Welcome to Grappy's Soap Box - a platform for insightful commentary on politics, media, free speech, climate change, and more, focusing on Australia, the USA, and global perspectives.
Here’s some genuinely good news: we’re not defenceless in the fight against cancer. In a recent interview on The Megyn Kelly Show, Dr. Patrick Soon‑Shiong revealed that our bodies already possess powerful natural killer (NK) cells, and science is finally learning how to unleash them.
This isn’t new hype. Soon-Shiong explains that NK cells are our immune system’s first responders, hunting down dangerous cells—virally infected ones or early-stage cancerous cells—without needing reprogramming.
What’s groundbreaking is that we now know how to activate and supercharge them. Tested treatments are waking up NK cells (and T-cells), retraining medicine to work with the body’s own defences instead of wiping them out. Soon-Shiong calls it a “triangle offence”—turbocharging NK cells, killer T-cells, and memory T-cells together.
The takeaway? Cancer treatment doesn't have to mean brutal radiation or chemo that demolishes your immune system. We have an internal army—and it's time we let it do its job.
This is a massive shift from the one-size-fits-all treatment model. If you’re curious, check out the full interview below.
👉 In short: Your body has the tools. We just need to know how to turn them on.
Disclaimer: This is super promising—but still early days. Don’t expect results tomorrow. Talk to your doctor about any new therapies.
So, after all the strikes and bold claims about crippling Iran's nuclear program, it turns out most of their enriched uranium might still be intact.French intelligence chief Nicolas Lerner recently stated that while Iran's nuclear capabilities have been significantly delayed, a substantial portion of their enriched uranium remains under their control.
The exact whereabouts of this uranium? Uncertain.With the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors pulled out due to safety concerns, there's a glaring lack of oversight.The Times of Israel Wall Street Journal
This situation raises more questions than answers.If the uranium is still accessible, what's stopping Iran from resuming its nuclear activities?And with limited international monitoring, how would we even know?
Ultimately, while the strikes may have set back Iran's nuclear timeline, the game is far from over.The uncertainty surrounding the enriched uranium's status keeps the stakes high and the situation tense.
So, the BBC decided to ask its viewers a straightforward question on Saturday Morning Live: "Is multiculturalism working?"Now, you'd think they'd be ready for any answer, right?Well, turns out 95% of respondents said "No".
That's not just a majority; that's a landslide.But instead of taking this as a wake-up call, the media elites seemed more interested in downplaying the results.They brought in the usual talking heads to explain why the public's opinion was misguided, misinformed, or just plain wrong.
It's a classic move: ask the public for their opinion, then dismiss it when it doesn't align with the narrative.The media isn't interested in reporting; they're interested in reinforcing their worldview.
This poll didn't just reveal opinions on multiculturalism; it exposed the growing chasm between the public and the media.While ordinary people express genuine concerns, the media continues to push its agenda, oblivious to the realities on the ground.
It may be time for the media to start listening instead of lecturing.
Here is the YouTube video of the live discussion....
Remember when hospitals were places of healing? During the COVID-19 pandemic, that notion was turned on its head. TrialSite News recently published an article titled “How Hospitals Became Killing Centres—Misdiagnosis, Censorship, and the Suppression of Reason”, and it's a sobering read.
In the early days of the pandemic, hospitals adopted protocols that, in hindsight, did more harm than good. Ventilators were used aggressively, following guidance that mirrored early Chinese protocols. In New York's spring 2020 surge, nearly 9 out of 10 intubated patients died.
Why such a high mortality rate? Because COVID-19 pneumonia was misdiagnosed as typical Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), leading to invasive mechanical ventilation when less aggressive treatments might have sufficed. Patients with “silent hypoxia”—low oxygen levels without distress—were sedated and intubated unnecessarily, resulting in preventable deaths from complications like ventilator-associated pneumonia and multi-organ failure.
Meanwhile, treatments that could have helped, like dexamethasone, were either dismissed or delayed. The clinical trial in June 2020 showed that this low-cost steroid cut deaths by one-third in ventilated patients, but by then, months had already passed.
So, what went wrong? A combination of misdiagnosis, censorship, and suppression of reason. Public health leaders followed panic and centralised narratives instead of data. Hospitals enforced homogenised care, erasing individual patient contexts in favour of algorithmic treatment pathways. Families were banned from the bedside, unable to advocate for their loved ones.
It's a tragic reminder that in times of crisis, critical thinking and individualised care are paramount. We must learn from these mistakes to ensure that hospitals remain centres of healing, not harm. Although we are some years after the peak of this pandemic, the excesses are only now being exposed. If we are to avoid this recurring, it is critical to review every aspect of the failures that occurred and hold to account those who failed in their duties to their patients.
Let me guess — you’ve probably never heard that 30g of flaxseed a day could do more for your blood pressure and cholesterol than your prescription meds.
Well, that’s what a double-blind clinical trial has found.
✅ Blood pressure down.
✅ LDL cholesterol down.
✅ BMI down.
✅ Side effects? Virtually none.
✅ Cost? Pocket change.
Meanwhile, pharmaceutical companies are charging a fortune for drugs that do less and come with a handy list of side effects that require more drugs to manage. Funny how that works.
