This story originally appeared in Panamerican Dispatch on Sep. 21, 2026, and is shared with permission.
The Brazilian Intelligence Agency (ABIN) has raised the risk of external influence and interference by the United States in Brazil’s 2026 elections to a “critical level.” The confidential report was sent to the Presidency, the Supreme Electoral Court, and the Ministry of Justice. In it, the agency points to escalating pressure from the administration of Donald Trump on Brazil. It ties Washington’s actions to a broader strategy to politically reorient Latin America.
The document is titled, “Threats to the 2026 electoral process.” It was forwarded to authorities in late August, and its contents were revealed this Saturday, Sept. 19, by journalist Mônica Bergamo’s column in the Folha de S.Paulo newspaper.
According to the report, there is a “trend of escalating pressure on Brazil” and a “selective intensification and reconfiguration of the pressure exerted by the United States,” albeit within a historic pattern of U.S. influence over the region.
The report’s assessment does not mention ballot tampering or altering the election results. The intelligence agency’s warning addresses the possibility that political, economic and diplomatic pressures could interfere with the institutional environment and with public debate during the electoral process.
The agency places these actions within the strategy adopted by the second Trump administration to reaffirm U.S. hegemony in Latin America.
According to the analysis, strategic documents released by the U.S. government between November 2025 and May of this year point to its objectives as reducing the influence of powers considered rivals and preventing their access to the region’s “strategic assets, natural resources and infrastructure.”
ABIN identifies China as one of the primary targets of this policy. In the agency’s assessment, Washington seeks to expand its direct or indirect control over these resources, whether through the U.S. government or the country’s private investment.
The report pays special attention to the actions of U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio. According to ABIN, his policy toward Latin America has an ideological bent and he seeks to “influence and reorient the foreign policy of countries in the region.”
According to the document, this strategy involves steering Latin American countries away from China and promoting a domestic political shift “by supporting the rise of conservative governments.”
The agency cites a U.S. Senate hearing held in June, during which Rubio linked the restoration of U.S. hegemony in Latin America to the presence of governments aligned with Washington.
At the time, Rubio stated that the region had come to rely on several governments “friendly” to the United States during Trump’s second term. He singled out Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela as exceptions.
The document also noted statements in which Rubio held Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva responsible for U.S. tariffs on Brazilian products, alleging that Brazil had not negotiated “in good faith.”
In ABIN’s view, this approach personalizes the pressure exerted on the country and has the potential to impact public debate in Brazil during the electoral period.
The intelligence agency assessed that Brazil holds a unique position in U.S. strategy, because it has a government with “greater political will and the means to defend its strategic autonomy” in the face of Washington’s pressure for concessions and geopolitical realignment.
The report states that, despite periods of easing tensions between Lula and Trump, actions taken by the United States since May indicate a trend of increasing pressure.
Among the actions cited is the U.S. designation of Brazilian criminal organizations as terrorist groups and sanctions announced in July against two Brazilians and companies based in Brazil and Portugal. The U.S. government accused them of ties to money-laundering networks linked to the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) drug gang. For ABIN, these sanctions represented a “transition” because they caused U.S. pressure to have concrete effects on Brazilian individuals and companies.
“As a result, U.S. external interference now directly impacts financial relationships, corporate reputation, access to the dollar, international operations, and the exposure of third parties to the risk of secondary sanctions,” states an excerpt from the report released by Folha de S. Paulo.
According to the analysis, the U.S. strategy is happening in a “gradual, combined and adaptive” manner, linking Brazilian organizations to threats against U.S. national security. This is then followed by measures capable of affecting the country’s companies, banks and other institutions.
The Brazilian Intelligence Agency warns that these types of sanctions could prompt Brazilian and foreign economic actors to alter their decisions out of fear of losing access to the U.S. financial system or being impacted by secondary sanctions.
The report has also emerged amid tensions between Brasília and Washington directly related to the 2026 elections.
During negotiations held in 2025, the Trump administration presented Brazil with a draft joint statement that outlined a Brazilian commitment to not “arbitrarily” detain, arrest or limit the participation of “political dissidents” in the electoral process. The proposal stated that Brazil should commit to holding “free and fair” elections and ensure the participation of such individuals in the vote.
On Thursday. Sept. 17, Lula stated in an interview with Rádio Itatiaia that the proposal had become a “dead issue” for the Brazilian government. The president also rejected the possibility of granting the United States preferential access to the country’s mineral resources.
The confidential agency report delves deeper into the concerns previously raised in public analyses by the Brazilian Intelligence Agency. In a document released this year regarding intelligence challenges for 2026, the agency identified foreign interference as a threat to sovereignty. It warned that a combination of technological dependence, disinformation, espionage, and coercion could enable foreign actors to influence public debate and decision-making processes in Brazil.
Edited by Geisa Marques. This article was originally published by Brasil de Fato. It can be read in its original form, in Portuguese, here.
by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH – originally published on his Substack Focal Points
All links to previopus Gospa News post or videos have deen added in the aftermath by virtue of the ties with topic covered
A coalition of 168 physicians, scientists, researchers, health-freedom advocates, and public figures—collectively representing over 63 million followers across social media—has just sent an open letter to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and President Donald Trump calling for decisive action on the mRNA platform.
The effort was coordinated by Dr. Mary Talley Bowden and includes signatories such as Dr. Peter McCullough, Louisiana Deputy Surgeon General Dr. Sean Troxclair, U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, former U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson, and myself. The full list is at the bottom of this article.
The letter argues that current federal actions have fallen short of the health-freedom movement’s stated goals and calls for the removal of mRNA/gene-therapy-derived vaccine technologies, termination of the COVID-19 PREP Act declaration, repeal of the PREP Act, an end to pharmaceutical direct-to-consumer advertising, and reforms addressing conflicts of interest and coercive healthcare incentives.
Below is the full open letter and list of signatories:
Dear Secretary Kennedy and President Trump,
As influential leaders within the MAHA and health freedom movements, we are writing to object to policies under your oversight related to the mRNA platform, and to call you to act on our policy goals.
While the centerpiece of the MAHA and health freedom agenda has been removal of mRNA shots, you have failed to take decisive action on this front despite overwhelming credible evidence to the harm of this technology. Instead, your policies related to mRNA technology are neutered and self-defeating, putting pregnant women and children at risk, misleading parents and eroding their rights, and failing to help those harmed by vaccines.
If you continue to ignore our central issue of removing the mRNA platform, the MAHA and health freedom movements will withdraw their support of you, and you will face the political consequences.
We are writing to express deep concerns about policies emerging from HHS, the CDC, and the FDA. Specifically, we object to:
Removal of the mRNA platform from the market remains one of the central goals of the grassroots medical freedom movement.
Millions of concerned citizens set aside partisan differences and identities to support the historic MAGA/MAHA alliance. Instead of decisive policy actions on these core issues, we see distractions, linguistic misdirections, and watered-down announcements that avoid serious action on the deadly mRNA injections.
Despite the Executive Order from August 10, 2026 reducing the recommended vaccination schedule from 17 to 11 types of vaccines, it simultaneously elevates pneumococcal and HPV shots into the “universal core recommendation”.
The elevation of HPV shots to universal core recommendation is surprising given Merck just reached a $50M settlement¹ with 200 plaintiffs who alleged the Gardasil HPV vaccine caused autoimmunity. In addition, the EO promotes the unconstitutional notion of “shared” decision making between the federal government and parents with respect to the mRNA and some additional vaccines. This Orwellian language does not belong in a free society.
We do not need more data to determine whether mRNA products should be removed from the market. The data are already in from multiple credible sources, including over 4,550 peer reviewed publications, the Pfizer documents released through Aaron Siri’s lawsuits, the VAERS and V-safe datasets, and data from foreign governments.
These sources document catastrophic levels of deaths and serious injuries from the mRNA injections, as well as reproductive harm, including approximately 400% increase in miscarriage rates.
You stated that the shots were removed from the CDC recommendation for pregnant women. Yet pregnancy remains listed as a “high-risk” health category in the revised FDA policy for mRNA shots. It is especially troubling that the new versions of these injections are recommended for all pregnant women, even though this platform has never been tested and proven safe in pregnancy.
