Tag Archives: Military

Ivermectin Claims by TUDM Officers : What Are The Facts?

Ivermectin Claims by TUDM Officers : What Are The Facts?

Are the claims on ivermectin made by a TUDM Brigadier-General and TUDM Major accurate?

Let’s take a look at the viral ivermectin claims by these TUDM officers, and find out what the FACTS really are!

 

Ivermectin Claims by TUDM Brigadier-General + Major

A message on ivermectin purportedly to be by a retired TUDM Brigadier-General and a retired TUDM major has gone viral on WhatsApp.

The message is long, so just skip to the next section for the FACTS.

(07/07, 02:12) BG Dato Goh Seng Toh TUDM: Am very happy today cos my friend’s wife who was tested Covid 19 positive was declared cleared of the Covid19 virus by the doctor at the Government Quarantined Centre this morning. She was on Ivermectin, vitamin C, fresh fruits and simple foods for 5 days. She was so happy. Please consider taking Ivermectin with vitamin C and zinc if any of your family members is infected with Covid19 virus. Early treatment with Ivermectin is even better. Don’t wait until stage 3 or 4

(07/07, 02:12) BG Dato Goh Seng Toh TUDM: Happy too as MoH allow prescription of ivermectin fir treatment upon request though off label … saving life and easing the full icu capacity is utmost important

*******

(07/07, 05:38) Mej Mior Rosli TUDM(B): I have been promoting ivermactin but many laughed at me..

We do like to read but listen to so called experts.. but most of the experts are half past six and bogus..

We have to change our paradigm if we want to be a developed country..

– Maj Mior Rosli.
7Jul 21.

 

Ivermectin Claims by TUDM Officers : What Are The Facts?

TUDM Brigadier-General Dato Goh Seng Toh and Major Mior Rosli from TUDM (Royal Malaysia Air Force) made a number of amazing claims about ivermectin.

So let’s go through their ivermectin claims, and see what the FACTS really are…

Claim #1 : Ivermectin + Vitamin C + Zinc Works Against COVID-19
Verdict : FALSE

TUDM Brigadier-General Dato Goh Seng Toh is advising all of us to “consider taking ivermectin with vitamin C and zinc“, but provides no evidence for their efficacy against COVID-19.

Ivermectin has been shown to work against COVID-19 in lab (in vitro) studies, but does NOT improve clinical outcomes or prevent transmission.

That is why the WHO and the vast majority of health authorities around the world DO NOT advocate using ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19.

Read more : Latest Ivermectin COVID-19 Study : What Does It Really Say?

Claim #2 : MoH Allows Prescription Of Ivermectin For COVID-19 Treatment
Verdict : Misleading

The Malaysia Ministry of Health does NOT allow the prescription of ivermectin for COVID-19 treatment.

However, they allow hospitals to apply to the Drug Control Agency (DCA) for the “off-label” use of ivermectin, which “must be done in a monitored environment“.

So you cannot simply get a prescription for ivermectin. Neither can you buy it online or over-the-counter.

Be warned – the illegal sale of ivermectin is punishable by fines of up to RM50K and/or 5 years jail!

Read more : Can Hospitals In Malaysia Use Ivermectin To Treat COVID-19?
Read more : Illegal Ivermectin Sale : Up to RM50K Fine + 5 Years Jail!

Claim #3 : 32 Countries Used Ivermectin To Combat COVID-19
Verdict : FALSE

There is no evidence that 32 countries have officially used ivermectin to combat COVID-19, much less reported any success with it.

Countries that ivermectin proponents have been promoting – India, Peru, Mexico, Chile, Brazil, South Africa – have all failed to control COVID-19.

Just look at their COVID-19 case numbers below. Does it look like ivermectin helped them at all? Is it therefore surprising to learn that on 27 May 2021, India dropped ivermectin?

Read more : MAECC Ivermectin Briefing : Control COVID-19 In 6 Weeks?