You can read the study here — it wasn’t funded by Big Pharma (no surprises there), but by a group of Iranian researchers. Because, let’s be honest, why would drug companies promote something that threatens their golden goose?
Don’t expect your doctor to mention it. And definitely don’t expect a TV ad about flaxseed between the ones for diabetes meds and cholesterol pills.
As Dr. John Campbell explains in his discussion of the paper, the effects of flaxseed match or exceed the impact of many commonly prescribed drugs, without the adverse side effects.
Now, should you stop your medication and start eating flaxseed? No.
What I’m saying is: read the paper, watch the video, and take it to your doctor. Ask the question. Challenge the script. Because clearly, the answers aren’t always coming from where they should.
In a spectacle that blended cutting-edge technology with slapstick comedy, Beijing recently hosted its first fully autonomous humanoid robot football tournament.
Four university teams unleashed their AI-powered creations onto the pitch, each hoping to showcase the future of robotics. The robots, designed to operate without human intervention, demonstrated impressive feats of engineering when they weren't toppling over or missing the ball entirely.
The final match saw Tsinghua University's THU Robotics team triumph over China Agricultural University's Mountain Sea team with a score of 5-3.
While the tournament highlighted significant advancements in AI and robotics, it also provided moments of unintended humour, reminding us that even in a high-tech future, the beautiful game retains its charm.
For a closer look at the action, check out the highlights below:
Many Australians would say, 'Thank goodness someone is willing to say it.' After all, the Australian PM has been shockingly ineffective in everything except winning elections. I won't bother venting about all the ineffective Woke policies his Labor government has foisted on a jaded public. Why jaded? Because Australia's opposition coalition has not decided whether it is a proper conservative party or is just slightly more conservative than Labor. As a consequence, the electorate has had no real choices.
The article is about Francesca Albanese, UN employee with the rather lengthy title "United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967".
She has been called out for consistent anti-Israel bias, with the US UN Ambassador calling for her sacking. Unfortunately, if every UN employee who held a strong anti-Israel bias were to resign, the UN cafeteria would be empty.
In summary, think twice before you employ anyone named Albanese.
Despite housing shortages, intense pressure on infrastructure and high social service costs, Australia's Labor government has maintained unprecedentedly high rates of immigration. Such high rates are not popular with the people, but they serve employers, as they put downward pressure on salaries. More importantly, they spike GDP, the only measure by which governments seem to gauge the effectiveness of their economic policies. So it is a win for employers and a win for the government, but who pays?
The workforce pays. Indeed, Australia is now in the thick of its longest per capita recession ever, and it's not letting up anytime soon. According to the OECD, we've experienced six consecutive quarters of declining GDP per capita. With population growth at 2.4% (half of which is due to immigration), the economy isn't keeping pace. This slump could last for 10 quarters or more, which is unprecedented. (macrobusiness.com.au)
The cost of immigration is borne by households. Real per capita disposable income has plummeted by 8.2% over two years—the steepest drop on record.
While government spending and immigration have kept the overall GDP afloat, the private sector is struggling. There has been zero growth in hours worked over the year, despite a 2.3% increase in population, as of September 24.
There is no clearer report card on Australia's Labor government than its decision to maintain high migration rates, which has led to a recession for Australian households. Wake up, Australia!
Well, that didn’t go according to plan for Australia’s eSafety Commissioner.
In a sharp rebuke to the country’s growing censorship machine, the Administrative Review Tribunal has ruled in favour of Canadian campaigner Chris “Billboard Chris” Elston, striking down a government order that tried to muzzle him under the Online Safety Act.
What was his crime? A post on X (formerly Twitter) from February 2024 that referred to a controversial WHO “expert” using biologically accurate pronouns. That was apparently enough for the eSafety Commissioner to label it “cyber abuse” and demand X take it down.
X initially refused, then geo-blocked the post in Australia. But Chris fought back — and he won.
The Tribunal found the censorship order was unjustified, and set it aside. A clear win for free speech.
“This is a victory not just for Billboard Chris, but for every Australian—and indeed every citizen who values the fundamental right to free speech.”
— Paul Coleman, ADF International
This isn’t just a win for one man with a billboard and a backbone — it’s a warning shot across the bow of Australia’s censorship regime. And it comes at a time when even the U.S. State Department is raising eyebrows at the powers our government has handed its so-called “eSafety” watchdog.
Chris said it best:
“The government does not have authority to silence peaceful expression… My post should never have been censored.”
Amen to that!
Here is an interview between Avi Yemini of Rebel News and Billboard Chris on his victory.
The political scale is ever wobbly. At times, the swing is towards the Right, while at others, it is towards the left. In many ways, the swing in recent years has been towards the Right. We saw it in the Brexit decision, the election of Trump, twice, and the rise of right-leaning governments in Europe. No doubt some of these were driven by circumstances peculiar to the individual countries. Others are due to general trends. For example, the rapid increase in immigration from developing countries in Western Democracies has contributed to the overall shift to the Right in the West.
However, at the same time, there has been an increasing support for Leftist policies, especially among the young. Indeed, a significant majority of under-25s lean Left. This has been evident in our streets, with demonstrators of all ages, but particularly youth, taking to the roads for various purposes. Whether it be Climate Change, Black Lives Matter, Indigenous rights, or expressing support for Palestinians or anti-Israel, the majority of demonstrators are always the young, and often University students. It is the youth of the world who are attracted to causes, and what more experienced or mature adults would call lost causes. Most notably, Socialism.
