This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
One major city's scheme that allowed a Christian pastor to be arrested, twice, because crowds in the streets were triggered to hostility by his words has been struck down.
The demise of Seattle's "heckler's veto" agenda comes in a consent order that was entered this week in a case brought by First Liberty Institute on behalf of Pastor Matthew Meinecke.
"Meinecke was censored and arrested on two separate occasions in 2022 for simply reading the Bible to others because his gospel-oriented message triggered hostile reactions from activists," the legal team explained.
But now in the order, which affirms a "complete victory" for the pastor, Judge Barbara J. Rothstein has granted Meinecke "permanent injunctive relief from the unconstitutional police policy, compensatory damages for the wrongful arrests, and nominal damages for the constitutional violations, along with reasonable attorney fees and expenses," the institute reported.
"This result is only fitting. The government should never silence the speech of a citizen just because an audience dislikes what it's hearing," explained Nate Kellum, senior counsel. "Pastor Meinecke is thrilled to put this case behind him and get back to sharing the gospel on the streets of Seattle."
The fight erupted just a little over two years ago when Meinecke traveled to the downtown Seattle area to read his Bible aloud, hold up a sign, and hand out literature to those who wanted it.
The events first happened at a pro-abortion rally.
"Despite his evangelistic and peaceful intent, some individuals in the crowd, including Antifa members, did not receive the message well. They took Meinecke's Bible away from him, ripped out pages from it, knocked Meinecke down, and took one of his shoes," the institute confirmed.
Seattle police finally arrived, and refused him assistance, instead taking immediate action against Meinecke. They ordered him to leave, then arrested him when he declined.
"Two days later, Meinecke encountered a similar situation at the Seattle Center, a public park where the Seattle PrideFest was occurring. Hecklers mistreated Meinecke again, and Seattle police officers silenced Meinecke again, as way of addressing the problem. The officers arrested Meinecke for refusing to depart from his intended audience," the institute said.
The fight then turned to courtrooms, and it was the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that judged, "The restrictions on his speech were content-based heckler's vetoes, where officers curbed his speech once the audience's hostile reaction manifested."
And the appeals court said, "Meinecke has established irreparable harm because a loss of First Amendment freedoms constitutes an irreparable injury, and the balance of equities and public interest favors Meinecke."
A "heckler's veto" is simply when authorities shut down a speaker because someone else doesn't like the message, which has been ruled repeatedly a violation of the First Amendment.
WND reported when the conflict developed police in Seattle chose to ignore actual criminal activity that was going on, instead attacking Meinecke for his speech.
The appeals court had returned the case to the lower court with instructions for a resolution.
The judges there had said, "The prototypical heckler's veto case is one in which the government silences particular speech or a particular speaker 'due to an anticipated disorderly or violent reaction of the audience. As such, it 'is a form of content discrimination, generally forbidden in a traditional or designated public forum.' The Supreme Court has emphasized as 'firmly settled' that 'the public expression of ideas may not be prohibited merely because the ideas are themselves offensive to some of their hearers, or simply because bystanders object to peaceful and orderly demonstrations.' … 'Listeners' reaction to speech is not a content-neutral basis for regulation.' …. It is apparent from the facts, including the video available from police body cameras, that the Seattle police directed Meinecke to leave the area because of the reaction his Bible-reading provoked at the Dobbs and PrideFest protests…."
The 9th Circuit said, "[T]he city maintains that the police officers merely sought to relocate Meinecke's speech rather than ban it outright…. But the government cannot escape First Amendment scrutiny simply because its actions 'can somehow be described as a burden rather than outright suppression.' … Even assuming that the officers simply instructed Meinecke to cross the street, their directions burdened Meinecke's speech. Meinecke had a right, just as those participating in the anti-Dobbs rally or the celebration of PrideFest, to use public sidewalks and streets for the peaceful dissemination of his views….