Claim #4 : It Is Safe To Take 10 Ivermectin Tablets At One Go
Verdict : Misleading

TUDM Major Mior Rosli claimed that it is safe to take 10 ivermectin tablets at one go. That’s potentially dangerous advice, because ivermectin tablets come in different doses, and the proper dosage is tied to body weight.

A 2002 study on ivermectin safety showed that it was safe at up to 120 mg in a single dose. This is 10X the FDA-approved dose of 200 micrograms per kg for a 60 kg healthy adult.

However, the study did not look at taking such a large dose of ivermectin on a continuous basis, only a single dose.

In addition, self-medicating with ivermectin can lead to overdosing because the tablets available in most countries, including Malaysia, are formulated for animal use.

In February 2021, Julie Weber, President of the American Association of Poison Control Centers and the director of the Missouri Poison Center warned that people are getting poisoned by fake COVID-19 cures like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

The Missouri Poison Center also issued a warning :

There have been reports of intentional ivermectin overdoses which can cause serious symptoms such as seizures, coma, lung and heart problems.

Claim #5 : Ivermectin Kills Any COVID-19 Variant
Verdict : FALSE

TUDM Major Rosli claimed that ivermectin kills any COVID-19 variant. That’s FALSE, because ivermectin does not actually “kill” the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but that’s not the same thing as killing it.

Just because I blocked you from entering my home, does that mean I killed you? Of course not!

Several mechanisms of action has been proposed for ivermectin, none of which actually involves killing the virus :

  • inhibiting the host cell’s importin alpha/beta-1 nuclear transport proteins
  • interfering with the attachment of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein
  • exhibiting anti-inflammatory properties

Claim #6 : Current Vaccines Do Not Protect Against Delta Variant
Verdict : FALSE

Major Rosli’s claim that current vaccines do not protect against the more dangerous Delta variant is FALSE.

Public Health England’s data have shown that the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines offer robust protection against the Delta variant, after two doses.

Read more : Why Delta Variant Causes MORE Breakthrough Infections!

COVID-19
Variant
Symptomatic
COVID-19
Hospitalisation
1 Dose 2 Doses 1 Dose 2 Doses
Alpha (UK) 50% 66% 76% 86%
Delta (India) 33% 60% 71% 92%

Claim #7 : India Used Ivermectin To Control Delta Variant
Verdict : FALSE

That’s not true. India had earlier adopted ivermectin for use in mild or asymptomatic COVID-19, but that is no longer the case.

On 27 May 2021, India dropped ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and favipiravir, azithromycin, doxycycline, zinc and even plasma therapy after they proved to be INEFFECTIVE against COVID-19.

Claim #8 : Philippines Allowed Ivermectin To Be Used
Verdict : Misleading

As it so happened, I watched the Philippines Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability bully the Filipino Secretary of Health, Francisco Tiongson Duque III in the HR 1711 public hearing.

Just like in Malaysia, the Philippines already allows hospitals to apply for off-label use of medicine.

So what Secretary Duque did was agree to clarify that there is an existing CSP (Compassionate Special Permit) that doctors can apply for.

Read more : Philippine Secretary of Health Duque Allows Use Of Ivermectin By Doctors?

Claim #9 : Australia Is Using Ivermectin Against COVID-19
Verdict : FALSE

Australia does NOT use ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19.

Here is the 1 June 2021 conclusion on ivermectin by the Australian Department of Health :

There is currently insufficient evidence to support the safe and effective use of ivermectin, doxycycline and zinc (either separately, or in combination) for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19.

More robust, well-designed clinical trials are needed before they could be considered an appropriate treatment option.

Claim #10 : Singapore Is Using Ivermectin Against COVID-19
Verdict : FALSE

Singapore does NOT use ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19.

Here is the 18 June 2020 conclusion from the Singapore Ministry of Health’s COVID-19 Rapid Review :

There is insufficient high-quality evidence to show chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine are effective for post-exposure prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19.

Instead, evidence to date suggests the use of these agents is associated with more harms than standard of care.

 

Please Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Fact CheckTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Chinese Bombers Fire On US Aircraft Carrier?

Did Chinese bombers fire on the US aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt in the South China Seas?