Yes, socialism, the political system that has failed in any country where it has been implemented, seems to attract the young, and with unrelenting passion. Just last week, a self-declared Socialist won the primary to become the Democratic candidate for Mayor of New York City. It is astounding.
Why are the young attracted to Socialism? I could cite many potential contributing factors, ranging from poor education systems that fail to teach history, the politicial leanings of Teachers, who themselves have never left the Education system and lived in the real world, and of course the University system that seems to incubate far Left ideologies, and no doubt 'corrupts the minds of the young'.
These factors may tell at least part of the story. However, Konstantin Kisin has his own perspective, which is worth considering. He claims that our Western Societies are failing their youth by not providing them the path to achieve the lifestyles that they have seen in previous generations. This is due to rapid increases in housing costs, which lock young people out of home ownership. This perspective is interesting and poses significant challenges to our societies.
Although it's a short video, it's well worth watching.
Of course, this raises the question: How can Western Societies make home ownership achievable again?
Given the widespread rise in blatant anti-Semitism around the world following Hamas' medieval massacre of innocent civilians attending a music festival, one has to wonder why it was allowed to persist. After all, in every Western democracy, while citizens have a right to protest, there are a whole swag of laws to ensure that such protests are civil. There are laws protecting property, against physical violence and against hate speech and discrimination. Many of the demonstrations have clearly violated these, but have had no response from the police. As a consequence, anti-Semitism has become 'mainstream'. If you do not enforce a law, then it is not the law.
Just on the past weekend, the Glastonbury music festival had a shameful episode where one of the acts had the audience chanting anti-Semitic and anti-Israel hate-speech ..." death, death to the IDF" was chanted by most of the thousands of youth attending the event.
This shameful episode reminded me the mass rallies in Nazi Germany with Hitler exhorting vile anit-semitism to an adoring crowd.
So, how can this evil be fought? Australia's Jewish community may have found one way to fight back. They took one of the radical Islamic hate preachers to court under Australia's discrimination act, which rather too broadly criminalises racial vilification. The preacher, whom I shall not name, had presented vile anti-Semitic sermons and had these circulated on the internet for years. Indeed, following complaints from the community, the Australian state and Federal police had studied the material to determine if hate speech laws had been broken. They had decided not to charge him. Why? The better option is that they thought the laws were not adequate, but possibly, and far worse, they did not want to rock the boat, starting some inter-ethnic conflict by charging a Muslim preacher.
This same inaction has been evident for increasingly blatant anti-Semitic acts in Australia's capital cities. These included weekly demonstrations with violent chants, intrusions into the Jewish communities, graffiti, vandalism, and even burning synagogues and the offices of Jewish members of parliament. All in all, it was a rather terrible period for Australia's Jews.
It was this increasingly violent antisemitism AND the failure of police to act to prevent it, that forced the Jewish community to initiate action under the Racial Discrimination Act.
The judgment was rendered today, with the preacher found guilty. This is a welcome result for all Australians, including peace-loving Muslim Australians, as it establishes a punishment for blatant hate speech. The ruling requires the preacher to pay substantial costs and commit to removing all offensive material from circulation, as well as not to reoffend. It may also prompt the police to reconsider their failure to act and enforce the law in the future.
This type of action should be taken by all Jewish communities around the world to fight back against the hate speech they have had to face.
Here is a brief summary of the final judgment by Australia's Channel 10
With virtually daily bombshell news hijacking all media focus, climate zealotry has not had its share of attention. You may not have heard about the recent presentation highlighting Australia's poor energy policies. As part of his sold-out Australian tour for the Institute of Public Affairs, US author and filmmaker Robert Bryce spoke in Sydney about why Australia needs to pull "the plug on Net Zero. Adam Creighton and Chris Uhlmann, both journalists for The Australian, joined Robert Bryce in presenting the case with compelling arguments.
Together, they provided an incisive critique of Australia's current energy policies, highlighting the pitfalls of the country's commitment to net-zero emissions by 2050.
Australia's Energy Failure
Bryce highlights the paradox of Australia being an energy-rich nation that exports vast quantities of coal, natural gas, and uranium, yet faces domestic energy shortages. He points out that while Australia is the world's third-largest LNG exporter, it experiences gas shortages at home due to infrastructure constraints and policy decisions. Similarly, despite possessing significant uranium reserves, Australia has no nuclear power plants, limiting its options for low-emission, reliable energy.
Critique of Net-Zero Ambitions
The presentation challenges the feasibility of achieving net-zero emissions, arguing that such goals are more aspirational than practical. Bryce emphasises that Australia's contribution to global CO₂ emissions is approximately 1%, questioning the rationale behind policies that could have minimal global impact yet significant domestic economic consequences.
Key Insights from the Presentation
Bryce presented several slides that demonstrate the absurdity of Australia's policies. Here are a few of them.
Australia's contribution to world emissions is insignificant
China and India's increase in emissions is much greater than the reductions in emissions in the rest of the world.