"If speech provokes wrongful acts on the part of hecklers, the government must deal with those wrongful acts directly; it may not avoid doing so by suppressing the speech. … The officers could have required the protestors to take a step back from Meinecke. They could have called for more officers—as they did after Meinecke was arrested. They could have erected a free speech barricade. They could have warned the protestors that any sort of physical altercation would result in the perpetrators' arrests. And they could have arrested the individuals who ultimately assaulted Meinecke. The city did none of those things. Instead, the police report on Meinecke's arrest simply recites that '[w]hen resources allowed in the past[,] SPD would try and keep the two opposing groups separated.' That is hardly the sort of concrete proof necessary to establish that restricting Meinecke's speech was the only way to avoid violence…."
Despite evidence of multiple assaults on Meinecke, Seattle police took "no action" against the attackers.
The appeals court noted at the Pride event, attendees were "dancing near him, holding up a flag to keep people from seeing him," and making "loud noises so he could not be heard." According to his complaint, "a couple of attendees stood close to Meinecke and howled and barked like dogs, and mocked Meinecke, while he read passages from the Bible. Meinecke did not engage with them." Another individual poured water on Meinecke's Bible.
Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley wrote about the dispute, "Note the protesters stole his Bible and assaulted him. Yet, the police threatened Meinecke with arrest and then took him into custody for failing to be silenced by the mob."
He said, "The opinion is a major win for free speech at a time when this 'indispensable right' is under attack by an array of government, corporate, and academic interests. We have seen Democratic politicians use the threat of violence from the left as an excuse to bar pro-life and conservative speakers. Likewise, this has become a regular practice at universities in barring conservative speakers due to security concerns while liberal speakers are free to speak on campuses."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An author who is known for coining the "Millennnial" descriptive and has seen his predictions for the future actually happen is warning that America is blundering down the road to another civil war, and four of five predicates for that calamity already have happened.
It is demographer and historian Neil Howe who was interviewed for an analysis by the Daily Signal, and who explained internal divisions so deep they can lead to a reprise of the war between the blue and the gray is more plausible than most people think.
"In 1997, he published a book with Bill Strauss, 'The Fourth Turning: An American Prophecy—What the Cycles of History Tell Us About America's Next Rendezvous with Destiny.' In that book, he suggested five catalysts for a major crisis—and four of the five have already come to pass," the analysis explained.
On the Daily Signal Podcast, he explained one predictor was a crisis over debt, and he called it a "new tea party movement," a label that subsequently was used during the 2010 fights by that name.
"The other one was a WMD [weapon of mass destruction] attack on New York City," Howe explained, citing how the catastrophe of 9/11 paralleled that worry.
"The other one was the [COVID-19] pandemic, and the fourth one was Russia invading a former Soviet republic," such as Ukraine, he explained.
What's left?
"A nullification crisis, where one or more of the states would actually nullify federal regulation, which would lead to a new secession movement," he warned.
His theory is that the United States can expect a major crisis about every 80-100 years, like a Great Depression or a World War II, events that he calls "fourth turnings."
And he says already in America the divisions between "red" and "blue" are so deep each considers the other "perfectly evil," the analysis explains.
"When most of what you're talking about is the width of sidewalks and the diameter of sewer pipes, just coordination issues, democracy works really well," Howe says. "But when you're talking about issues that virtually define who you are, it doesn't work. He (Carl Becker, author of the 1941 essay 'The Dilemma of Modern Democracy') said no one is going to accede to a vote count that goes 51% against you. You are not going to give up everything you believe in just because you came up three votes short."
He said the fact that there now are leftist enclaves inside conservative states, and vice versa, actually makes his theory of coming conflict stronger.
He also warned that the American government, during this time period, already is "so huge," when circumstances of conflict generally make governments larger.
And he cautioned about the impact on the American military and its effect on the world.
"If it requires our forces around the world to stand down for six months, the entire world will remake itself," he said. "The entire world, for better or for worse, depends upon our presence to be what it is."
He's just not sure what will be the trigger, though.
"You've got to feel everything's on the line to push you to do something."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A new report from a watchdog says the FBI must improve its performance when it handles child sexual abuse investigations.
A report at Just the News said the warning comes some three years after it was learned the FBI knew that U.S. gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar was molesting female athletes, but "did not act quick enough."
The new report is from the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Justice.
A summary explains, "The DOJ OIG found that further improvements are needed to build upon the FBI's recent changes to its crimes against children and human trafficking (CAC/HT) program to ensure it appropriately addresses child sexual abuse allegations."