Take a look at the viral news, and find out what the FACTS really are!

 

Claim : Chinese Bombers Fire On US Aircraft Carrier In South China Sea

A YouTube video is going viral on WhatsApp, claiming that Chinese bombers fired on an US aircraft carrier in the South China Sea.

It is usually shared without commentary because the title speaks for itself, and the video itself repeats the same claim.

 

Truth : Chinese Bombers Did NOT Fire On US Aircraft Carrier

This is fake news by an unknown YouTube channel called M News, and here are the FACTS.

Fact #1 : Chinese Bombers Did Not Fire On US Aircraft Carrier

It bears repeating – this is FAKE NEWS. Chinese bombers did not fire on any US aircraft carrier.

If that really happened, it would have been a major news story all over the world. It would have certainly started a major war between the United States and China.

You didn’t hear anything about it, did you? What makes you think some unknown YouTube website called M News would have an exclusive scoop on this story?

Fact #2 : The USS Theodore Roosevelt Incident Happened In January 2021

Eight Chinese H-6K bombers, escorted by four J-16 fighters and a single Y-8 anti-submarine warfare aircraft practiced a mock attack on USS Theodore Roosevelt as it sailed between Taiwan and the Philippines on 23 January 2021.

The H-6K bomber pilots could be heard in cockpit conversations confirming orders for the simulated targeting and release of anti-ship missiles against the carrier.

However, the Chinese strike group remained more than 250 nautical miles (463 kilometres) away from the carrier group – beyond the 248 mile (459 km) range of their YJ-12 anti-ship missiles.

Fact #3 : M News Ripped It Off Popular Mechanics

M News used stock footage, and a text to voice software to recite a Popular Mechanics article by Kyle Mizokami on the USS Theodore Roosevelt incident, word for word.

The creator didn’t even bother to edit out the part about the “the map embedded in the tweet above” – the tweet was in the article, but not the video.

The only original thing the creator did was to insert the fake news chyron claiming that Today: Chinese Bombers fire on US Aircraft Carrier in South China Sea.

And of course, sharing it on WhatsApp so you would share it too.

Fact #4 : The Date Changes Daily

M News garnered more than 2 million views for this video, but only because they changed the date in the title on a daily basis!

This allows them to keep sharing the video on social media, and WhatsApp, to fool people into clicking and watching their video.

They first posted the video on 3 February 2021, but they keep changing the date in the title, to make it look “new” and “current”.

Now that you know that M News posts fake videos and fake news, please WARN your family and friends.

And please STOP sharing M News videos, and definitely DO NOT visit their YouTube channel!

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | AircraftTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did US Refuse To Let WHO Investigate Fort Detrick For C19?

Is it true that the United States refused to let WHO investigate Fort Detrick, where the SARS-CoV-2 virus was made?

Take a look at the latest viral post from China, and find out what the FACTS really are!

 

Claim : US Refused To Let WHO Investigate Fort Detrick, Origin Of Trump Virus!

This post from China has been frenziedly shared by Sinophiles in WhatsApp groups.

It’s a long read, so if you just want the facts, skip to the next section.

Till today 10 June 2021, USA has refused to let WHO International team to investigate Fort Detrick, the origin of the Trumpp virus…your say

Shocking! Today the poisoning killer was finally found, and it really was the United States!
The truth is creepy, the new crown virus is man-made and originated from the[骷髅] P3 virus laboratory in North Carolina, USA!

[庆祝]Greg Roubini, a well-known American intelligence expert, officially revealed the secrets of this day in an interview with the First News Network television channel. According to Greg, the new crown virus was genetically engineered as a [炸弹]biological weapon. It originated from the[炸弹] BSL-3 laboratory in North Carolina and was developed by Professor [炸弹]Ralph Barrick.

He also stated that the [庆祝]virus was spread from North Carolina[庆祝] to China, Italy and the entire United States by the [骷髅]”dark government”. Greg once tweeted and questioned Trump: Why didn’t you tell the American people that the virus was made by the United States? [庆祝]Why not make it clear that the new coronavirus itself is a biological weapon?