Coal is NOT being phased out. The growth in coal-fired capacity is five times greater than the growth in nuclear capacity.
Australia's coal-fired generation is insignificant, so why close them prematurely?
World experience shows that cheap alternative energy is a myth.
Renewables (solar and wind) cause increases in electricity costs
Net Zero is very expensive
In summary
Given Australia's relatively insignificant contribution to global emissions, energy policy should be driven by cost and efficiency. Australia's Net Zero target should be abandoned as it is unattainable, and attempts to implement it will cause damage to Australia's economy without yielding any benefits in terms of global emissions reduction. The drive towards Net Zero would be self-inflicted harm.
Trump, never one to "hide his light under a bushel", has often enough expounded on his 'winning policies. During his 2016 campaign, he said
“We’re gonna win so much, you may even get tired of winning. And you’ll say, ‘Please, please. It’s too much winning. We can’t take it anymore, Mr. President, it’s too much.’ And I’ll say, ‘No it isn’t. We have to keep winning. We have to win more!”
Trump is nothing if not entertaining. Yet, this last week qualifies as the most winning of weeks for Trump and his policies. Let's look at the list:
The US dropped massive bunker busters on Iranian nuclear facilities, significantly downgrading, if not eliminating, their nuclear infrastructure and capabilities.
At the NATO conference, he won commitments from almost all NATO members to increase their defence investments to 5% of GDP
SCOTUS announced 3 most significant rulings, all in favour of the Trump administration;
The first was a ruling denying individual Federal Court judges the right to issue nationwide injunctions. This is a direct defeat of the lawfare battle that the Democrats had initiated against Trump's executive orders. Virtually every one of his EOs had been challenged via injunctions for various reasons by left-leaning Federal judges.
The second was to give power back to parents to refuse to accept the LGBT propaganda that seems to have pervaded many of them
The third was to allow the administration to send illegal immigrants to third-party nations
The signing of a trade deal with China
Food giants have agreed to remove artificial dyes from food
The social security payments have had the most considerable monthly reduction ever, due largely to the work of DOGE
The Pentagon has started reinstating service members who had been wrongfully dismissed due to their refusal to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.
Trump brought an end to the war between Rwanda and Congo, a war that had been going on for decades.
The tariff strategy has generated some $88 B, disproving many pundits
The SP500 and NASDAQ hit record highs
Zero crossings of illegal immigrants into the US
Not a bad list!
Here is Rowan Dean from Sky News Australia summarising this most successful of weeks for Trump.
Earlier this week, I was speculating about Bill Maher's allegiance to the Democrats following his Trump dinner (see Maher telling it straight).
Obviously, I was either prophetic or already too late, as I came across this video where he claims he was "never a Democrat". Go figure. He certainly sounded like one for a very long time. Admittedly, many people who claimed to be Democrats a decade ago do not recognise what has become of the party. I often reflect on how organisations and individuals can transform gradually into something so unrelated to their former selves. They seem to have intense and passionate views both before and after their transformation, yet these views are now the opposite. If you think I am talking only about Democrats, you would be wrong. I find Tucker Carlson has undergone a significant transformation from his Fox News days into a bloviating isolationist. And don't get me started on Candace Owens. But I digress....
Spoiler alert, it is still too early to tell. While that may be the short version, here is more detail.
Following the massive attack on key nuclear sites using the biggest bunker busters ever, all the pundits have been voicing their opinions. President Trump has announced it an unqualified success with total destruction of the sites and Iran's nuclear ambitions eliminated forever. Ok, I am exaggerating, but that is the spirit of his commentary. The left-leaning newspapers have doused these claims as being too optimistic and cited various 'leaked' security services' assessments as questioning the success of the mission. The bombing has not destroyed all the sites, and some 40kg of 60% enriched Uranium was transported from the sites and hidden elsewhere.
Clearly, we have Trump and his team with a strong interest in owning a successful mission. At the same time, the anti-Trump brigade, including most Democrats, the left-leaning media and some isolationist Republicans, want to prove it a failure.
As always, it is challenging to glean truth from the cacophony of claims. But there is one party that has a strong interest in the truth. That is Israel. Israel, under an existential threat from a nuclear-armed Iran, certainly wants to know whether Iran's nuclear ambitions have been thwarted for keeps.
So what does Israel say? Israel Defence Forces spokesperson Brigadier General Effie Defrin said
"It is too early to fully assess the operation's achievements, which will be discussed for years to come. Even at this moment, we maintain high alertness. Our missions are not complete, and we will continue to act for our future."
He stressed that Iran's nuclear program, according to Israeli assessments, "has been set back for years."
So there you have it, 'too early to tell the details, but successfully put back for years. That is good news.
It has been messy. After widespread acclaim for the US operation to end Iran's nuclear program through intensive strikes by the US, including the deep penetration MOPs, Trump has been speedy in announcing a ceasefire between Iran and Israel.
It was not a fully negotiated affair, with Iran denying, then accepting, Israel accepting, then accusing Iran of breaking, and with missiles killing Israeli civilians. It also had a rather truculent Trump denouncing both Israel and Iran as if they were equally guilty of the violations. Bibi complied but was most probably smarting. It was another unedifying Trump performance. But, so far, the ceasefire is holding.
That seems to have been Trump's objective, but is it wise?
