explored in We Didn’t Change, The Democratic Party Did, this awakening transcends traditional political boundaries. Americans across the spectrum are tired of being told not to believe their own eyes, whether it’s about pandemic policies, economic realities, or the suppression of dissenting voices.
“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.
It was their final, most essential command.”
–George Orwell, 1984
The Moment of Truth
With Kennedy potentially overseeing America’s health infrastructure, media institutions face a crucial inflection point. Fear campaigns and ad hominem attacks won’t suffice when his policy positions require serious examination. The machinery of coordinated dismissal—visible in identical talking points across networks—reveals more about institutional allegiance than journalistic integrity.
This moment demands something different. When Kennedy raises questions about pharmaceutical safety testing or environmental toxins—issues that resonate with families across political lines—substantive debate must replace reflexive ridicule. His actual positions, heard directly rather than through media filters, often align with common-sense concerns about corporate influence on public health policy.
This institutional pattern of manufactured authority connects directly to themes I explored in Fiat Everything earlier this week—systems built on decree rather than demonstrated value. They don’t sell weapons—they sell fear. The same forces that control monetary policy now seek to dictate public health discourse.
Breaking the Machine
The solution won’t come from institutional gatekeepers (that’s what got us here) but direct examination. We all need to:
- Listen to Kennedy’s complete speeches rather than edited soundbites
- Read his policy positions rather than media characterizations
- Examine the evidence he cites rather than fact-checker summaries
- Consider why certain questions about public health policy are deemed off-limits
I’m not suggesting we accept every contrarian position, but rather that institutional credibility must be earned through rigorous analysis rather than assumed through authority. Until then, coverage like these recent Times pieces will continue to exemplify the very institutional failures that fuel the movements they seek to discredit. As Kennedy approaches real institutional power, expect these attacks to intensify—a clear signal of just how much the guardians of our manufactured consensus have to lose.
Israel’s collateral killing of civilians is finally in the spotlight
The New York Times’ recent “bombshell” presents facts that have been known for a long time – and does its best to sanitize them
By Robert Inlakesh | RT | December 30, 2024
The New York Times recently published a piece admitting that an unprecedented amount of “collateral damage” was permitted by the Israeli military. However, it omits key statistics that were previously revealed in order to sanitize the revelations it claims to be uncovering.
Presented as a bombshell piece, the December 26 article reveals that Israel had sent through an order that permitted killing up to 20 civilians for each low-level Hamas target. “The order, which has not previously been reported, had no precedent in Israeli military history,” the article reads.
However, in early April of 2024, an Israeli media outlet called +972 Magazine had not only published this fact, citing sources within Israel’s military, but uncovered much more damning figures detailing what was to be considered “acceptable” collateral damage.
The +972 article revealed that the Israeli airstrike that killed Hamas’ Shujaiya Battalion Commander, Wisam Farhat, was authorized to kill 100 civilians. Even more shocking was the infamous case of Ayman Nofal, the commander of Hamas’ Central Gaza Brigade, where, according to the sources, “the army authorized the killing of approximately 300 civilians.”
The +972 report was mentioned in passing by The New York Times, with the caveat that Israel’s military had denied it. However, +972 Mag’s investigative work on this topic did not begin in April. In fact, a piece published in November of 2023 cited a source who claimed the following:
“The numbers increased from dozens of civilian deaths [permitted] as collateral damage as part of an attack on a senior official in previous operations, to hundreds of civilian deaths as collateral damage.”
So, while a big deal is made of the fact that such high numbers of collateral damage have “no precedent in Israeli military history,” the IDF has been knowingly writing off civilians as collateral damage for years. One need only look at literally any UN report on Israel’s past military conduct to see it.
It isn’t only in Gaza that such horrendous “collateral damage” has been normalized, it has also been the case in Lebanon. When Israel carried out the assassination of Hezbollah’s Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, it openly announced that it estimated the total death toll to be around 300, as a result of leveling a number of civilian buildings in southern Beirut.