The watchdog found that there were suspected child abuse cases for which the FBI "lacked any recent investigative activity or case updates, logical investigative steps, or referrals to appropriate agencies."
The report said not only did agents not appropriately review leads about cases, but there were "instances of substantial non-compliance with FBI policy."
According to Courthouse News, while the FBI tried to correct its operations after the Nassar case, "some agency staff have been slow to respond to active child sexual abuse allegations."
The report noted that lawmakers will put the agency "back under the microscope this fall" because of the report.
The criticism comes from FBI Inspector General Michael Horowitz.
"It was also partly a response to bipartisan oversight from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who grilled FBI Director Christopher Wray on the Nassar case in 2021 and demanded that the agency review its practices for responding to such reports," CN reported.
In fact, the IG found "dozens of instances" where FBI employees sat on allegations of child sexual abuse or failed to report those allegations properly.
Horowitz listed almost a dozen recommendations to better address the FBI's failings than the adjustments it already had made in procedures.
Lawmakers say they are ready to act.
"The FBI must answer for the inspector general's grave findings," charged Sen. Dick Durbin, a Democrat. "In 2021, Director Wray testified to the Committee that what happened with Nassar was 'inexcusable … and we're doing everything in our power to make sure it never happens again.' But it's still happening."
The report noted just months ago, the DOJ agreed to a settlement of some $139 million for more than 130 claims the FBI failed to properly investigate allegations of sexual abuse crimes by Hassar.
Nasser, convicted on charges several years ago, is serving three consecutive 20-year terms.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. Department of Justice announced Monday an arrest was made after an American soldier was found to be in the possession of thousands of child pornography images he generated using artificial intelligence.
Seth Herrera, a U.S. Army soldier stationed at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, was arrested and charged with allegedly transporting and possessing child sexual abuse images. Herrera had also used AI to generate child pornography images using pictures of children he knew.
Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco said the DOJ will be prosecuting AI-enabled criminal activity and will seek increased penalties if warranted.
"The misuse of cutting-edge generative AI is accelerating the proliferation of dangerous content, including child sexual abuse material – so the Department of Justice is accelerating its enforcement efforts. As alleged, the defendant used AI tools to morph images of real kids into horrific child sexual abuse material. Criminals considering the use of AI to perpetuate their crimes should stop and think twice – because the Department of Justice is prosecuting AI-enabled criminal conduct to the fullest extent of the law and will seek increased sentences wherever warranted," Monaco said.
Herrera has been charged with one count of transportation of child pornography, once count of receipt of child pornography, one count of possession of child pornography, and will be appearing in court Tuesday. He faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison if convicted.
U.S. Attorney S. Lane Tucker for the District of Alaska, said AI-generated sexual abuse images are still child pornography, and perpetrators will be held accountable.
"Technology may change, but our commitment to protecting children will not. We will aggressively pursue those who produce and traffic in child sexual abuse material (CSAM), no matter how that material was created. Put simply, CSAM generated by AI is still CSAM, and those who sexually exploit children, through whatever technological means, will be held accountable by our office in conjunction with our law enforcement partners, for justice and the safety of our children," Tucker said.
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Nicole Argentieri, head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division said the arrest of Herrera should serve as a warning to criminals who engage in these types of acts.
"As alleged, Seth Herrera possessed thousands of images depicting the violent sexual abuse of children, including infants. He also allegedly used AI to create images depicting the sexual exploitation of children he knew. Today's announcement should serve as yet another warning that the Criminal Division will aggressively pursue those who possess or produce child sexual abuse material, including where the images were generated through AI," Argentieri said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A speaker at an event for the Black Caucus, during the Democrat National Convention in Chicago this week, has said, stunningly, "The quiet part out loud."
Listen to Mark Thompson, who was urging attendees to behave, carefully, until the coming Nov. 5 election day, is history.
Thompson, known for a podcast called "Make It Plain," told listeners to stay composed. And then…
"We got 70 days to act right, y'all. Now, after 70 days, we can go back to acting crazy, right?" he said.
A posting at RVM News said, "The comments appeared to suggest that supporters should avoid any actions that could potentially harm the Democratic Party's prospects until after the election. When someone off-camera referenced the DNC chant 'We're not going back,' Thompson humorously responded, 'I hope not, but for those who got to, just wait 70 days to go back, please. Be good.'"