Israel had total control of the air and was systematically disarming the IRGC. The ceasefire stopped their momentum. Had they continued for a few more days, the regime may have suffered terminal damage and allowed for a popular uprising to replace the regime that has terrorized its people for over four decades. Now, that may not happen. The IRGC has already been out rounding up anyone who showed support for the Israelis and could pose a threat to their rule.
Equally significantly, there have been reports that the IRGC relocated enriched Uranium before the attacks on the known nuclear sites and even claims that the level of destruction of the sites was not as extensive as has been reported. If there is truth to such claims, it would make all that Israel and the US have invested into this battle be for naught.
Given the bombing occurred quite recently , it is too early to evaluate the veracity of such claims, but they are important. Once a ceasefire is in operation it becomes far more difficult to assess the truth, and more difficult to react if further bombing is required.
I am generally a Trump supporter, but I really cannot see the urgency in pushing a ceasefire before assessing the status of the nuclear program after the bombing. Also, Trump has made it clear that he forced Israel to accept this ceasefire. Given Israel had taken all the risks of attacking Iran, executed the battle over 12 days, and had suffered 1000 missiles raining on her civilians, Israel should have had the choice of whether it wanted a ceasefire and when it should have been called.
I recently came across a compelling interview with Dr. Aseem Malhotra titled “The Doctor That Got Banned For Speaking Out: ‘We've Been Lied To About Medication!’” and felt it deserved a wider audience, not for sensationalism, but because it raises questions we’re too often told not to ask.
Malhotra is no crank. He’s a respected British cardiologist who once enthusiastically promoted pharmaceutical interventions, including the COVID-19 vaccines. But as he tells it, experience — and personal tragedy — led him down a very different path.
Here are the key takeaways:
Big Pharma's Influence
Malhotra paints a disturbing picture of an industry with far too much sway over medical research, publication, and guidelines. The result? Not only overmedication and an ignorant public, but poorer health outcomes.
COVID Vaccine Concerns
Initially supportive, Malhotra changed course after his father’s sudden death — a cardiac event he now believes was linked to vaccination. He points to multiple studies that show that the COVID mRNA vaccines carried a greater risk of serious harm than benefits, and believes that vaccination should not never have been mandated and that no one should continue to be vaccinated.
Lifestyle Over Medication
A longtime advocate of healthy living, Malhotra argues that we’ve become too reliant on drugs — particularly statins — when the better solution is staring us in the mirror: diet, exercise, and stress control. He argues that if patients are properly advised about the risks and benefits of a medications such as statins, they would be able to make an informed consent to their treatment.
Speaking Out Comes at a Cost
Unsurprisingly, his public stance has made him a target. He’s faced professional backlash, regulatory scrutiny, and the full force of the modern "consensus machine."
A Call for Transparency
At heart, his message is simple: stop censoring debate. Let people hear the whole story, even if it makes us uncomfortable.
Now, you don’t have to agree with everything Malhotra says, but in an era where dissent is often treated as heresy, voices like his deserve to be heard, questioned, and debated — not silenced.
Liberal comedian Bill Maher has been a favourite of the Democrats for many years. His caustic humour can tear apart many Republican policies, and when targeting an individual, it is at its best. After all poking fun at your enemies is a powerful weapon. How can anyone respect a politician who has been totally ridiculed? Indeed, for many years, Donald Trump has been the target of Maher's barbed humour. But not all is well in Liberal land. Maher is an old-fashioned liberal of the type that has been dying out with the capture of the Democrats by Wokism. So Maher has transgressed on occasions, pointing his barbs at Woke extremists. It was tolerated, firstly because he is always funny, but more so, because it was balanced by at least as many strikes on the Republicans, and of course, Trump.
Then Trump did the unexpected! He extended an invitation to Bill Maher to the White House for a dinner with a group of commentators and naysayers. Maher, true to his independent spirit, accepted the invitation. His summary of the evening revealed that Trump had made an impression on him, not completely, but significantly.
Judge it from this piece that Maher presented after the dinner.
Subsequently, Maher's stance has shifted. He appears to have softened towards Trump, a change he attributes to his own consistency. However, his increasing criticism of the Woke extremists suggests a more complex evolution.
Again, here is a sample.
The Democratic party's shift to the left has led many traditional liberals to reconsider their allegiance. The list of defectors is long, stretching back decades and including names like Ronald Reagan, Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Dave Rubin, Alan Dershowitz, and Joe Rogan. Could Bill Maher be the next to leave the Democrats?
It happened! After what looked like endless vacillation, Trump gave the order to destroy Iran's nuclear sites using the US's bunker buster munitions. The reports to date indicate it was a total success. But let's be a bit cautious, it will require verification. No doubt it will be confirmed or otherwise in the coming days.
Hopefully, the sites are truly inoperative, but even if not, Trump, the US and Israel have had a significant victory. After decades of threatened terror by Iran's Islamists, the West has fought back.