There is literally nothing in the article published by The New York Times that is new; all it does is affirm what has already been reported, yet it is done in a way that works to water the killings down by omitting key facts and repeating old tropes.
For example, it repeats as proven fact the widespread allegation that Hamas purposely embeds itself amongst civilians to use them as human shields, a point that has been found at least questionable before.
What is undeniable however, is that Israel uses Palestinians as human shields, as has been copiously documented throughout the war and used to be an accepted part of Israel’s military doctrine.
“From November 2023 onward, amid a global outcry, Israel began to conserve ammunition and tighten some of its rules of engagement, including by halving the number of civilians who could be endangered when striking low-ranked militants who posed no imminent threat” states the NYT. The question here is, where did this information come from? According to the article itself, the sources are all Israeli soldiers and officials.
The only evidence presented is the words of the Israelis. Was there any analysis done or examples cited to prove that the IDF would only kill ten civilians on average for every low-ranking Hamas fighter? Absolutely not, because not even Israel can present this information to the public, nor the names of the thousands of supposed “Hamas fighters” it has targeted.
If we go by Israel’s official figures for the number of alleged Hamas militants killed, they rise at such a rate that it doesn’t match the death toll figures accepted by the United Nations. While the official death toll in Gaza is nearly 46,000, with 10,000 missing and presumed dead, the only way Israeli “Hamas fighter” figures make sense is if the toll is much higher. However, accepting a higher death toll in order to give Israel’s claims about Hamas fighters more legitimacy would mean that The New York Times would face another issue: they would then have to wrestle with the fact that the killing only escalated in November of 2023.
In addition to this all, the +972 article from April 3 provides a much more in-depth insight into the artificial intelligence systems used by the Israeli army and points out that the targets it generated were highly inaccurate. The investigation discovered that when the Lavender system chose junior Hamas targets, the Israeli army would actually use its more lethal unguided munitions, because “you don’t want to waste expensive bombs on unimportant people.”
Furthermore, +972 noted that while a human has to verify targets chosen by the AI before a strike is ordered, eventually this boiled down to simply making sure the target is male – spending about 20 seconds on average before pulling the trigger.
Nowhere in the New York Times article is there any mention of the slaughter of civilians where no military target is located, there is no mention of the mass torture, sexual abuse, or demolition of homes for the pure vanity of soldiers. Everything is framed as a military that went a little overboard after the Hamas-led October 7 attack.
Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’.
Germany whining it’s defenseless against ‘Oreshnik’ after initially mocking it
By Drago Bosnic | December 30, 2024
After the Russian military’s Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN) used the latest “Oreshnik” missile in Dnepropetrovsk on November 21, the world was left shocked, with news ranging from “end of the world” scaremongering to ridicule. Some major German media outlets resorted to the latter, with Julian Roepcke (better known as Jihadi Julian), one of the more prominent “military experts” at the Bild, a German tabloid, saying that the missile “likely carried no explosive charge and did not cause any significant damage”. Roepcke’s report, published on November 23, says that the launch was “a propaganda and political action rather than a military one”, as there was “neither a nuclear charge nor explosives inside”. The German author insists “that’s the reason the damage was so insignificant”. As many analysts have already suggested (myself included, both last year and in April), Roepcke also believes that the missile is most likely based on the RS-26 “Rubezh” (although this is yet to be confirmed). However, he erroneously thought that “the ‘Oreshnik’ didn’t contain explosives or a warhead and would have been equipped with a substitute of the same size and weight to simulate the appearance of a nuclear warhead”. While this is true for regular missile tests, the launch of the “Oreshnik” was anything but. Namely, the RVSN used 36 advanced kinetic penetrators to strike heavily fortified targets, including those deep underground. Thus, it’s quite clear that Roepcke’s virtually immediate disregard of the “Oreshnik’s” capabilities was a careless miscalculation, to say the least.