Pregnant women have not been made safer by this linguistic shift. Removing the mRNA injection from CDC recommendations for pregnant women and healthy children is meaningless when the American Academy of Pediatrics, to which the vast majority of pediatricians belong, still recommends all babies get a mRNA shot.
Further, the CDC still recommends the shots for every child except those labeled “healthy.” Those outside of this category include children with minor ailments such as an acute illness or allergies. The risks of these shots far outweigh any benefits, particularly given they now carry an FDA warning for increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in children.
Parental choice is not realistic when parents are not getting informed consent on the true risks of these products. CDC language appears to erode parental rights. Even for healthy children, the CDC frames the decision as one that parents must “share” with healthcare providers—including pharmacists who lack authority to treat patients. By treating the decision to inject a child with mRNA as a “shared decision,” while treating routine injections as the default, a dangerous legal precedent is being set that assigns powers to the federal government that have historically belonged solely to parents.
The CDC’s COVID shot policy claims to be evidence-based. However, no evidence has been provided—and none exists to our knowledge—showing that the categories of people labeled “vulnerable” under this policy would benefit from mRNA injections.
A formal Citizen Petition authored by Children’s Health Defense, asking to properly relabel the COVID-19 vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna as “EUA Countermeasures” is pending with HHS since December 8, 2025.
Under the PREP Act declaration for COVID emergency, the products that went on the market de novo as “EUA Countermeasures” – a non-investigational legal status – cannot be declared “safe, effective and fully approved by the FDA” without complying with the investigational pharmaceutical product requirements under the applicable federal law.
The PREP Act was extended by the Biden Administration in December 2024 and upheld by you to date to last until December 31, 2029. The COVID-19 injections never underwent legally valid investigational assessment for safety and efficacy, being subject to only emergency distribution requirements, since the PREP Act precludes use of bio-chemical compounds in clinical investigation.
This Petition gathered a record number of public comments in support of it (over 104,000). Your failure to respond to this Petition speaks louder than any placating HHS / Trump Administration messaging on vaccine schedule issues in advance of the midterm elections.
Conflating clearly established risks with an automatically assumed benefit from a product that remains a poorly regulated, liability-free EUA Countermeasure under the PREP Act emergency declaration defies both scientific reason and common sense.
We did not fight to place you in positions of leadership so that our clearly stated policy goals would suffer a “bait and switch” that rebranded the grassroots powerful objection to the damaging mRNA platform as a concern about coloring agents in Skittles.
Health freedom is not the possession of Secretary Kennedy or his advisors. Health freedom agenda arose from the voices of millions of those impacted by the harmful government policies during the pandemic.
The MAHA/health freedom vote was a historic game-changer. Neither Republicans nor the Democrats could have prevailed without this critical swing vote.
Health freedom voters can and will walk away if we continue to see inaction—or condescending non-policy—on our core issues.
If you continue to ignore the centerpiece of our policy agenda—removing all mRNA products covered by PREP Act emergency declarations entirely from the market—you will pay a political price. We will run our own candidates at the state level, and we will support other challengers and sponsors who share our values and advance our draft bills at the federal level for the midterms and for 2028.
We ask you to deliver our actual policy goals in the near term, or face the political consequences:
by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH – originally published on his Substack Focal Points
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Support our mission: mcculloughfnd.org
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
The names below with a link are those for which we have written an article on Gospa News regarding vaccines.
Deborah Adams, RN
Sally Adams, DVM
Adnan Al-Daini, PhD
Arden Andersen, DO, MSPH, PhD
Lars Bo Appel, World Council for Health
Robert Apter, MD
Anthony Arnott, MD
Raphael Balbino, MD
Clayton Baker, MD, Brownstone Institute Senior Scholar, Global Wellness Forum Council
Bradley Banko, MD
Richard Bartlett, MD, Texas HHS Meritorious Service Award, Texas Health Disparities Taskforce
Nancy Benedict, RN
Laura Bevis, DNP, APRN
Kimberly Biss, MD, FACOG, Senior OBGYN Fellow for Independent Medical Alliance
Marsha Blakeslee, DO, Personaldocs LLC
Mary Talley Bowden, MD, Americans for Health Freedom, Independent Medical Alliance, VSRF
Avery B. Brinkley, Jr., MD
Mark Brody, MD
Margaret Aranda Brown, MD, PhD, CTP
Lisa Bryhn, MD
Dariusz Brzezinkski, DC
Ora Burstein, MD
David B. Collum, PhD.
Carrie S Cannon, MD, MS, CTP
Buckley Carlson
Tucker Carlson
Renee Carlson, BSN, RN (ret)
Lora Chamberlain, DO
Pete Chambers, LTC (Ret), DO
Geeta Chougule, World Council for Health
Liz Churchill, Medical Freedom Activist
Ryan Cole, MD, Head of Medical and Scientifc Affairs, Independent Medical Alliance
Esther N. Cooper, MD, Texas Medical Do No Harm Physician Activist
Jean Coyer, NP
Greta Crawford, Survivor of COVID Hospital Protocol, Founder of ProtocolKills.com
Michelle A. Cretella, MD, Past Executive Director of the American College of Pediatricians
Barbara A. Crothers, DO, FCAP, FMCP-M
John Davidson, Director, “Epidemic of Fraud”
Hannah Davis, BSN, RN
John Day, MD
Xylie Desiree, Founder, Interest of Justice
Maryanne Demasi, PhD, Investigative Journalist
Jan DeNapoli, MHS, PA (ret)
Jimmy Dore, Host of “The Jimmy Dore Show”
Jeff Dornik, CEO Pickax
William Campbell Douglass III, MD, MS – DutyToDissent.Substack.com
Edward Dowd, Phinance Technologies
Henry Ealy, Energetic Health Institute
Richard Edgerly, MD
Charles Fall, Green Liberty Caucus
Brian Festa, Esq.
Harry Fisher, EMT, Medical Freedom Activist
Catherine Austin Fitts, The Solari Report
Christina Flaming, CRNA, DNAP
Jon Fleetwood, Investigative Journalist
Kim D. Folse, DC
Tracy Forker, RN
Jeremy Friedman, Esq.
Lynn Fynn, MD, Global COVID Summit, Independent Medical Alliance
Suzanne Gazda, MD
Eleftherios Gkioulekas, PhD, Professor
Simon Goddek, PhD
Russ Gonnering, MD, MMM, FACS, CPHQ(ret)
Dana H. Granberg-Nill, MD, COO Goldcare.com
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Former U.S. Representative – GA
Erin Greer, MD
Arthur Grinstead, MD
Joseph Guarino, MD, Piedmont Occupational and Urgent Care
Meredith Harwell, DC
Sierra Hamm, RN, BSN, World Council for Health
Dan Hartman, Father of COVID vaccine victim Sean Hartman
Thomas F. Haviland, 2022-2025 “Worldwide Embalmer Blood Clot Survey”
Mary Helms, Health Freedom Advocate
Margaret Hertel, Naturalist
Eric Hensen, DO
Jennifer Hibberd, DDS, FRCDC, Global COVID Summit
Trisha Hope, National Delegate, Texas
Lyndsey Nicole House, RN
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, Epidemiologist, McCullough Foundation
John Humiston, MD
Stella Immanuel, MD, Faith and Freedom
Ehsan Joader, Medical Freedom Advocate
Daniel Jones, APRN, FNP-C
Jack Jasper, The Paradox Press
Bobbie Jo Jenkins, RN
Sayer Ji, Founder Restore the 1st and Greenmedinfo, Chairman Global Wellness Forum
Shannon Joy, The Shannon Joy Show
Laura Kasner, “Worldwide Embalmer Blood Clot Survey”
Tamra Kelly, MSN, CRNA, APRN
Sandy Kim, MD
Stacy Kiraly-Duran, RPh
Steven Kirsch, Founder, Vaccine Safety Research Foundation
Deanna Kline, AGNP-C, MSN, RN, Author, Substack NPTru4u
Jack Kruse, MD, Kruse Longevity Centers, Inc
Brian Kung, MD
Karl Lambert, ARNP
Seth Landry, FNP
Sasha Latypova, Independent Investigator and Writer, “Due Diligence and Art”
Tess Lawrie, PhD, Founder, World Council for Health
Levi Leatherberry, National Organizer for Medical Freedom
Lionel Lee, DO, FACOEP
Susan Lee, MD
Debbie Lerman, The Brownstone Institute
Maria Liljeblad, World Council for Health
Katarina Lindley, DO FACOFP, Americans for Health Freedom, Independent Medical Alliance
John Littell, MD
Lisa Lopes, World Council for Health
Donna Lowery, RN
Aseem Malhotra, MD
Robert Malone, MD, MS, pioneer of mRNA technology
Jill G. Malone, PhD
Leslie Manookian, Founder/President, Health Freedom Defense Fund
Ben Marble, MD, Nobel Peace Prize Nominee
Allen Martin, Parent of COVID vaccine victim Trista Martin
Taylor Martin, Parent of COVID vaccine victim Trista Martin
Thomas Massie, U.S. Representative – KY
Jonathan Maxham, DO
Kevin McCairn, PhD, Synpatek Labs
Culpepper McCuller, MD, Informed Health Initiative
Peter McCullough, MD, President, McCullough Foundation
Shane Mekeland, Rep., MN (R) District 27A
Reni Moon, MD
Kirk Moore, MD, Ex-Defendant, Freedom Surgical and Aesthetics
Cindy L. Morris, MD, World Council for Health
David Nelson, PhD
MyHuong Nguyễn, MD
Hanna Parikka, MSc, Biotechnology
Gayln Perry, MD
Ivan Raiklin, Esq., Green Beret Lieutenant Colonel (ret)
Tom Renz, Esq.