 

The Truth : WHO Does Not Even Want To Investigate Fort Detrick!

The super-long WhatsApp post appears to be Google translated from Chinese, with mistakes like :

  • crown virus = coronavirus
  • First News Network = One America Network
  • Greg Roubini = Greg Rubini
  • Ralph Barrick = Ralph Baric
  • Radixivir = Remdesivir
  • Stanley Chela = Stanley Chera

It is also nothing more than a rehash of past and present Chinese propaganda on COVID-19, some of which we have already debunked in the past :

And now, let’s go through and fact check the super-long article, to show you why this is just more fake news and yet another piece of Chinese propaganda.

Claim #1 : USA refused to let WHO investigate Fort Detrick
Verdict : FALSE

The WHO international team that is looking into the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus never requested to investigate Fort Detrick.

That’s simply because Fort Detrick, and the city of Maryland, was not the epicentre of the first COVID-19 outbreak.

The first COVID-19 outbreak happened in Wuhan in the Hubei province of China.

Claim #2 : Fort Detrick Is Source Of SARS-CoV-2
Verdict : FALSE

China’s continuous suggestions that there may have been a leak at the Fort Detrick laboratory is illogical.

If SARS-CoV-2 leaked from Fort Detrick, the city of Frederick in Maryland would have been the epicentre of the initial COVID-19 outbreak, not Wuhan.

That is why the WHO international team not only asked to investigate the Huanan Seafood Market, they also asked to investigate the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Now, this does not mean that the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It merely means the Chinese claim about Fort Detrick is nonsensical.

Claim #3 : Greg Rubini is an American intelligence expert
Verdict : FALSE

Greg Rubini was exposed by Buzzfeed as the alias of a 61 year-old Italian man who worked in marketing and music promotions.

He is definitely NOT American or an intelligence expert.

Claim #4 : SARS-CoV-2 originated in the BSL-3 laboratory in North Carolina
Verdict : FALSE

Wait, didn’t this piece of Chinese propaganda just claim that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was created in Fort Detrick?

Fort Detrick is in the state of Maryland; while the University of North Carolina (UNC) is in the state of North Carolina.

Which is it? The virus cannot be created in two separate places.

If it was created in the BSL-3 laboratory at UNC, then why ask for Fort Detrick to be investigated?

The lack of logic in Chinese propaganda is astounding…

UNC Burnett-Womack BSL-3 laboratory

Claim #4 : Luc Montagnier revealed that virus has HIV sequence
Verdict : FALSE

This claim was made in April 2020, when Luc Montagnier actually hypothesised that the SARS-CoV-2 virus came “out of a laboratory in Wuhan“.

Not surprisingly, this piece of Chinese propaganda adroitly skipped past that inconvenient claim…

At that time, Montagnier cited an Indian pre-published study as evidence that the coronavirus was engineered.

He did not “reveal” that the virus has HIV genetic sequences.

Claim #5 : Indian scientists discovered the HIV virus insert in SARS-CoV-2
Verdict : FALSE

The Indian paper that Luc Montagnier cited was posted on BioRxiv, not in February as claimed, but in January 2020.

In their paper, that group of Indian scientists claimed that there were “uncanny similarity of unique inserts” between SARS-CoV-2 and HIV-1, suggesting that the coronavirus was engineered.

That pre-published study was widely criticised by the scientific community, as the similarities it pointed out were very common amongst similar viruses.

The authors quickly retracted their paper.

Claim #6 : COVID-19 originated in the United States
Verdict : FALSE

Analysis of blood samples of donors in various countries, including the United States, have revealed that people were infected with COVID-19 before China reported it to the WHO on 31 December 2019.

That led China to push the narrative that the COVID-19 pandemic originated in the United States.

However, there are two problems with that narrative – SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious, and scientists can analyse its genomic changes over time.

SARS-CoV-2 Is Highly Contagious

SARS-CoV-2 is so contagious that an outbreak is very hard to contain. Look at the severe lockdown measures the Chinese took in Wuhan.