The confession was noticed.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Abortion promoters have been, and are, flooding the streets of America these days.
This is way beyond the vasectomies and chemical abortions being offered, as a stunt, at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago this week.
The activists are collecting signatures and pushing state constitutional amendments that would give the nation's abortion industry an open door to pursue any money-making procedure that they could develop in the name of "abortion rights."
It's all because of the Dobbs decision from the Supreme Court a few years ago that overturned the longstanding, but constitutionally flawed, Roe v. Wade ruling to which states were bound.
The change didn't ban abortion, but it did turn over regulation of the lucrative industry to states, creating what is now the battleground as abortion business operators seek to ensure their financial future.
Among the states, about half have now imposed major roadblocks to the commercial-level killing of the unborn, including some that have outright bans; but about half have not.
It's that half with the new requirements that now are in a bull's-eye.
And the center of that bull's eye is South Dakota since it is known to be conservative and its voters in the past have been not friendly at all to abortionists. There was a time when there was only a single abortion business operating in the state.
The fight has involved the courts already, but whatever happens there, the results from the state will be seen as a precedent for more attacks on other pro-life standards around the nation.
"A Kamala (Harris) presidency means more health risks to women and more babies aborted," Caroline Woods, a spokeswoman for the Life Defense Fund, which is fighting to protect the lives of the unborn, told WND.
"When undercover videos showed Planned Parenthood executives cavalierly talking about selling baby parts in California, then-Attorney General Kamala Harris viciously went after those who exposed Planned Parenthood's illegal actions. She will act no different as president, and she has made it her goal to legalize abortions across the nation."
There have been accusations that Harris schemed to send state agents to undercover reporter David Daleiden's home, to confiscate his videos and equipment, as he was releasing a series of reports on those agendas among abortionists to sell unborn baby body parts for higher and higher amounts.
One abortionist explained the need for that: "I want a Lamborghini."
Woods' organization sued the "Dakotans for Health" which is pushing for the plan that would unleash unrestricted abortions by eliminating more than 100 requirements the state already has. The fight also is significant because if pro-abortion radicals can succeed in South Dakota, in the heart of America, and with food production, tourism, and finance as major industries – nothing like Hollywood or New York – they would feel confident in taking their campaign anywhere.
Life Defense Fund's case was dismissed for not including Secretary of State Monae Johnson as a defendant, but that was reversed by the state's Supreme Court Johnson now has been added and further hearings are expected.
"The court has expedited our case – Life Defense Fund and Leslee Unruh vs. Dakotans for Health – where each of our claims will proceed in trial come September. If we win, Amendment G will be null and void regardless if this radical abortion measure appears on the ballot this November," Woods explained.
"A vote for Amendment G is a vote for the Kamala Harris' radical agenda for America. In South Dakota, we reject her extreme abortion plans that endanger women and children," she said.
She warned, "South Dakota can be an example to the rest of the nation by once again showing that we are pro-woman and pro-children. Amendment G is the most radical abortion measure we've seen in our country, and we will fight to make sure children aren't aborted up to birth and women are protected from unsafe, unclean medical practices."
"We want South Dakota to blaze a path for a pro-life victory and show the rest of the nation how we can beat the abortion lobby."
She said the court case revolves around allegations of unethical, even illegal, behavior by the petition collectors.
"They say 'Let the people vote,' but what they're saying is, 'Let us cheat.' In the same way, that Olympic teams are banned from performing if they cheat, this abortion amendment should be disqualified from appearing on the ballot since Dakotans for Health broke South Dakota election law, cheated, and lied directly to South Dakotans to advance their radical agenda."
Reports confirm there are allegations petition circulators left petition sheets unattended, a violation. They misled signers, a violation. They tried to bait-and-switch voters, a violation.
They included nonresidents, a violation.
The pro-abortion faction went to federal court, trying to get the state case killed, and the judge refused.
Woods described the proposal as "one of the most extreme abortion laws in the nation."
It would "legalize painful, late-term abortion, all the way to the point of birth." And it would kill a multitude of existing state abortion policies that have been created over time on a bipartisan basis.