Charles Rixey, MA, MBA, Edogawa Hospital & D.R.A.S.T.I.C.
Brian Roberts, Americans for Health Freedom
Jessica Rose, The Brownstone Institute
Jeanne A. Rungby, MD, World Council for Health
Molly Rutherford, MD, Americans for Health Freedom
Erica Samp, Vaccine-injured mother from Iowa with Federal lawsuit pending
Andy Schmitt, The Paradox Press
Carl Scott, PhD, Professor, Author, Dissident Conservative Substack
Cynthia Shoemake, RN
Michelle Simpson, RN
Brad Skistimas, Five Times August
Patrick Slater, MD, Austin Ear Clinic
Laurel Starr, MD
Daniel Stock, MD, Senior Fellow, Independent Medical Alliance
Mary Kelly Sutton, MD
Edward Szall, CEO, TLM Global, Producer, Died Suddenly
James Thorp, MD, ObGYN – Maternal Fetal Medicine
Mark Trozzi, MD, World Council for Health
Sean Troxclair, MD, Deputy Surgeon General of Louisiana
Tamella Trulson, MD
Jeffrey Tucker, The Brownstone Institute
Dan Twelmeyer, Medical Freedom Activist, Iowa
Suzanne Vandenhul, MD
Kenneth G. Varley, MD, FRCPC, BSc, MSc, MBA
Rajeev Varma, MD
Joe Varon, MD, President and CMO, Independent Medical Alliance
David Vella, MD, CovidAccountabilityNow.org
Denise Verni, PA
Kelly Victory, MD, President, Victory Health
Joel Wallskog, MD, Co-Chair React19
Bret Weinstein, PhD
Sheri Weinstein, MD, Founder, Health and Freedom Forum
Marcus Wheeler, MD
Lauren Witzke
Gizela Wolan-Szymanski, RN
Katherine Zbodula, NP
Andrew Zywiec, MD, Co-founder, CEO Ekklesia Research Group
What will a DSA-led state look like — will it back defund and community control of police, or bow to the powers that block affordability? Lawrence Grandpre, political commentator for Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle, explores this question in his recent Baltimore Times article, “The Dangers of ‘Law and Order’ Leftism: Toward a Black Power Public Safety,” asking whether DSA will embrace the outmoded Law and Order politics that fueled America’s prison boom. As officials like AOC and Mamdani backtrack on defunding police — one of the biggest carceral drains on housing, healthcare, and education funding — Grandpre sits down with former political prisoner and Rattling the Bars host Mansa Musa to unpack these contradictions ahead of the midterms, where Democrats hope to retake the House and Senate. Tune in for an unflinching look at the Left’s relationship to the state and to law and order.
Related Links:
Credits:
The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. It will be updated.
Mansa Musa:
Welcome to Rattling the Bars. I’m your host Mansa Musa. Today I’m joined by Lance Grandpre, political commentator with Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle, to discuss his recent article for Baltimore Times, “The Dangers of ‘Law and Order’ Leftism—Toward a Black Power Public Safety.” Thank you for joining me, Lance.
Lawrence Grandpre:
Thank you for having me.
Mansa Musa:
Alright, so let’s start like this here. At one point we had in 2020 where you had a push for the abolishment of prisons and to dismantle the police system as we see it during that period. But immediately you had a pushback and the pushback came in the form of saying that this was woke. Now we look at the United States and mass incarceration, armed policing, and you juxtapose that with the lack of funds for healthcare, lack of funds for education and lack of funds for housing and the fact that the criminal injustice system is in itself painful when it comes to poor and oppressed people, mainly people of color. Let’s start with your article.
Lawrence Grandpre:
So this article stems out of a protest I went to because sometimes people say if you talk about police reform or defunding police, you don’t care about victims. And this protest was the opposite. This was a Black elder, a former member of the Baltimore Black Panther Party who was assaulted by many teenagers and it was caught on film. So of course Fox News, our local Fox News is showing this over and over again saying, “Lock them up, what’s wrong with these kids?” And these were community advocates, many of them women, Queen Mother Victorious who lost her son to gun violence, Mama Gwen, who was formerly incarcerated, coming together with community and saying these young people, what they did was a problem, not because it just violated the law, because it violated our community respect for elders. And we don’t want to just throw the cops at these kids and throw away the book, but if people know who these young people are, turn them into us, the Black community, so we can make sure that they are held accountable but not railroaded by the criminal legal system.
And I though the sophistication and intelligence of that response and even Baba Ade, the elder who was hurt, saying the Black Panther’s argument was that capitalism and racism breed criminality in the community.
Mansa Musa:
Right.
Lawrence Grandpre:
And it’s not for us as the vanguard to educate ourselves and use political consciousness to eliminate criminality, not just from a material standpoint, but from a psycho-spiritual standpoint. And it was really interesting because this was a few days after AOC went on the news and said, “Nobody’s talking about defund anymore. Woke 1.0 was crazy.” So it was really interesting that the people who were supposed to be talking about social justice, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, some of these other so-called leftists,
Mansa Musa:
Right.
Lawrence Grandpre:
Even they were saying, “Defund—that was just people on Twitter trying to look woke. Nobody really talks about defund in real life.” And these Black elders, Black people in West Baltimore, were saying things like, “We have a $700 million police budget in Baltimore. How are we going to have that and schools and investments in the Black youth?” So these Black people who the left is telling us are conservative are actually more progressive than the DSA.
And I thought that was very telling that, in this moment, going into the midterms, there are these leftist democratic socialists who are trying to get elected, and because they want to get elected, they want to push away from radical rhetoric because they think it’s turning off voters. And I think that that goes to show you that when it comes to Black people, we need to have our own vision of public safety, because what’s being offered by even the left, the Democratic Socialists, is willing to push our issues aside, because they have a misunderstanding of our issues. They think it’s just a bunch of radicals on Twitter as opposed to Black folks been talking about Defund since the ’50s. And our visions of Defund are very different than what you saw on Twitter in 2020, but these folks wouldn’t know that.
Mansa Musa:
So how do you see the DSA in terms of how they look at the budget, just police budget and the fact that it’s undercutting the services of the very people they supposed to be representing?
Lawrence Grandpre:
It’s interesting because I think if you are a democratic socialist, it’s obvious you believe police are a tool to protect capitalism. So a world where if you’re a socialist, the idea that you wouldn’t talk about [how] protecting capitalism getting more money is a problem for you—it’s weird.