There were no such lockdowns in the US, so if SARS-CoV-2 originated in the US, it would have resulted in a massive outbreak.

Obviously, that did not happen, ergo COVID-19 cannot possibly originate in the United States.

Genomic Analysis

Viruses mutate and create new strains over time. A novel virus like SARS-CoV-2 would start with a single strain and evolve into multiple strains as it spreads globally and mutate over time.

By analysing the genomic changes of these strains, scientists have pretty much concluded that SARS-CoV-2 did indeed originate in China.

The blood sample studies only serve to reinforce the growing opinion that China was either unaware of COVID-19 for many weeks, or covered up the fact that they had a new viral epidemic on their hands.

Claim #7 : Robert Redfield said many deaths in September 2019 were from COVID-19
Verdict : FALSE

Chinese media, like CGTN and New China TV, have actively pushed this false narrative after CDC director, Dr. Robert Redfield, said that some deaths that were initially diagnosed as influenza were later detected as COVID-19.

This happened on 11 March 2020, during the US House Oversight Committee discussion :

Rep. Harley Rouda asked Dr. Redfield if it’s possible that some flu patients may have been misdiagnosed, and actually had COVID-19.

Dr. Redfield replied, “Some cases have actually been diagnosed that way in the United States today“.

At no point did he say that that those deaths were detected in September 2019.

Claim #8 : US soldier Maatje Benassi spread COVID-19 to Wuhan
Verdict : FALSE

Chinese media and netizens have assiduously claimed that COVID-19 was introduced to Wuhan by US soldiers participating in the 2019 Military World Games.

They initially used a video of a Belgian man to push this fake narrative, but later shifted to targeting one specific US soldier – Maatje Benassi.

Maatje Benassi was just one of the hundreds of US soldiers participating in the 2019 Military World Games – essentially the military version of Olympics.

A competitive cyclist, she suffered an accident in the final lap of a 50 mile race, suffering a fractured rib and a concussion.

Despite not being diagnosed with COVID-19, she was accused of being Patient Zero, who spread COVID-19 to Wuhan.

Both Chinese propaganda outlet, Global Times, and Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian, participated in this false narrative.

U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Maatje Benassi of the U.S. Armed Forces Cycling Team leads the group during the women’s road race event of the 2019 CISM Military World Games in Wuhan, China Oct. 20, 2019. (DoD/EJ Hersom)

Claim #9 : Maatje Benassi works at Fort Detrick
Verdict : FALSE

Maatje Benassi does not work at Fort Detrick.

She is an Army reservist assigned to the 312th Observer-Controller Trainer unit at Fort Meade – about 91 km away from Fort Detrick.

Claim #10 : Ralph Baric developed the SARS-CoV-2 virus
Verdict : FALSE

There is no evidence that Ralph Baric, or any other person, developed the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Claim #11 : Remdesivir was developed for COVID-19 before it existed
Verdict : FALSE

Remdesivir is a broad-spectrum antiviral medication, that works by inhibiting viral RNA polymerase, which exists in most RNA viruses. That means it could work against a broad range of viruses.

It was initially developed to treat hepatitis C and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in 2009, but failed to work against them.

It was then studied as a potential treatment for Ebola and Marburg virus infections, before it was discovered to work in vitro (in the lab) against multiple filoviruses, pneumoviruses, paramyxoviruses and coronaviruses.

Therefore, the claim that Remdesivir was created to treat COVID-19 before it existed, is false.

Claim #12 : Remdesivir is an antidote for COVID-19
Verdict : FALSE

The US FDA approved remdensivir for use in COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalisation on 22 October 2020, after three promising trials.

However, in November 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended AGAINST the use of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients, after the Solidarity trial determined that it had “little to no effect on hospitalised COVID-19“.

Therefore, the claim that Remdesivir is an antidote or cure for COVID-19 is also false.

 

Why Would China Push Fake Fort Detrick Claim?

With China’s aggressive foreign policy moves in recent years, it is not uncommon to see fake pro-China, anti-America stories being created and shared.