For example, a provision for parents to know when a minor daughter is being pressured into abortion would be killed.
Killed would be protection for a mother from being forced to have an abortion against her will.
Killed would be conscience protections so that doctors and nurses cannot be forced to participate in performing abortions against their will.
Killed would even be basic health and safety requirements for abortionists to follow, including requirements that abortions be done by a physician and an inspected and clean facility.
Among the allegations the abortion industry promoters are facing:
Bait and switch. A couple told pro-lifers during a Farmers Market in 2023, where abortion promoters were gathering signatures, they were telling people the petitions were regarding a tax proposal.
The couple, not named, said the signature collector even checked, when they asked for the tax petition, and said, "This is the one you want," handing them the abortion plan.
Also, abortion promoters were collecting signatures but failing to provide a required statement from the attorney general.
There also were incorrect claims that the new petition supported the same thing that Roe did back in 1973. The promoter explains, "This is exactly what the Supreme Court did in '73. In the first three months, it's a woman's choice. Then there are stipulations and exceptions. … They say it's up to nine months and that's not true…"
Here is Tiffany Campbell, a petition coordinator, explaining just how extreme is the amendment.
She boasts, "The legislature can't mess with it." And "It's gonna wipe off 113 abortion regulations that we have now."
Cited are the 24-hour waiting period, parental notification, 22-week ban … "Everything goes away."
Signing the petitions twice? No problem, the extra signature is just "crossed off."
And leaving petitions unattended:
Giving incorrect information, where a signature collector accuses someone of lying if they say abortions would be allowed through nine months, which they would be.
Other videos suggest verbal abuse by petition collectors and worse.
Woods already has written in National Review that abortion activists are "doing anything they can to get their way, including deceiving voters."
She continued, "Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, many conservative states like my home state of South Dakota activated trigger laws on abortion. These laws were passed while Roe was still operative and were designed to be implemented the moment Roe v. Wade was overturned. They typically outlawed abortion unless the doctor believed it was needed to save the life of the mother. Since then, the abortion lobby has aggressively centered its efforts around gathering petition signatures and putting abortion measures on the ballot in states like South Dakota, among many others."
She noted polling reveals three-quarters of Americans support abortion bans after 15 weeks.
And she said Amendment G allows non-doctors to do abortions, too.
Woods explained her organization has "over 100 hours of video capturing pro-choice petition circulators, much of which showed them breaking South Dakota law."
Such evidence already has prompted the state's attorney general to reprimand the abortion promoters.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Democrats apparently see everything through the clouded lens of gender.
Scientifically, of course, there are two: Male and female, defined by DNA.
But to Democrats, politics is gender, school lessons are gender, sports are gender, religion is gender, even war now is gender. And all of those situations the gender has to be "neutral," so as not to bestow some advantage on men.
And now it's prayer.
There is, in fact, a "Gender Neutral Prayer Room" at the DNC in Chicago this week.
Social media pointed out that those who consider themselves to be men or women shouldn't worry, as there also are prayer rooms for men and women.
A video reveals the gender neutral prayer room is outfitted in advance with prayer rugs, forcing the assumption it is for "gender neutral" Muslims.
Commenters on social media said, "Do non-binary people pray differently?" and another was startled, with, "Wait, they pray??"
And, "Oh, so now even prayer rooms have to be gender neutral? I can just imagine the confusion when someone walks in and sees a sign that says 'No gender-specific praying allowed.' I guess even God has to be politically correct now."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – South Tel Aviv was rocked by an explosion Sunday night in what police and the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) have now confirmed was an attempted terrorist attack involving "a powerful explosive device."
The incident took place at around 8 p.m. and the terrorist – who has yet to be named – is thought to be a 50-year-old man from the Samarian city of Nablus (known as Shechem in Hebrew). Sitting between the twin peaks of Mounts Gerizim and Ebal, the town is thought to be some 4,000 years old and is the site of Joseph's Tomb, after the Israelites returned his bones from Egypt and interred him in the Holy Land.
The terrorist – who is thought to have had an accomplice who transported him to Tel Aviv – was captured on CCTV wearing a backpack and walking past stores crowded with shoppers, and it was a miracle the only person wounded in the botched attack was a 33-year-old passerby riding on an electric scooter, who escaped with moderate injuries.