Mansa Musa:
Right.
Lawrence Grandpre:
But these folks are a particular brand of socialist. Many of them were very much pro-Bernie Sanders. So when Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris used conversations about identity to attack Bernie, now a lot of these folks see all conversations about race as just distraction from class issues.
So, even when Black people talk about police, they say, “Well, it’s not serious. No one really talks about Defund. So you’re really just trying to attack the socialist candidates.” And it’s like, no, Black folks have been the community control of the police platform.
It wasn’t just invented by the Black Panther Party. It was talked about by Black activists in the ’40s and ’50s, in part because the understanding that if the police were seen as a solution to all social problems… it’s not just police, it’s police-ism: the idea that policing is the only solution to the problems facing all poor people, but especially Black poor people, that’s going to push money away from all the other programs we need in the Black community. So Black folks have been saying that, really, since the Northern migration.
So when we talk about community control of the police, part of that is having community control boards control the police themselves, hold them accountable. And we’ve worked on that as LBS, but it’s also community control of the institutions that produce public safety beyond police. So, housing, addiction, education. I mean, I love to point out that Bobby Seal, he was in AmeriCorps before he was a Panther. So he would be shooting dice with the Black kids trying to school them on AmeriCorps’ time. And part of his frustration is these nonprofits don’t let us actually do the training we need to do with these youth, but we got to get the money from the nonprofit because that’s the only job we got. So even the Black Panthers program was a push for Black control of resources to socialize our youth, specifically around things like violence prevention. And again, the idea that all of that is just under this large framework of “woke”… And again, the right wing hates woke, we know that, but even some of the Bernie folks—they really hate “woke,” because they associate it with the attacks on Bernie and they see all conversations about police as woke.
Mansa Musa:
Let’s unpack some more about DSA because we see upheaval of DSA type activity and we see in terms of midterm elections, some of the candidates that ran on DSA platform have made it through the primary. And so at the same token, what is their appeal? Because they vacillating when it come to social issues.
Lawrence Grandpre:
The federal government, in theory, can print money. So there’s this belief that if we just spent more money, things will get better, and the Democrats have been afraid to spend money. I think that in the DSA, it’s like, “Let’s really focus on, in theory, cut the military budget, invest in community through things like Medicare for Al”l. Now, if you don’t have the integrity to stand up for “Defund the Police,” why do you think we would believe that you have the integrity to stand up to “Cut the Military Budget? If you don’t see the connections between the violence of policing and the violence of militarism, why would we expect you to be able to push the military budget to community?”
Lawrence Grandpre:
These are intelligent, college-educated voters who feel like the government needs to spend more money, in part, because it’s a job program for people like them. So they have an interest in fighting the austerity of the Democratic Party, in part, because they want to see conditions improve for the community, but also in part because it’s a business model for the voters of DSA. And that’s a big concern for us, because even with Medicare for All, there’s no world in which healthcare should be a for-profit enterprise. But it’s not just that doctors are racist. When you look at things like Black women get more cesarean sections than other women, So, literally, they’re getting cut open in these dangerous surgeries. Black women, if you have a child in the hospital, you are going to get a drug test. And even if you pop for that drug test from the epidural, the drugs they give you for the pain, they might take your kid away. So engagements with the medical system are not just imperfect for Black people; they are places of surveillance and violence.
So we, as Black people, need systems like a birthing center, like nutrition, upstream investments that are different than what the DSA crowd cares about. So the idea that we should just accept not talking about Defund to get Medicare for All ignores the fact that Black people—we don’t just need healthcare to not give us a bill. We need to change the vision of healthcare so we control it. And the DSA is not interested in that. They don’t really think that way. And they honestly believe the only way anything will get passed if it goes to everybody. Universal programs prevent racial backlash. Because we know any spending in America is seen as giving money to welfare queens. So we just got to give the same thing to everybody and that’ll deal with racial backlash.
And what we know is anything you do that gives out any tax money will deal with racial backlash, but also do things that don’t give Black people the power we need to build for ourselves. It will just put us in systems that really are built by other people that, even if it’s good for them, can often be violent for us.
Lawrence Grandpre:
But I think that, again, when you have a class-based vision of the world, that has become in some ways hostile to thinking about race because you had negative experiences with people weaponizing race against people like Bernie Sanders. You’re not thinking about what a political agenda would look like when you actually invest in… because we should do both. We should have a class-based redistribution of wealth, but that restribution should also be invested in community institutions that reflect the culture and history of specific communities, not just Medicare for All, but clinics that use the history and culture of the community to provide that healthcare. Nutrition that reflects the culture and the way communities like to be fed so that they can have upstream nutrition so they don’t need to go to the doctor in the first place.
These things should go hand in hand. And I think it’s concerning that it feels like, because DSA is becoming electorally viable in some spaces, that [they] only talk about affordability issues, only talk about Medicare for all, only talk about ending the war in Iran, without really thinking intelligently about a platform that would meet people’s needs for community control of public safety, broadly defined. So not just policing, but again, youth programming, schooling, getting nutrition. Our kids are literally hungry.
Mansa Musa:
Yeah.
Lawrence Grandpre:
They’re fed junk food, but they’re undernourished. So we actually do have serious nutritional needs as we have obesity in the inner city. So what does it look like to build a food sovereignty ecosystem, whether it’s Black Yield, Black Church Food Security Network that can actually feed ourselves as opposed to just the DSA, it’s like, well just make sure they get food stamps. And food stamps are cool, but food stamps are not the vision of liberation for us.
Mansa Musa:
But talk about, because when we look at DSA, and it’s misnomer even to use the name socialist because when you look at. We got examples in Cuba and when they first took over, the literacy rate in the countryside was 90%. 90% of the people could not read or write. They organized, it’s a book out called Vincent Ramos. We were trying, that’s the name of it. And they organized all the college kids, all the intelligence and made them go in the countryside and stay to educate the people, to get them to read and write.
They didn’t say, “Oh, we’re going to create a system where they can come out the country, live in a project style housing dwelling and get them public schools that’s not going to teach them nothing.” They actually educated the people and a lot of that education led to what we see today in Cuba, got best medical, despite all the things going on. So when we talk about DSA, and I think this is a danger, and maybe you want to weigh in on it. I think it’s a danger that confronts that notion that this is a socialist party and because the right wing is going to put them right in the category like communists and they can resurrect that notion.
Lawrence Grandpre:
Socialism, to me, the key word is social. You either have the market making decisions about planning for the world or you have people doing it socially. It’s clearly better to do it socially, but there are divisions within that larger social body. And my concern is that even amongst some of the people in the DSA crowd, the leftists, some of the visions of what they would socially plan may like and lean on policing partially because they are afraid of being looked at as communist. So they might, for example, even in very, very progressive Bernie Crat, DSA San Francisco, there’s this push to, well, we got people homeless, they have mental illness. So they as individuals may not be rational, so we are going to use policing to bring them into drug treatment.
Mansa Musa:
Right.
Lawrence Grandpre:
And again, this is like even Bernie people sometimes say this. So there are elements of even the less progressive mindset that are like, we as a society can’t let you be out here damn bad. We have to help you lift yourself up. And if that means we have to involuntarily commit you to treatment, and if we have to use police to do that, then we’ll do that. While one thing that we talk about here in Baltimore is, and Baltimore’s been a heroin town since the 60s and 70s. And it’s been really hard for us, but we’ve also had systems of informal community care that have been designed to address some of the worst exigencies of drug abuse. Nika Namdi from a program called Fight Light said that grandma’s basement was the first halfway house. We had systems where elders, you would be able to stay with family and you would be able to get certain stabilizing influences through your social network so you wouldn’t be out on the streets.
So in that worldview, we would look at something like making sure these abandoned homes get rehabbed and given to Black people in community. That’s partially an anti-homelessness effort.