Many believe it’s part of a concerted attempt to burnish China’s image overseas, and drown out negative coverage of China’s controversial Belt and Road Initiative, and their aggressive moves in the South China Sea..

China has also been blamed for not handling the initial COVID-19 epidemic better, and unfairly – for being the origin of this new virus.

Hence, they have been trying their best to deflect blame by casting aspersions unto others, using aggressive Wolf Warrior diplomacy tactics, propaganda outlets like Global Times and CTGN, and their 50 Cent Army.

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact CheckHealth | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Thank you!

Malaysia FMCO 3.0 Lockdown Extended To 28 June 2021!

MKN just announced that the FMCO 3.0 lockdown will be extended by two weeks to 28 June 2021!

Here is what we know so far…

 

Malaysia FMCO 3.0 Lockdown Extended To 28 June 2021!

The National Security Council (MKN) just ordered a 2-week extension of the FMCO 3.0 Total Lockdown Phase 1.

The lockdown of most social and economic sectors across Malaysia will continue until 28 June 2021.

During this FMCO 3.0 lockdown, ALL sectors are FORBIDDEN to operate, EXCEPT for essential economic and service sectors that will be announced by MKN.

The Malaysian people are asked to STAY AT HOME to break the chain of infection, and maintain COVID-19 precautions.

If this new Total Lockdown Phase 1 succeeds in bringing down the number of new COVID-19 cases, the government will implement Phase 2.

Total Lockdown Phase 2 will last for four weeks, during which several economic sectors that do not involve mass gatherings and allow for physical distancing will be allowed to reopen.

The next step is Total Lockdown Phase 3, which is basically the current Movement Control Order (MCO) 3.0.

However, the decision to shift from Phase 1 to Phase 2 and then Phase 3 will be subject to risk assessments by the Ministry of Health (KKM).

 

FMCO 3.0 Total Lockdown SOP : 2 June 2021 Edition!

Here is a video showing the 2 June 2021 edition of the total lockdown SOP for MCO 3.0, which people are calling Full MCO or FMCO.

Here is a selection of FMCO 3.0 total lockdown SOP :

  1. Interstate or inter-district travel is FORBIDDEN.
  2. Up to two (2) people from each household are allowed to go out to purchase food, medicine, dietary supplements and other daily essentials.
  3. Up to three (3) people, including the patient, are allowed to go out from each household to seek medical treatment, healthcare, screening test, security assistance or other emergencies within a radius of no more than 10 kilometres from their home, or the nearest available service (if there are none within 10 km).
  4. Up to two (2) people are allowed in each taxi or e-hailing ride, including the driver. The passenger must be seated in the rear compartment.
  5. Commercial vehicles carrying essential goods are allowed to carry people up to the licensed limit.
  6. Official government vehicles are allowed to carry up to their maximum capacity.
  7. All airports and ports are allowed to operate as usual.
  8. Sea and land public transportation services, like employee transportation, public buses, express buses, LRT, MRT, ERL, monorail and ferry are allowed to operate at 50% of vehicle capacity.
  9. Travel for funerals and natural disasters are allowed with police permission.
  10. NGOs travelling to assist with natural or humanitarian disasters must obtain permission from the State / District Disaster Management Committee, and the aid must be funnelled through the Disaster Operations Control Centre (PKOB).
  11. Interstate / inter-district travel for the purpose of COVID-19 vaccination is ALLOWED with the display of vaccine appointment on MySejahtera, website or SMS.
  12. Members of Parliament or State Assembly are ALLOWED to cross state or district lines.
  13. Interstate travel is FORBIDDEN for couples in long-distance relationships.
  14. Short-term business visitors are ALLOWED for official or business purposes under the One Stop Centre (OSC) Initiative, with police permission

Recommended : MCO 3.0 Total Lockdown SOP : 3 June 2021 Update!

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Business | Travel | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Israel Reject Al Jazeera Request For 10 Extra Minutes?

Did Israel reject a request for 10 extra minutes to vacate the Al Jazeera building in Gaza, before bombing it?

Find out what’s this viral claim all about, and what the FACTS really are!