President Vladimir Putin himself stated that the missile is effectively unstoppable, but this too was met with disregard and even ridicule. For some inexplicable reason, neither the mainstream propaganda machine nor its bosses in the political West’s leadership seem to be able to learn from their mistakes. Namely, when President Putin says something, it should be taken very seriously. For instance, back in 2004, just two years after the United States announced its unilateral withdrawal from the ABM (anti-ballistic missile) Treaty, he publicly promised that Russia would resume the development of hypersonic weapons started during the (First) Cold War. However, nobody listened, as NATO was convinced that the Eurasian giant was “finished” (nothing could be further from true).
Just two years after that speech, Moscow inducted the “Iskander-M” missile system, along with its 9M723 hypersonic missile. Since then, the Russian military acquired at least a dozen types of such weapons, resulting in an advantage measured in decades. Back in 2019, I argued that the Kremlin was at least 20 years ahead of its NATO adversaries, including the US. This turned out to be not only true, but it can even be argued that the “Oreshnik” ensured this advantage grows further. Now, much unlike Roepcke, it seems that the German military understands just how outclassed it is, especially by such weapons. Namely, Roepcke’s own newspaper, the Bild, disagrees with his previously mentioned report about the “Oreshnik”. First, the outlet lamented that Russia deployed the missile in Belarus.
According to the report, a recently leaked internal document showed that the Federal Foreign Office (AA) warned that “Germany is not adequately protected against this deadly danger”. Interestingly, the document also posits that “the current protection provided by ‘Patriot’ systems is not sufficient” and that “the federal government now wants to close the gap”. The report also points out that interception rates are atrocious and that the extremely overhyped US-made ABM/SAM (surface-to-air missile) system would “base their performance on sheer luck” when it comes to intercepting Russian missiles (particularly something like the “Oreshnik”). The Bild also added that Berlin would purchase the Israeli “Arrow” ABM system to “help strengthen Germany’s defense against new types of missiles”.
It’s quite interesting that the Germans openly said that the “Patriot” cannot effectively intercept hypersonic weapons. Namely, for nearly three years, the Neo-Nazi junta has been saying its forces regularly “shoot down” Russian hypersonic missiles. I’ve argued numerous times that such claims are virtually guaranteed to be nothing more than war propaganda. Simply put, the numbers behind all this just don’t add up. This fact is supported by other globally renowned experts, including senior military officers. Namely, retired Group Captain Uttam Kumar Devnath from the Indian Air Force recently stated that “Russia’s ‘Oreshnik’ missile system is beyond the interception capabilities of Western defense systems like the ‘Patriot’ and THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense)”.
“The ‘Oreshnik’, described as a hypersonic, intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), is claimed to travel at speeds that exceed Mach 10, making it, according to Devnath, ‘too fast for radar targeting’. This speed, coupled with its maneuverability, purportedly renders it impervious to interception by current Western missile defense technologies,” the Indian Defence Research Wing reported, quoting Group Captain Devnath and adding: “The ‘Oreshnik’s’ velocity and ability to alter its trajectory are cited as key reasons why systems like the ‘Patriot’, designed to counter ballistic threats, would fail to engage it effectively. Devnath highlighted the missile’s design, suggesting it leverages stealth technologies and hypersonic flight principles to evade detection and interception.”
President Putin has already publicly called on NATO to pick any target, deploy its much-touted SAM/ABM systems to defend it and promised that the Russian military would neutralize it either way. Such confidence serves as a testament to Moscow’s unrivaled hypersonic capabilities. Obviously, the political West would never accept such a proposal, which speaks volumes about the veracity of the claims that NATO-sourced missile defenses are supposedly “shooting down” Russian hypersonic weapons left and right. It should also be noted that the usually quoted speed of Mach 10 for the “Oreshnik” is quite misleading, as the missile it was based on, namely the RS-26 “Rubezh”, can actually fly at speeds of anywhere between Mach 20 and Mach 25 (7-8,5 km/s or 25,000-30,000 km/h).