That’s an anti-addiction effort. That’s a crime fighting effort. So it’s not just social housing, it’s not just public housing. It’s also making sure that Black people in communities can pass down their family homes
And they have a way to make sure that they’re affordable so they can stay housed because that produces capacities for people who do suffer from addiction to not be on the streets committing crime. And again, the DSA vision is so limited to what they see and what they know, they sometimes end up using police where it’s like, if we just had networks of people in community that could care for each other, we wouldn’t need police for that. But I also do think folks are afraid. I know academics are very afraid and some folks are afraid of looking too radical, looking like the rhetoric of 2020 was burn down the police station.
Mansa Musa:
And
Lawrence Grandpre:
I think that’s also part of what they want to distance from when they talk about we not doing defund no
Mansa Musa:
More. Part
Lawrence Grandpre:
Of it is the direct antagonism with the state, the cost of that has increased for them. What we know is that the cost is high for us, whether we’re openly antagonistic or not, we are politically antagonistic by making demands upon the state to recognize our humanity. So we’ve always had to deal with that potential backlash. And I think now for some folks they’re saying, oh, I can’t use that. We’re not trying to do that radical rhetoric no more
Mansa Musa:
Because
Lawrence Grandpre:
People are losing jobs, people are potentially getting deported. So it’s like the ’70s, marginally away from the rhetoric of the ’60s and leaving the Black radicals out to dry after the draft ended. I think the white radicals moved away from radicalism and that we’re seeing a similar
Mansa Musa:
Dynamic. Okay, but we know that this is the 60th year of the anniversary of the Black Panther Party. And I was talking to somebody about just like we’re not anti-police. The party wasn’t anti-police. One of the things they did, one initiative they took was, and this is a revolutionary suicide by Huey Newton, where they had this particular intersection that didn’t have no stoplight and it was in the Black community and kids was getting hit. So somebody came and said, “Man, they not doing nothing about this. We’ve been complaining.” So they went down there and became traffic guards, the members of the Black Panther Party. They held up the traffic, let the kids walk by, you know what I’m saying? And this is what they did. And they had guns with them because they had one part of their program was policing the police. The police in turn came and told them they stop.
Now you guys stop this. They said, “Well, we’ll stop this when y’all put a traffic light up there or y’all stop directing traffic. We don’t care which one you’re going to do, but you do or we going to continue to do.” They wind up putting the traffic light up there. So in terms of that particular example, what are the core aspects of the Black Power Public Safety?
Lawrence Grandpre:
I like your example because the party was a little bit different in different cities, but I think one thing that stands out to me is that they had questions about police, but the Black Panthers in some ways were law and order. It was law and order within the party. You cannot show up high, very much about discipline, law and order in the community. If you’re selling drugs, if you’re a parasite in our community, we’re going to deal with you. And I think that’s a perception, because this is something that happened in 2020, that there were white leftists being like, “Let’s just run wild and be anarchist and burn stuff down.” It’s always been Black people that’s been like, “We’re not doing that.” So the idea that somehow that is tied to Black issues, no, we’ve always been extremely serious about our liberation.
So when the Black Panther Party talks about doing a plebiscite in order to get Black sovereignty, I think that’s an example of why we need to think about community control of the police in terms of we have in Maryland, substantial police reform is nowhere near enough, but we need to have the ability for the community to have investigative power to be able to investigate police. We need to have community resources to be able to flow to community institutions so the community decides who’s doing public safety in that community. So when we talk about who’s funded to do violence prevention work, it shouldn’t just be the people who are tied into the police or the people that are tied into the nonprofit world. We got tons of people in community that have been doing work that have not
Mansa Musa:
Been funded.
Lawrence Grandpre:
And the fact that they are getting a little bit of money now, I think is part of why we’re seeing these unprecedented declines in violent crime. So Black power public safety isn’t just people getting grants. It is the community having the power to determine what the grant making criteria are. It’s the community being able to tax institutions in their community that they see as producing crime. And by that I mean Johns Hopkins. That’s
Mansa Musa:
Right.
Lawrence Grandpre:
Because Johns Hopkins gentrified the whole area of the
Mansa Musa:
City. The big colonial king in Baltimore.
Lawrence Grandpre:
And when you gentrify a whole part of the city, you’re moving people to different hoods and that creates a lot of possibility for conflict. My father was a cop for 20 years, so he talked about East Baltimore used to be called the country club because it was so quiet up there. But when Hopkins gentrified all those people out of the Middle East Baltimore, a lot of them moved to Northeast, which creates a ton of conflict, pretty much increased the murder rate in that part of the city. Hopkins should have to pay for that. They got a $13 billion endowment. So Black Power Public Safety is about us not tying in our future to gentrification, which is what the police really are a tool for. They’re a tool to produce gentrification. That’s good for that business model because gentrification needs policing.
Mansa Musa:
We
Lawrence Grandpre:
Should be able to put tax on the gentrifier so we can secure our communities so they can’t gentrify them, own our own property, stabilize our communities, but then invest in the capacity to take care of our youth, to do violence prevention, to take care of our health. All the things they stripped from us, they should have to pay us to be able to do for ourselves. In that world, I think we would have Black Power
Mansa Musa:
Public Safety. Right. And that’s basically what the Black Panther Party was doing because they had the survival program. Exactly. And the concept was Survival Pending Revolution. The Survival Program wasn’t like us being in a basement, taking guns apart in the dark with blindfolds, then putting them back together, making bombs, reading Ann Archer’s cookbook. No, survival program was the free breakfast program, free medical, sickle cell anemia, taking prison families to prison to visit them, alternative education. This was a survival program, survival pending revolution. And what the goal was, going back to your point, the goal was to stabilize the community for self to be able to be self-determined. So if I’m self-determined, I got self-determination. A great example for Baltimore would be the Clean Block because when they had Clean. And I remember I was locked up and I used to read the Afro. Afro had a big thing about Clean.
The sense of community that came out of that, the Clean Block, when they was able to say, “We recognizing this neighborhood for Clean Block.” But more importantly, that neighborhood not only had a clean block, but that neighborhood had policing. That neighborhood had a sense of identity that if I seen you, I know you Meryl’s son or Meryl’s daughter. I know you Tommy’s son or Tommy’s daughter. You know me and you know that if I see you doing something that you ain’t supposed to be doing, then I’m going to tell your parents the minute you see me, you’re going to alter your behavior because that became the sense of community. But like you say, once Hopkins got in the equation, and not only Hopkins, I remember when Shafer started when he did the Inner Harbor and they started pushing people out of certain areas in order to get to Inner Harbor and they pushed people into.
Either they pushed them out into the county or they pushed them into the interior of Baltimore in neighborhoods they wasn’t familiar with or neighborhoods they was familiar with and had issues with and would automatically create a conflict. But talk about how do you see, because what you just outlined is in fact a model that is one, inexpensive because it becomes self-contained. So the monies that you’re putting towards astronomical police budget can go towards stabilizing some of the projects that deal with housing, deal with substance, the people that’s actually doing the work.Like you say, you got people that actually going around taking people and putting them in a place and letting them drown. So we talk about how you see DSA and the gains that they’re getting and the models they’re using. How do they fit into this narrative? Are they rewriting the script and say they’re going to invest in this type of thinking or their model is, like you said earlier, we creating a cadre of intelligent people that can grant write and that’s going to become our funding source and not only our funding source, but create an infrastructure for doing case studies and then marketing these case studies, the new Jim Crow.
Lawrence Grandpre:
Yeah. I think it’s to be determined. We’re going to see a huge increase in DSA affiliated leftist people in Congress. Now, whether they’re going to be able to write bills, whether they’re just going to vote on stuff that comes from the Republicans, we’re going to see. I think the real test is going to be 2028 when it’s possible the Democrats will take the White House, Senate and the Congress. So it’s really going to be important for us these next two years for people that believe in the possibility of these folks doing good to push them. What is your actual proposal on how you can use the power of the federal government to enhance the ability of people On the ground locally to have more ownership and power and control over the institutions that impact their lives. Because policing is a state and local issue. Feds actually have relatively little control
Mansa Musa:
Over it,
Lawrence Grandpre:
Except given a few grants here or there. So really it is, do you have a vision for whether it’s through food sovereignty policy, whether it’s through manufacturing policy? The metric for us at least is again, local self-determination and the ability for local people on the ground to own the institutions that are doing this work. I think part of even going back to the New Deal, the frustration with these progressives is that sometimes they do these top down technocratic re-imaginings of what solutions look like that don’t involve community. Mamdani, people have called him a technocratic socialist.