 

Claim : Israel Rejected Al Jazeera Request For 10 More Minutes!

A video showing a man pleading with Israeli authorities for 10 more minutes before a building is demolished, is being circulated, together with this message :

Director of Al Jazeera Palestine was begging for extra 10 minutes to Israel Army officer. But he refused to give any extra time and destroyed the Al Jazeera Building in Palestine in minutes.

They asked them to evacuate the building first and then used GPS Coordinate guided Bombs to destroy the Al Jazeera Palestine Head office building. The punishment is for broadcasting Fake news about Israel.

 

Did Israel Reject Al Jazeera Request For 10 Extra Minutes? Not Quite…

Irrespective of our views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we must agree that they should be based on facts.

We investigated this video and claim, and here are the FACTS :

Fact #1 : That Is Not The Director Of Al Jazeera Palestine

The man in the video is not the director of Al Jazeera Palestine.

He is Jawad Mahdi – the owner of the al-Jalaa building that was destroyed by an Israeli airstrike on 15 May 2021.

Fact #2 : There Is No Al Jazeera Palestine, Or Al Jazeera Building

There is no organisation known as Al Jazeera Palestine, or a building called Al Jazeera Building.

The building in the video is the al-Jalaa, a 12-storey office tower which hosted the bureau offices of the Associated Press and Al Jazeera in Gaza.

Fact #3 : Israel Gave Them One Hour To Vacate

The IDF gave al-Jalaa occupants an hour to vacate the building. They would normally drop “roof knocker” bombs as a final warning before destroying the building.

However, it is impossible for anyone to vacate such a large building in such a short time frame, with anything more than some belongings.

Fact #4 : Israel Rejected The Request For 10 Extra Minutes

Jawad Mahdi was seen in the video asking an Israeli intelligence officer for an additional 10 minutes, so that four journalists can go in to retrieve their belongings.

The Israeli intelligence officer rejected his request, and the video shows the building collapsing after being bombed.

Fact #5 : Israel Claimed Hamas Secretly Used The Building

IDF and the Israeli government claimed that Hamas secretly used the building for “military intelligence purposes” and a unit operating out of the building had been “conducting sabotage operations against the IDF”.

However, they did not offer any evidence, or explain why it was justifiable to demolish a 12-storey office building that was “secretly” being used by Hamas.

It was also not explained why it was not possible to give journalist the extra 10 minutes to retrieve their belongings, when they had no issue giving the other occupants (and the secret Hamas operatives inside) an hour to evacuate the building.

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

Fact Check : Palestinian Home Occupied By Brooklyn Couple?

Did a couple from Brooklyn occupy a home that used to be owned by an elderly Palestinian couple?

Take a look at the photo that Michael Moore made viral, and find out what the FACTS really are!

 

Claim : This Palestinian Home Was Occupied By Brooklyn Couple!

This photo was shared several times during the recent conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, but it only went viral after Michael Moore posted it on his Facebook wall.

His Facebook post did not specifically address the couple, so it looked like he only used the photo because it fitted his narrative.

If someone took/stole your home right now, and moved you out because a theocracy ordered it — or what if this same theocracy bulldozed your home and tossed you out into a field and told you and your children to GTF outta here — what would YOUR response be?

What would you have the moral right to do about it? And to be perfectly clear, I don’t care if it was a Christian Fascist German soldier in 1941 forcibly removing you from your home, or an American bank in 2008 forcibly removing you and kicking you to the curb while taking your home — it’s gut-check time, folks (and yes, I mean you too, fellow pacifists):

What would you have the moral and human right and DUTY to do about it, to respond to it, to stop it? And would the rest of the world just stand by and let you suffer as it so often does?

When do we all just put a stop to this, to grind the gears of the machine to a complete halt and replace the plutocracy (we’re not a democracy), the theocracy (you’re not a democracy), and any racial, religious or corporate supremacy with TRUE democracy, FULL human rights, and love?

 

Fact Check : Palestinian Home Occupied By Brooklyn Couple?

This is a rather iconic photo – a Palestinian couple looking at what used to be their ancestral home, now occupied by an Israeli couple. That was probably why Michael Moore chose it.