Why did it take so long? A good question. I think the reaction from the world is at least a part of the story. Instead of universal acclaim for making the world safer, the media keeps giving mixed messages. Sure enough, there are plenty who do recognise the importance of the action and welcome it. But many nay-sayers seem to spout an endless stream of negative consequences. Yes, some are voicing fears about what may happen, and this would be reasonable if it gave some recognition to the necessity of the strikes. But no, they claim the strike was unjustified and cite the consequences that have not yet occurred as justification for not striking. Mmm, sounds like cowardice. It is an argument for inaction for fear of potential negative impacts. That is called appeasement, and we know what happens to appeasers. I think it was Churchill who said it best, "An appeaser feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last". It is that same cowardice that tries to appease bullies, and is at least one reason that Iran's Islamists have managed to get away with it so long.
But today we can celebrate. The world is a safer place due to the courage of Israel, the US and Donald Trump in facing up to the bullies.
It is unusual for prominent Muslims to put their head above the parapet and expose themselves to the Islamists who threaten physical violence against those who do not follow the Islamists' dogma. Yet, a prominent and outspoken Imam in France has broken the spell. Imam Hassen Chalghoumi, of Drancy near Paris, has penned a piece praising Israel and the Jewish people.
It is a short piece but well worth a read, especially as such direct praise of Israel and Jews is so rare in our hate-driven world. Read the article "Israel: A Nation of Miracles"
Israel has , once again, had the courage of its convictions, attacking Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons. This was high risk and fraught with uncertainty. It was done after extensive planning and executed with precision and professionalism. Given the task's difficulty, long distances, the likelihood of retaliation, and catering for massive barrages of ballistic missiles, the decision to act was not easy. It was made at what Israel thought was the latest time possible to avert an even worse scenario, Iran developing nuclear weapons that would have put Israel at existential risk.
While it would have preferred for the US to join in the attack, Israel decided that it could not wait and went in alone. It had advised Trump and his team, and unlike the Biden administration, Trump accepted Israel's decision and provided assistance in mitigating Iran's missile attack on Israeli cities.
This was just six days ago, and Israel's IDF's performance has been exemplary. Israel has achieved air supremacy; they have destroyed aerial defences, damaged many of the nuclear sites, and eliminated senior military and nuclear personnel. The Ayatollah has passed control to the next in charge, and he is hiding outside Tehran. Israel has freedom of the skies to destroy the IRGC military, communications, and energy infrastructure. Tehran is in chaos with long queues of citizens leaving the city.
On the other hand, Israel has suffered significant damage. Despite the Iron Dome's defence system's 90% success rate, 40 of the over 400 ballistic missiles sent by Iran have got through. They have inflicted damage to Tel-Aviv, Haifa and many other towns. Fatalities amount to some 30 people, but this number is increasing, and some 1000 Israelis have been wounded. These figures are far lower than expected, but the war is not yet over. Israel estimates they have destroyed some 40% of Iran's missile stocks.
There is, however, a serious issue. Israel's attack's key objective was to destroy Iran's nuclear ambitions. While Israel is in the process of destroying all the known sites except Fordow, it has limited capability to attack Fordow, which was built inside a mountain. Israel has limited options for the Fordow site. They lack the US's bunker-busting munitions that can penetrate some 200 feet underground. The US is needed to destroy Fordow.
As of this minute, Trump has been hesitating. His team has developed the plans for such an attack, but says he has not decided to give the go-ahead.
Why? While I understand that such decisions should not be made lightly, consider the alternative. If Fordow is left intact nothing is stopping Iran, no matter what regime takes over, from developing nuclear weapons in the future. If Iran did so, all Israel's efforts would be wasted, Trump's legacy would be shot, and Iran would again threaten the rest of the Middle East, Israel and the whole world with nuclear terrorism.
This decision is not difficult. If Israel could make the decision to attack, given all that it had to lose, why can't Trump make the decision when he has nothing to lose; it only requires dropping some bombs in undefended skies. It does not need troops on the ground. Sure, the US could face attacks on US bases worldwide, but that has always been the case.
I believe Trump will make the right decision, but he should do it now. As soon as the US destroys Fordow, it will destroy the IRGC's dreams and precipitate an end to the war. While Fordow is intact, it keeps alive Iran's dream of nuclear weapons.
Don't take my word for it. Here is a short video by Historian and political commentator Victor Davis Hanson on this topic.
Consider this. There are two demonstrations in town at the same time. One is a rather aggressive, large group of protestors threatening violence against citizens; they should shout slogans and carry signs that incite violence. The other is a smaller group of ordinary citizens, walking quietly; they, too, carry flags and some signs, but none incite violence. There are no speeches or chants, just a quiet demonstration.
Which would you prefer in your city? If you went to the city and happened to pass by one of these demonstrations, would you want to be confronted by a screaming mob or a quiet group of peaceful demonstrators?
Yes, I have loaded the question to absurdity. No one who is not part of the screaming mob or strongly aligned with their motivation would want their peaceful city taken over by loud, aggressive mobs. No matter the cause.
And what would you want the police to do if the two demonstrations converged on each other? I guess that would be more difficult, as it would depend on police resources at the time and the size of the two demonstrations. You would not want to have them merge, as we know what would happen. But, and this is important, if a demonstration was planned and authorised at a specific location, then the Police should ensure that that demonstration had the priority at that location. Moreover, the Police should ensure they have sufficient resources to protect the demonstrators from aggressors.