Mansa Musa:
And
Lawrence Grandpre:
I think that’s not on some right wing stuff, but that’s scary from a Black power
Mansa Musa:
Perspective
Lawrence Grandpre:
Because technocracy oftentimes views Black peoples as widgets and inputs in someone else’s equation for progress and liberation. And I think part of the value of the Black Panther Party is they called themselves socialist, but in many places, in many ways they were also Pan-Africanist and Black nationalists. And they were combining them all to say that, yes, we will fight capitalism, but we will not just make the people this abstract proletariat to fit within a Eurocentric version
Mansa Musa:
Of
Lawrence Grandpre:
What a class centric revolution will look like. We are going to lead our people on our vision of what we think fighting capitalism looks like. And again, I think it’s going to be our job to force the DSA to not see that as woke, to actually recognize that that is just what black people demand. And that’s the cost of us being in political coalition is you respecting our self-determination.
Mansa Musa:
And I agree it’s to be determined because one, you gain electoral office through coalition building. That’s really where it come out of. And you’re able to get a common identity out of the coalition, common identity being what we want change, the change that we want to see. Harold Washington in Chicago, he was successful at building a coalition. And to his credit, he tried to maintain the standard, but they fought him tooth and nail at the state government. So he wasn’t able to get a lot of things done. But the fact of the matter, what we’re asking or we’re talking about is not really hypothetical because we see this in Europe and we see examples where police don’t have guns. They call in, if it’s a violent situation where a gun, they got a unit that comes in to deal with that. But outright, the police walk around with no weapons because the lack of fear towards the society.
Lawrence Grandpre:
You mentioned New Zealand, I think in that as
Mansa Musa:
Well.
Lawrence Grandpre:
But in New Zealand as well, the Aboriginal communities actually have really pushed a model for youth justice that places tribal elders and tribal institutions at the heart of restorative justice programming
Mansa Musa:
For
Lawrence Grandpre:
Youth who are engaged in acts of criminality. And so that’s been a big fight for Aboriginals in New Zealand and Australia to really demand tribal sovereignty over their youth as opposed to putting them into the juvenile justice system.
Mansa Musa:
But
Lawrence Grandpre:
Again, given the legacy of the private schools where they beat the Indian out of you and stuff like that. And again, I think it’s jarring for white people to think that we as black people are asking for something similar here in America because the joke is white people are so settled in America, they don’t even see themselves settler colonists no
Mansa Musa:
More.
Lawrence Grandpre:
And I think unfortunately that’s part of what’ happened with the DSA. It’s like the idea of black sovereignty is just jarring to them in a way that you’re an Australian, you know you took over Australia and there are people here that are really dark skinned, you’re not.
Mansa Musa:
But
Lawrence Grandpre:
I think in America, that basic concept of having to negotiate with people who have their own sovereign agendas is not something that they’re used to conceiving as anything other than a tool for the centrist to undermine the Bernie’s of the world.
Mansa Musa:
And
Lawrence Grandpre:
I just think the reality is if DSA is going to get Black support, it’s going to really have to reckon with the visions of the world that come from Black people, including our visions of public safety.
Mansa Musa:
Right. And before we close, you got any closing remarks?
Lawrence Grandpre:
I really appreciate this. Please check out our podcasts and search of Black Power and Political Commentary Corner. So those are on YouTube. Check us out at lbsbaltimore.com. We have all of our email updates about the work we’re doing in Annapolis to push criminal justice policy, reparations policy, which
Mansa Musa:
I’ve
Lawrence Grandpre:
Never seen DSA has been skeptical on, but we’re very adamant about its practical utility as a framework to invest in Black sovereignty here in Maryland. And you can find me on any social media at Neil Nubian, N-E, the number zero, Nubian, N-U-B-I-A-N. Right.
Mansa Musa:
And we ask our audience to really take deep thought on this particular subject matter. It’s not like say it loud, I’m Black and I’m proud. It’s not when Stokley Carmichael in the ’60s, they called Black Power, James Brown, Song and Song. We’re not in that state. We’re not trying to go back into that state of mind, that conditions created that state of mind. We’re talking about an analysis of having Black political power as it relates to our safety. We’re talking about because we’re the ones that’s unsafe, we’re the ones that this astronomical budget is being doled out to, to make us feel unsafe, to lock us up. Then we believe, as the brother was talking about Lawrence, that we believe that we have a right to define what is safe for us and what is not safe for us. And making that definition or defining that, we see the necessity to make an analysis and implement it.
And in this case, this is an analysis that we want to, I think the Gullah Geechee in South Carolina got a thing where they do restorative justice. And so the fact that you infringe on the community, that they might not put you out the community, but they’re going to put you in such a shameful state of mind and the fear of what you’re getting ready to lose or make you get the person to come back or people come back and lie in accordance with the social system that they set up. We ask that you continue to support the real news and rattling bars because guess what? We’re actually the real news. Thank you.
North Korea has released imagery of what appears to be a flight test of an updated version of its Hwasong-11Ma hypersonic missile, nearly a year after the weapon first appeared publicly at a military technology exhibition in Pyongyang.
The September 20 test involved a short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) booster fitted with a hypersonic glide vehicle, according to photographs released by North Korean state media. A display screen visible in the imagery identifies the weapon as the Hwasongpho-11Ma-1, or Hwasong-11E-1 in the equivalent English-language designation.
The test was conducted from the east coast near Anbyon County, south of Wonsan, an area North Korea has repeatedly used for missile testing. The launch site allows missiles to be fired eastward over the Sea of Japan, providing a relatively controlled area for testing short- and medium-range systems.
South Korean and Japanese authorities say they detected two launches on September 20, with the first occurring at approximately 3:00 p.m. local time and the second several hours later.
North Korean photographs show the missile being launched from a coastal location, with Kim Jong Un and senior missile officials observing the test. Kim’s daughter, Kim Ju Ae, also appears in the imagery.
North Korea displayed a mock-up of what it called the Hwasong-11Ma at its Defense Development-2025 exhibition in October 2025. The design uses the basic architecture of the Hwasong-11 family, known in the West as the KN-23 family, but substitutes a distinctive glide wedge-shaped vehicle for the conventional warhead arrangement.
North Korea claimed another hypersonic missile test that same month, but did not release launch imagery clearly connecting that test to the Hwasong-11Ma. The missile was subsequently shown again during a military parade in Pyongyang.
The latest “-1” designation suggests an iterative evolution of the Hwasong-11Ma, although Pyongyang has not explained what modifications it represents.
Based on the imagery, the new configuration also includes a modified launcher, with the missile carried on a six-axle transporter-erector-launcher (TEL). When the Hwasong-11Ma was first shown, it was mounted on a five-axle TEL. The latest vehicle also appears to incorporate modified retractable covers around the missile.
It remains unclear whether the new TEL represents a standardized operational vehicle or a test configuration.
Preliminary illustration of the new launch vehicle for North Korea's hypersonic missiles. pic.twitter.com/dZ31LA1cbn
— Tal Inbar (@inbarspace) September 22, 2026
As with previous North Korean weapons announcements, the country’s state media claims need to be treated very cautiously. Pyongyang has a long record of publicizing weapons systems and test results that cannot be independently verified, while some of its purported hypersonic tests have left outside analysts unable to determine whether the advertised maneuvering performance was actually demonstrated.
Perhaps the most revealing test-related imagery comes from a display screen photographed at the launch site.
Kim Jong Un and his daughter can be seen watching the screen, which shows the apparent flight trajectory of the Hwasong-11Ma-1. The displayed path initially follows a ballistic trajectory before descending and then performing a pull-up maneuver, regaining altitude before continuing toward the target area.