Ayalon District Police Commander Haim Bublil told Kan News Radio "it is possible the assailant planned to reach the nearby synagogue or perhaps the shopping center. We have no ability to understand why [the bomb] exploded at this point in time."
He added if the bomber had done so there would likely have been a scene of carnage with dozens of people either killed or wounded. Meanwhile, one worshiper at the synagogue said he decided to enter the building to participate in evening prayers at the last moment and would have been on the street in the radius of the blast if he had not decided to do so.
The Israel Police have requested Tel Avivians remain vigilant and are concerned about the prospect of potential copycat attacks. Hamas took responsibility for the attempted attack, saying it worked in collaboration with PIJ and threatened to carry out more.
Judea and Samaria is growing increasingly restive as different militant Arab factions squabble for supremacy in the region. Hamas, for example, has grown in influence and popularity, especially since Oct. 7.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Ultra-zealous prosecutors, trying to jail as many people as they can from the Jan. 6 protest-turned-riot at the U.S. Capitol, have decided to submit to a Supreme Court ruling and eliminate "obstruction" charges from many of the cases.
The prosecutions of those at a rally held by President Donald Trump that day, after which a few hundred rioted at the Capitol and broke windows and doors, has been more intense than likely any other federal prosecution ever has been. Some defendants essentially are liable for misdemeanor offenses who have spent years in jails already awaiting trial.
One of the enhancers that prosecutors have been routinely applying to anyone at the events that day has been an obstruction charge. But now they're working through the paperwork to drop many of those allegations since the Supreme Court said it wasn't a proper use of the count.
The Washington Examiner said its review of court records found that many of those counts are being dropped.
It was in the Fischer v. United States case that the high court determined, 6-3, that Joe Biden's Department of Justice was improperly applying counts against defendants a statute that actually "only applies to conduct such as manipulation or destruction of documents."
The report noted Bill Shipley, a defense attorney who has represented dozens of Capitol defendants, told the publication the dispute is over an obstruction charge, known as 1512(c)(2). And he said prosecutors have been offering pleas to other charges.
The Examiner noted it spotted the emerging pattern in July, almost as soon as the Supreme Court ruling was announced.
Shipley said the government now is backtracking "in every case that is about to go to trial."
The report explained, "There are 259 people who have been charged with the felony obstruction count, according to the DOJ, with around 133 having already been sentenced. Around 50 people have been sentenced on obstruction charges and no other felony. Of those, about half are currently serving a sentence of incarceration, fewer than 2% of all charged cases."
The report cited the filing in the case against Deborah Lynn Lee, a 58-year-old woman from Pennsylvania who recently saw her felony obstruction charge deleted.
She still faces misdemeanors for allegedly entering or being in a restricted building and disorderly conduct, but the maximum possible penalty has been cut from 23 years to three.
In the case Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexander Diamond did not explain the dismissal of the felony count, the report said.
The changes will not mean the cases will be dropped entirely, as no defendant faced only that obstruction charge. Other counts often include entering the Capitol or simply being there without permission.
Meanwhile, prosecutors working for U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves's office have said in court filings they think the count still can be used.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy said dropping the claims made sense.
"If a case is not scheduled for trial any time soon, the prosecutors can bide their time and try to negotiate some kind of guilty plea, knowing that, if negotiations fail, they can always dismiss the case down the road. But if the case is already scheduled for trial, and the prosecutors believe they can't win because of the Fischer decision, it's not surprising that they'd drop those cases."
Prosecutors claim that the convictions and sentences under the now-inapplicable provision for those whose cases already are resolved should remain.
The Fischer ruling also has, the report said, a significant impact on the lawfare cases that Democrats have created against President Trump.
In one case special counsel Jack Smith, claims he will keep using the count.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Chinese scientists are bragging about finding a way of developing hypersonic missiles that are capable of "skipping" on the atmosphere, extending the missile's range.
In the peer-reviewed Journal of Astronautics published in June, researchers from the China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center state the missiles could use a method similar to skipping a stone on water – the missile would skip along the denser part of the atmosphere, extending its range by up to 34%.