Unfortunately, for many Western Cities, aggressive and unseemly demonstrations have become a weekly occurrence. They have been called pro-Palestinian demonstrations, but in practice, they would be better characterised as anti-Israel or pro-Hamas demonstrations. No matter the justification, no one would have cared had they been peaceful. But no, their marches were provocative, specifically targeting synagogues and Jewish-dominated areas. The chants were genocidal and anti-Semitic. It was not just Israel they demonised, but Jews. Also, they incited violence against Jews, and they were themselves violent.
What did the police do to ensure the many laws against hate speech, incitement to violence, and to protect the rights of non-demonstrators to use public roads and parks? In Australia, they did nothing. They allowed the demonstrators to take over the streets. They allowed racist anti-Semitism and genocidal chants to continue. They allowed the flags of Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation, contrary to the law. They only acted when there was property damage and seemed reluctant even then. When pro-Israel demonstrators happened to be in the same areas, the police invariably forced the peaceful demonstrators to leave. Why? They were afraid they could not enforce their will on the aggressive mob. That is the epitome of police failure.
No society can survive if those charged with protecting the rights of all citizens simply abandon their jobs when they are needed most.
A recent episode was recorded by Rebel News' Avi Yemini and is well worth a view.
Israel has pulled off a spectacular pre-emptive assault on saber-rattling, terrorist-supporting, theocratic dictatorship. It has managed in just a few days to win dominance in the air, and is in the cleaning-up stages. This includes further attacks on nuclear-related sites, the IRGC assets, and some infrastructure. The latter is specifically to discourage Iran from using its ballistic missiles against civilian targets.
The war has not been all one-way. Iran showed a surprising lack of resistance to Israel's air attack. More on this later. On the other hand, it has launched multiple waves of drones and ballistic missiles against Israel's largest cities. Despite a highly efficient protective dome, destroying some 80-90% of such missiles, the remainder do penetrate, and we have seen substantial damage to buildings, and some casualties. The number of civilians who have lost their lives is relatively small, especially given the size of the onslaught. It was only possible due to Israel's defensive infrastructure, with shelters built in or near virtually every building.
Iran has targeted a few strategic sites, Israel's defence departments' building and an Oil Refinery in Haifa, but its primary targets have been residential areas. I expect that we will soon have the ICC issue warrants for the Iranian military leaders and the Ayatollah for such war crimes. And of course, the UK, Australia, Canada and Norway will put sanctions on these people. SO that will teach them. Of course, I don't really expect any such actions. But it does show the hypocrisy of the ICC and those virtue-signalling morally blind leaders of the UK, Canada, Norway, New Zealand and shamefully Australia.
While all freedom-loving people will applaud the success of Israel, and indeed thank them for taking the action against Iran. While Israel has done this as it faced an existential threat in Iran's moves to develop nuclear weapons after they had threatened Israel's destruction often enough. They had even boasted that Israel was a one bomb state. So they only had to make sure they managed to get one through, and Israel would be destroyed. So Israel had little choice, and they took the brave steps to protect their country. Yet, we have to accept that they have done us all a favour. The Islamists who rule, perhaps I will soon be saying ruled, but not yet, have threatened not only Israel but the West in general. A nuclear-armed Iran would have perpetuated a regime that had already supported terrorism around the world, through proxies, it had fought civil wars in Yemen, Lebanon and Syria. It was a force for evil and should never have been accepted in the community of nations. The world could isolate such rogue states, but I will leave that for another day.
While the West celebrates Iran's now-likely fall, its allies, China & Russia, have a lesson to learn. Iran's inability to prevent Israel's air superiority despite anti-aircraft defence systems provided by Russia is sobering. While Russia did not supply many batteries of its best system, the SU-400, it had provided the SU-300. They turned out to be totally ineffective against Israel. To our knowledge, after 5 days, Israel has not lost a single aeroplane. That is remarkable.
So Russia's confidence in its ability to defend itself has taken a blow. Equally important, Iran was a major source of the drones that Russia had been using against Ukraine. That supply line has now been broken. Israel's success against Iran has dealt several blows to Russia.
Here is a video providing far more detail on the impact of Iran's failure on Russia.
I almost feel guilty pointing out the same issues post after post. Yes, I am criticising the MSM (Main Stream Media) again. No surprise that much of the MSM is left-leaning. Sometimes we can adjust for the known bias. If we see any article about Israel in the NY Times, we can completely discount what they say. They not only always take a view that is critical of Israel, but also, too often, they simply print lies. Even when this is pointed out later, they will take no steps to correct the lies.
Consider the case where a misdirected rocket fired from Gaza towards Israel fell short onto a hospital parking lot, killing many people. Hamas claimed Israel had bombed the hospital, killing some 500 people. All are simply anti-Israel propaganda. You guessed it, most MSM printed the propaganda as fact. When the truth was discovered, most of the media printed retractions, pretty weak ones, but of course not the NY Times.
But that is not my focus today. Today it is about the LA riots. The anti-Trump MSM, together with the Democrats, have tried to portray these riots as 'mainly peaceful'. That description is, of course, now infamous after we experienced the summer of love in 2020 with mainly peaceful demonstrations, causing the destruction of billions in property, looting, fires, and even deaths. All mainly peaceful.