The “Oreshnik” is not only a major asset for Russia, but also for the whole multipolar world, as it offers a massive advantage in non-nuclear strategic deterrence. Although surely nuclear-capable, the “Oreshnik” is armed with a conventional MIRV/MaRV/HGV payload composed of 36 advanced kinetic penetrators (six in each of the six warheads). Coupled with its speed and maneuverability, this makes it the most powerful conventional weapon ever devised. This combination is what makes hypersonic weapons effectively impossible to track and intercept. Namely, unlike traditional ballistic missiles which fly at a predictable path, hypersonic weapons maneuver, making the interception based on the calculations of ballistic computers completely useless and void.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Featured Video
Diplomacy is Now a Crime in Britain / Ian Proud
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Is America behind the massive surge in Kiev regime’s child trafficking?
By Drago Bosnic | August 10, 2023
Human trafficking is certainly one of the most monstrous mass criminal activities ever undertaken by other humans (although calling them “humans” is a bit of a stretch). And yet, there’s a special kind of this deeply repulsive crime that pushes it to diabolical proportions – child trafficking. Underage kids, particularly those who were abandoned, sold or have very poor/abusive family backgrounds, are by far the most vulnerable group. The depraved criminals who engage in such illicit activities specifically target unfortunate children and given there are millions of them all around the globe, particularly in war-torn areas, the “recruitment pool” is effectively endless. Unfortunately, the demand on the black market also seems to be constant and growing, making it a very lucrative and appealing prospect for criminals. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- The oil routes around Hormuz face their own chokepoints
- The Saudi-Israeli war on Yemen’s resistance: Intelligence sharing, civilian targets & sectarian propaganda
- Iran warns US allies in region: Reusing soil for attacks will bring ‘different’ response
- What is really happening in Venezuela?
- Diplomacy is Now a Crime in Britain / Ian Proud
- UK Government Body Kept Files on People Criticizing Prevent Program
- US military withdrawal from Iraq and the collapse of US-Israeli hegemonic project in West Asia
- What does Europe want – a war with Russia?
- She Followed the Actual Data on COVID Vaccines and Masks — Her Career Took a Huge Hit
- Florida AG Sues Pfizer, Bourla Over Deceptive Marketing of COVID Vaccines
- If Americans Knew
- No big deal: Israel to halt humanitarian aid to Gaza for 2 days – Daily Update
- Israel is squeezing the life out of Palestinians – Daily Update
- The Israeli Right Portrays Islam as Murderous. It Serves a Political Purpose
- Jordan Has Had Enough: King Abdullah’s Scathing Warning to Israel
- Israeli Colonizers (i.e. Settlers) Kill Palestinian Man Near Salfit
- New Google Maps images reveal massive scale of devastation in Gaza
- Jewish supremacy, anti-Palestinian bigotry on display in Israel – Daily Update
- Israeli Soldiers Abduct At Least 22 Across Occupied West Bank
- Eight Palestinians Killed in Israeli Attacks on Gaza
- Israeli former leaders and security chiefs threaten legal action over ‘Jewish terrorism’
- No Tricks Zone
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
- Green Energy Debacle: German Expert Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Warns Of Severe Economic And Social Consequences
- Two More Paleo Reconstructions Affirm Meters-Higher Sea Levels Across Ireland, Brazil 7000-6000 Years Ago
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
- 2025 Nature Paper Claiming Worsening Global Drought Gets RETRACTED …Heavily Flawed
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
- Energy Crisis: Germany Enters Heating Season With Historically Low Gas Reserve Fill Levels
- New Study: The Antarctic Ice Sheet Gained Mass From 2020-2024 Due To Staggering Snow And Ice Accumulation