According to Business Insider, the article's principal author Yong Enmi said the work was partly inspired by aerospace engineers in Nazi Germany who envisioned a space plane, and the Dyna-Soar project carried out by the U.S. Air Force during the 1950s. Both were designed for long distances and skipping capabilities, however, neither was ever built.
The director of Military Analysis at Washington-based Defense Priorities, Jennifer Kavanagh, told Business Insider the implications of the People's Liberation Army having such weapons are a serious threat, as missiles could reach U.S. soil and are harder to track and intercept.
"It will be easier for the PLA to protect, and harder for the United States to find and target missile systems based deep inside China than those that must be positioned along the coast," Kavanagh told Business Insider, but added the research did not include actual missile tests, only simulations.
While China works on developing weapons capable of mass destruction in the U.S., the Chinese government is simultaneously asking the U.S., the United Kingdom, and Australia to scale back their nuclear submarine cooperation.
On Wednesday, the Chinese foreign ministry announced they are aware Australia has entered into a cooperation agreement with the U.S. and the U.K. on nuclear-powered submarines, which would allow the three nations to exchange nuclear–related material and information.
Foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said the cooperation harms efforts to keep the region secure and peaceful, and exacerbates the arms race that could lead to military confrontation.
"The U.S., the U.K. and Australia formed AUKUS to advance cooperation on nuclear–powered submarines and other cutting-edge military technologies. Their moves exacerbate the arms race, undermine the international nuclear non–proliferation regime, incite bloc politics and military confrontation and hurt regional peace and stability. China and relevant countries in the region have expressed more than once serious concerns and firm opposition," Lin said in a statement.
Lin further added the alliance contravenes the object and purpose of the Treaty on the Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
"The cooperation involves the transfer of nuclear-powered submarine reactors and a large amount of weapons–grade highly enriched uranium from nuclear-weapon states to a non–nuclear–weapon state, which constitutes grave nuclear proliferation risks," Lin said, adding that many countries have expressed concerns.
Lin stated the international community should take the alliance seriously, and the negative effects it has on safeguards.
"Until the international community reaches consensus on safeguards and other issues, the U.S., the U.K. and Australia should not proceed with their nuclear–powered submarine cooperation," Lin said.
Under the alliance, Australia would receive a fleet of eight nuclear powered and armed submarines by 2050.
According to a 2021 statement from the office of the U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the alliance was formed to enhance the development of joint capabilities and technology sharing, to keep their respective citizens safe from harm, while reinforcing shared goals.
The statement goes on to say AUKUS would deepen defense, security and foreign policy ties. The three nations already share intelligence with the Five Eyes alliance that includes the U.S., U.K., Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.
Johnson said in the statement the alliance would drive jobs and prosperity.
"The U.K., Australia and U.S. are natural allies – while we may be separated geographically, our interests and values are shared. The AUKUS alliance will bring us closer than ever, creating a new defense partnership and driving jobs and prosperity. This partnership will become increasingly vital for defending our interests in the Indo–Pacific region and, by extension, protecting our people back at home," Johnson said.
Meanwhile, the Department of Justice announced in a news release Tuesday, that a U.S. Army sergeant has pleaded guilty to charges of selling national defense secrets to China for $42,000 after being indicted by a grand jury in March.
Korbein Schultz was charged with conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defense information, exporting defense articles without a license, conspiracy to export defense articles without a license, and bribery of a public official.
Assistant Attorney General Matthew Olsen of the Justice Department's National Security Division said in the statement Schultz abused his access to restricted government systems to sell military information to a known foreign national.
"By conspiring to transmit national defense information to a person living outside the United States, this defendant callously put our national security at risk to cash in on the trust our military placed in him. Today's guilty plea is a stark reminder that those who would betray their sworn oath for personal gain will be identified and brought to justice," Olsen said.
Executive Assistant Director Robert Wells of the FBI's National Security Branch said the arrest of Schultz should be a warning to any U.S. service member who is considering betraying the U.S.
""The U.S. is governed by the rule of law and when persons, placed in a position of trust violate that trust, the FBI and our partners will hold them accountable. Governments like China are aggressively targeting our military personnel and national security information and we will do everything in our power to ensure that information is safeguarded from hostile foreign governments,"" Wells said.