Thankfully the LA riots have not been allowed to get out of hand. After what happened in 2020 Donald Trump was not going to allow these riots to continue without direct and forecful action. He called out the National Guard and sure enough the LA police also started doing their jobs.
The media, however, was once again at their worst. Instead of reporting the facts, they acted like cheerleaders for the rioters. If only there could be some way to punish the media for inciting illegality. But I note that with some hesitation, as I know what would happen if Congress were tasked with framing such a law. No, the better way is to enforce the laws as they stand.
Dr Phil presents an enlightening perspective on how the media handled the LA Riots.
In the "now for something completely different" file, I have included this video clip of the appearance of Boston Dynamics' robotic dogs in America's Got Talent reality show. They made quite a splash and were certainly a popular act. These types of casual, friendly introductions of robots are important. They serve to demystify the machines that will no doubt integrate ever more completely into our daily lives.
A few hours ago, Israel launched its much-anticipated surprise attack on Iran. It was not unexpected, but its timing may have been. It is too soon to gauge its success, though initial reports show -
a large operation with some 200 planes
Minor reported damage to Israel from Iran's defence systems
widespread damage in many locations in Iran
targets included anti-aircraft defence, high-value military personnel, missile manufacturing sites and most importantly, nuclear weapons factories
The 'neutralization' of some senior personnel has been acknowledged by Iran, including the head of the IRGC
Iran, Khamanei has vowed retaliation, and drones have been launched against Israel
These are but a few hours after the attack, so much too early to draw conclusions.
Israel has been a victim of unwarranted aggression by Iran for decades. Iran has been threatening, has been using proxies for direct attacks and just a few months ago launched hundreds of drones and ballistic missiles against Israel. Iran has declared war on Israel and has used everything in its power to attack Israel for decades. Israel has taken this step only due to the threat of Iran developing nuclear weapons.
So, by any fair evaluation, Israel was justified, and the free world will be better off if it succeeds. Success would be the elimination of Iran's nuclear threat. Even greater success would be the elimination of the terrorist theocracy that took control of Iran in 1979.
We can all hope that Israel achieved the former, and that the freedom-loving people of Iran take the opportunity of Iran's weakness to overthrow the regime.
Biden's Autopens are multiplying. As Congress delves into the use, or likely abuse, of Biden's Autopen, we are learning more. Congressman Comer has reported that there was not a single Autopen but three. One of these was only discovered recently, and more importantly, that the 3rd Autopen had been used for signing 'hundreds of proclamations'. We have also learned that four people were involved in using the Autopen, including Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. This is building the case for legal action against some of these for usurping the power of the President.
It now seems that, due to cognitive issues, Joe Biden was not in control of his faculties throughout much of the later years of his presidency. His 'minders' should have reported his condition and had him replaced under the 25th Amendment. Instead, they lied about his condition and usurped his power, using the autopen to forge his authorisation.
If this can be proved, it will invalidate a large number of Autopen-authorised proclamations, executive orders, and pardons and launch a myriad of court cases and prison terms. Oh, 'tis a tangled web.
The media is starting to pick this one up, so many people are covering the Autopen-gate scandal.
Given the history, I guess we shoudl not be surprised, but the IDF has uncovered the UN working with Hamas to smuggle aid to Hamas for re-sale. Israel Hayom reports that
"Newly obtained data reveal a systematic mechanism by which the Hamas smuggled goods using UN aid trucks, enriching its coffers by millions of dollars during wartime. The documentation shows direct "under-the-table" cooperation between Hamas operatives and staff of the UN's World Food Programme (WFP)."
After much protest by the climate zealotry fraternity that the Spain /Portugal blackouts at the end of April were caused by unusual atmospheric conditions and were not an ongoing issue with a high proportion of renewables in the electricity grid, everyone has gone shtum. While many knowledgeable analysts at the time pinpointed the cause as the instability caused by fluctuations in the output of renewables in the grid, the zealots rejected that this was a serious concern for renewables. The media has quickly moved on, and once more, the warnings of the experts have been ignored.
Yet, given the experts' concerns, when intermittent renewables become a significant energy source of the grid, fluctuations in the energy generated will cause a cascade that is very difficult to limit. Sophisticated automated grid management systems operate to ensure that fluctuations in frequency, which would damage the grid, are detected and the offending generators are switched out of the system.
The cascade occurs when the consequence of switching one generator out of the system, in turn, causes a fluctuation that is transmitted across the next component and so on. It is just this type of process that resulted in all of Spain and all of Portugal having a blackout. Given that Spain's grid is connected to France, why didn't the cascade continue to France? The difference is that France has sufficient non-intermittent nuclear generators that ensure that the fluctuation of losing Spain is relatively small, and gives adequate time to France's grid management system to switch Spain out of its network.
So the Achilles heel of renewables is the fluctuations that occur with changes in solar output due to clouds, or just the natural changes in wind strength. The fluctuations can be handled when renewables are a relatively small proportion of the total power, but become unstable when the grid is majority renewables.
This is the canary in the renewables coalmine! Countries that have bet the farm on 100% renewables must return to the drawing board.
Australian journalist Chris Uhlmann has followed renewables technology and government policies for some time. He has developed healthy scepticism about current Australian policies. Here is a short video of his interview with John Anderson. It is well worth a view.