That type of trajectory is consistent with the basic concept behind a hypersonic glide vehicle. The booster provides the initial velocity and altitude, after which the unpowered glide body follows a relatively shallow, atmospheric flight path at hypersonic speeds, while maneuvering rather than following a simple ballistic path.
The graphic is useful for understanding what Pyongyang says the weapon is designed to do, but it does not independently demonstrate that the missile actually followed the depicted trajectory.
The flight data visible on the display provides some unusually specific figures.
Enhancing the original image released by North Korea allows for an excellent view of the HS-11Ma hypersonic glide missile trajectory, providing altitude and speed data. Note: Slight inaccuracies in the numbers may occur due to the use of AI tools. pic.twitter.com/M4LkfF5VYu
— Tal Inbar (@inbarspace) September 22, 2026
According to the North Korean imagery, the missile traveled 908.2 kilometers (564.3 miles), reached an altitude of 35.8 kilometers (22.2 miles), and remained in flight for approximately 445 seconds, or 7.4 minutes.
The display gives a velocity of 2,146 meters per second, equivalent to roughly 4,800 mph. That is hypersonic velocity in the aerodynamic sense, but speed alone is not what makes a hypersonic glide weapon particularly challenging to defend against. More consequential parameters include sustained controlled flight, maneuverability, guidance, and accuracy.
Other portions of the display appear to show additional points along the flight, including different times, altitudes, and speeds. None of these figures have been independently verified.
The claimed range is particularly noteworthy because it does not match the publicly reported tracking data from South Korea and Japan.
South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said North Korea launched two SRBMs from the Wonsan area on September 20. The missiles were assessed to have traveled approximately 450 and 600 kilometers, respectively.
Japan similarly reported two launches, assessing the first at approximately 440 kilometers and the second at approximately 590 kilometers, with maximum altitudes of roughly 60 and 70 kilometers.
Those figures are substantially different from the 908.2-kilometer distance shown on North Korea’s display.
The discrepancy does not necessarily establish that either side’s data are incorrect. The North Korean figure could represent a different measurement of the flight path, or could correspond to a portion of the test that was not reflected in the public South Korean and Japanese assessments. It is also possible, if not highly probable, that Pyongyang selectively presented or altered the data.
South Korean analysts have already raised questions about the unusually long distance displayed by North Korea. Yonhap reported that experts suggested Pyongyang may have altered the figure to portray the test as more successful.
Regardless of the range actually achieved in this test, the Hwasong-11Ma/Ma-1 is significant because it represents an attempt to combine a relatively compact SRBM with a maneuvering hypersonic glide vehicle.
The underlying Hwasong-11 family is a well-established North Korean missile design. In its KN-23 configuration, members of the family have also been used by Russia against Ukraine. By placing a glide vehicle on this type of booster, Pyongyang could potentially give a regional strike weapon a flight profile substantially different from that of a conventional ballistic missile. The Hwasong-11Ma/Ma-1 also uses a solid-fuel booster, allowing for faster launches than earlier liquid-fuel designs.
In principle, the Hwasong-11Ma/Ma-1 could give North Korea an additional hypersonic strike option against more heavily defended targets in South Korea. Having road-mobile TELs would also provide greater operational flexibility despite their relatively limited range, while making it more difficult for adversaries to locate and track the launchers.
A genuine boost-glide weapon creates significant challenges for defending forces since the sheer speed of the weapon bypasses most air defenses. Its trajectory can also become less predictable after the boost phase. Maneuvering at lower altitudes could also reduce the time available to detect, track, and engage the weapon.
However, the available imagery does not establish the extent of the vehicle’s maneuverability, its ability to maintain controlled flight, its accuracy, or the reliability of the complete missile system.
North Korea has made similar claims about its hypersonic weapons in the past.
Pyongyang says it has flight-tested multiple hypersonic boost-glide vehicle designs since at least 2021, but there continue to be questions about what degree of actual capability the country has achieved in this regard. Viable wedge-shaped boost-glide vehicles have historically been extremely difficult to design and then bring to an operational state.
The challenge is not simply reaching hypersonic speed. A weapon has to sustain controlled flight and maneuverability under extreme thermal loads, while also overcoming demanding materials-science, guidance, and navigation requirements. The terminal phase is harder still. Accurately finding and striking a moving target, particularly a ship, requires a highly capable seeker and guidance system. Integrating a nuclear warhead introduces another layer of engineering and weapons-design challenges.
Those demands have made hypersonic weapons a major technological challenge for the United States and other major powers. China is currently widely regarded as the leading country in deploying and developing operational hypersonic systems, although important questions remain about the capabilities and maturity of individual weapons.
Pyongyang said it first flight-tested a wedge-shaped hypersonic glide vehicle in 2021 aboard the liquid-fuel Hwasong-8, before pairing a similar-looking vehicle with the solid-fueled Hwasong-16B intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) in 2024.
VIDEO: Korean Central Television (KCTV) broadcasted footage of North Korea successfully testing the new "Hwasong-16B" hypersonic intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) on Tuesday. pic.twitter.com/VNdhLAeyyK
— NK NEWS (@nknewsorg) April 3, 2024
In its coverage of the latest test, North Korean state media initially avoided identifying the weapon, describing the event as a successful trial of a “new-type weapon” that it said was significant for the rapid development of weapons technology.
Kim said the development would give adversaries an “incurable headache” and deliver what he described as a “cruel and unavoidable blow.”
Tal Inbar, the head of the Space and UAV Research Center at Israel’s Fisher Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies identifies the Hwasong-11Ma/Ma-1 as a “very significant weapon, bringing hypersonics to the operational/tactical arena and [posing] a challenge to … air and missile defense systems.”
Whatever the exact achievements of the test, the imagery points to continued development of a weapon North Korea first publicly displayed nearly a year ago. The appearance of a new, six-axle TEL, a potentially modified missile, combined with the apparent flight test, suggests that the Hwasong-11Ma/Ma-1 program has progressed since its initial public unveiling.
What remains uncertain is how much of that progress represents a genuine improvement in operational capability.
The latest test therefore provides another indication of the resources and attention Pyongyang is devoting to hypersonic weapons, but the available evidence is still insufficient to determine how closely the Hwasong-11Ma-1’s actual performance matches the capabilities depicted by North Korean state media.
Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com
The post North Korea Tests New Hwasong-11Ma Hypersonic Missile appeared first on TWZ.
Remnants claimed to be photographed in Iran have been identified as belonging to a Raytheon ADM-160 Miniature Air-Launched Decoy (MALD). The wreckage was reportedly recovered after an Iranian interception that occurred earlier in the day, although the exact location and circumstances remain unconfirmed and there is reason for caution. Iranian state and military media have a long record of presenting unverified or exaggerated claims, especially during periods of conflict, and imagery released through those channels warrants independent scrutiny. Still, the MALD identification appears credible based on the visible wreckage, but its provenance, location, and the circumstances of its loss have not yet been independently established. MALDs were likely used at least in the opening stages of Operation Epic Fury, as well.
With that being said, the showing off of the MALD wreckage, regardless of its original use case, is something of a reminder that U.S. and Israeli forces are continuing to evaluate Iran’s electronic order of battle, which can include probing activities that leverage deception and decoys to better understand the state of Iran’s air defenses and command and control architecture. This is critical information that needs to be constantly updated for contingency and future potential air campaign purposes.
Iranian sources today reported the destruction of an Orbiter-type reconnaissance drone over the Strait of Hormuz, before the separate imagery emerged showing what appears to be the wreckage of a MALD. It is not yet clear whether the two reports refer to the same incident or separate losses.
The appearance of the wreckage could also shed a light on how the U.S. and Israel can conduct ongoing air operations against Iran, even if kinetic actions have largely slowed to a trickle.
15090 is the CAGE code for Raytheon, which is visible on the tail fins and other remnants.
— Trevor Ball (@Easybakeovensz) September 20, 2026
Source for images: https://t.co/weIo1Hh6RR pic.twitter.com/4LoBMChKZG
MALD is an expendable store, launched from another aircraft. The ADM-160 family was developed to provide a flexible way of decoying and distracting an enemy’s air defenses, while also adding to the survivability of allied aircraft and standoff weapons. Raytheon won the U.S. Air Force development contract for the current-generation ADM-160B in 2003. The B design is significantly different from the initial A-model from Teledyne Ryan (later Northrop Grumman), the development of which had started in the late 1990s. The B also features a more powerful turbojet engine and possesses greater range.
The ADM-160B is approximately 6.5 feet long, has a wingspan of roughly 5.6 feet when deployed, and is powered by a small turbojet. It has an operational range of around 550 miles.
Rather than carrying a conventional warhead, the MALD carries equipment intended to reproduce the radar signature of specific aircraft or standoff weapons. It can therefore provide additional and often highly enticing tracks for an adversary’s radar operators and surface-to-air missile crews to respond to. It can be programmed to fly intricate routes to better rival the target it is emulating and to provoke the attention of air defenders.
The related ADM-160C MALD-J adds an electronic warfare capability, allowing it to perform stand-in jamming and other forms of active electronic attacks against enemy air defense nodes. Further improved variants of the MALD, which the U.S. Navy has also been acquiring, have since been developed as you can read more about here.
The exact variant involved in today’s incident cannot be established from all publicly available imagery at this stage.
The possibility that the United States had used MALDs against Iran had already attracted considerable attention following Operation Midnight Hammer, the U.S. strike against Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025.
During the operation, U.S. officials described a complex deception plan involving aircraft and other decoy measures designed to prevent Iran from determining the true direction and composition of the attack.
This strongly pointed to MALD as one likely component of that deception architecture.
The opening hours and days of Operation Epic Fury also likely saw MALD employments. ADM-160s have also been used extensively by Ukraine against Russia, primarily for provoking air defense systems into radiating and as penetration aids for cruise missiles.
In the Strait of Hormuz context, the MALD could serve a dual purpose. It could act in its primary role, as a defensive measure for allied aircraft and standoff weapons, drawing Iranian air defense systems away from it and toward the decoy. It can also be used more independently, triggering Iranian defenses and revealing their locations and operating characteristics, as well as the state of Iran’s command and control for those assets. Surveillance platforms, especially those in the air, can then soak up all that signals data. This can then be used to generate intelligence for future operations, and all without putting a person or an expensive piece of equipment at risk.
The unique nature of the current state of the Iran conflict would allow for MALD to be used in this unique manner. While kinetic actions have become sporadic, they are still occurring, so firing a decoy that looks like something much more threatening to Iranian air defenders would not be an unprecedented escalation.
Iran has characterized the incident as a shoot-down. If Iranian forces did successfully engage the MALD, that would represent a real air defense interception of a U.S. deception system, although these are expendable by design. It is equally possible that the MALD malfunctioned or just flew its route and ran out of fuel and crashed, as designed.
The wreckage also does not, by itself, identify the aircraft that launched the MALD.
The system has been integrated with a broad range of U.S. aircraft. In the course of U.S. operations against Iran, we have notably seen Air Force A-10C Thunderbolt II attack jets returning from theater with markings depicting MALD missions.
It is also worth noting that the MALD wreckage has appeared at the same time as reports of unusual, UAP-like objects over Iran, with videos and eyewitness accounts circulating online. Their authenticity and nature remain unclear.
A number of videos are circulating showing an unidentified object in the skies above Tehran, Iran, it’s not immediately clear what is being filmed. pic.twitter.com/bHNAQGFPNv
— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) September 21, 2026
Such reports come amid an increasingly sophisticated use of low-end drones, decoys, and other forms of deception. These kinds of systems can be employed not only to stimulate adversary air defenses, but also to distract populations and probe how information moves out of a denied area. In such an environment, unusual aerial sightings should be viewed with caution — but not necessarily dismissed as irrelevant. We have been talking about how new forms of misdirection and guile will leverage relatively low-end technologies in future conflicts for many years now. While it isn’t clear if this light show in the sky over Iran was such an activity, it is certainly a reminder to keep that possibility in mind.
I don’t know what this is, or if it’s legit BUT remember we are in a new age of misdirection, decoy and guile. Specifically using low end drone technology. There are more ways to stimulate an enemy air defense system, distract a populous, assess the flow of public info from a… https://t.co/wW7YVlbayB
— Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) September 21, 2026
Meanwhile, the prospect of renewed U.S. strikes is increasingly being raised on both sides. Iran’s central military command said Sunday that it had received information that Washington was preparing to resume attacks, while President Donald Trump told Fox News that he was in a “deciding mode” and was considering further military action alongside economic pressure and a deal.
Trump had also told Axios last week that he was approaching a major decision on whether to resume large-scale military operations, with U.S. forces in the region being maintained at current levels through the end of the year.
Iranian officials have warned that a renewed U.S. attack would trigger retaliation against American forces and interests across the region. At the same time, Qatar and Pakistan are pursuing diplomatic efforts to restart negotiations.
This situation is exactly why keeping as detailed intelligence on the status of Iran’s air defense overlay would be so critical. Building a highly detailed electronic order of battle and maintaining it is critical to the effectiveness of future air operations. There is usually an observable burst of such activity prior to a major operation kicking off, as well. There are also many unseen assets that help with this, from those in space to those in the air and even those under the sea. There have been reports of Israel’s secretive RA-01 stealth flying wing drone being spotted over Iran and of course the U.S. has its own RQ-170 and RQ-180 aircraft, just to name a couple known penetrating assets that are likely highly capable of collecting this information.
Regardless, the U.S. and Israel will have a lot of ‘maintenance’ to do in order to roll back any air defense capabilities Iran has been able to reconstitute should hostilities break out in full again, and a lot of critical intelligence data will need to be up-to-date in order to support such an operation.
Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com
The post ADM-160 Miniature Air Launched Decoy Wreckage A Reminder Of Ongoing Spying On Iran’s Air Defenses appeared first on TWZ.
In a historic first since the founding of the Federal Republic of Germany, the Christian Democrats (CDU) have failed to enter a state parliament after falling below 5 percent in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. In Sunday’s election, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) finished first with 38.2 percent.
“The result is a disaster,” Chancellor Friedrich Merz said shortly after polls closed in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Berlin. He made the remark before public broadcasters ARD and ZDF projected that the CDU would drop below 5 percent in the northeastern state. That threshold is decisive in German politics: parties that fall short do not enter parliament.
The preliminary result is now in. The CDU finished at 4.9 percent, down 8.4 points from 2021. It is the party’s worst state-election result in postwar German history. The outcome is likely to revive calls for Merz to resign. He has given no sign that he will, and he also refuses to give up the CDU chairmanship.
Instead, Merz spoke of reforms that require “backbone, steadfastness and patience,” adding: “I will bring this up, as party chairman of the CDU and above all as chancellor of our country.”
No further pivotal state elections are imminent, and Merz is betting that debt-financed spending will start to show in the economy. He hopes that by 2027 he can point to two years of growth.
The problem is that fuel prices keep rising, health-insurance costs remain high, and large parts of German industry are under pressure from tariffs, input inflation, and competition from China.
The AfD is increasing that pressure. It finished well short in Berlin, below 17 percent, but took first place in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern with 38.2 percent — more than double its 2021 result of 16.7 percent. That follows its victory in Saxony-Anhalt, where it won 43.8 percent. The AfD will not govern in Schwerin, the capitol of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, however. The Social Democrats (SPD) came second with 35.5 percent. Together with the Left (6.5 percent) and the Greens (5.7 percent), the SPD has enough seats for a coalition and is expected to stay in power.
AfD co-leader Alice Weidel called her party the new “people’s party” and said the CDU had been displaced in that role.
“We are the strongest force and have arrived in the middle of the population,” she said on ZDF.
Voters had wanted “a change of policy,” she added, declaring the firewall of other parties against working “a failure.” Her long-term goal, she said, is coalition talks with the CDU.
Co-leader Tino Chrupalla claimed a “clear government mandate” and said the AfD would offer talks to all parties. The other parties in the new Mecklenburg-Vorpommern parliament have already ruled that out.
The post Germany: AfD roars into first, but CDU looks set to crash out of parliament for the first time ever appeared first on Remix News.
Login