We decided to investigate the photo, and here was what we found…

Fact #1 : The Photo Was Taken In Israel

This photo was taken in the village of Ijzim, about 30 minutes south of Haifa in Israel.

Just to be clear, Ijzim is not in the West Bank. Nor is it in the Gaza Strip.

Fact #2 : Ijzim Was Depopulated In 1948

Israel captured Ijzim during the 1948 War, and the majority of the villagers fled or were expelled during the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe).

The Israelis quickly demolished the Arab houses to make way for permanent Jewish settlements.

Photo credit : Fred Csasznik – Front cover of The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem by Benny Morris, Cambridge University Press 1989.

Fact #3 : The Photo Was Taken In 2020

Despite what people may say, this photo was not taken recently. It was taken and published a year ago – in May 2020.

The last time the elderly Palestinian couple was in Ijzim was 72 years ago.

Fact #4 : The House Was Not The Original Home

The house in the picture was not the original home of the elderly Palestinian couple.

The original home, which belonged to the Palestinian man’s father, was demolished, and a new home built on the land.

Fact #5 : It Was Part Of An Al-Jazeera Project

In May 2020, Najwan Simri of Al Jazeera took an elderly Palestinian couple to visit their original homes and to meet their current Israeli residents.

Here is the Al Jazeera video clip, as well as an English translation.

Some towns and cities inside the Green Line will become the hope of those in the diaspora. But they will also become a station of refuge for others.

Here lives a family uprooted from a nearby village. We had an appointment with Hajjeh Im Samir to accompany her there. Her [ailing] husband insisted on coming with us because he said the air of Ijzim is the best cure.

Despite its beauty, the road there seems desolate as if it gets you to the place but doesn’t take you there. Eagerly, Im Samir organizes our tour for us and tells us the names of the [Palestinian] owners of the houses.

Our first stop is God’s house. Its stones have been preserved as they were. Alone, the colors of its locked doors change each time the dryness of the seasons intensifies.

Here, Abu Samir does not stay in the car because this stop [station] is the location for which he has most longed in order to banish the other stations of his life. “This was our house, my father’s house. After the ‘48 wars, the Jews occupied it.”

After a few minutes, the residents of the house come out to [the gate]. They ask us what we want. We say, this is the owner of the house; how do you feel living in a house built on the wreckage of his house? [The answer] Frankly, I don’t feel anything. I am very happy. Living here is very enjoyable.

How strange is the distance between the owner of the house and he who is occupying it. How strange is the irony between he who has to stand inside the gate and he who must stand outside the gate. How strong Abu Samir is! For other uprooted people have refused to accompany us [on our tour]. One of them told us that he cannot bear to glimpse through the window of his father’s house a foreigner living there.

And that [glimpse] could possibly be of a strange symbol, like [what is glimpsed through the window] of a stolen [Palestinian] school converted into a temple with an emblem [the flag of Israel] that is not as old as the memory of the stones of the school.

And so, an extreme picture! It is said that the passage of time helps in forgetting, but, in the Palestinian case, it seems that the equation of time is different and that the years are merely a number. Rather, the longer the banishment of the Palestinians is, the more they remember.

– This is Najwan Simri, reporting from the depopulated village of Ijzim for Al Jazeera.

Fact #6 : No Evidence The Couple Was From Brooklyn

The most direct source was Al Jazeera, and even they did not identify the Israeli couple, much less confirmed that they were from Brooklyn, New York City.

Despite my extensive searching, I could find no source of this claim. None of the earlier posts using this picture – in May to June 2020 – mentioned that the Israeli couple were from Brooklyn.

Therefore, it is highly likely that their Brooklyn origin was completely bogus.

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

Fact Check : US Withdraws After Chinese Jamming Attacks?

Did the US Navy withdraw from the South China Sea after Chinese jamming attacks on their planes?

Find out what’s going on, and what the FACTS really are…

 

Claim : US Navy Withdraws After Chinese Jamming Attacks!

This was the Chinese article that went viral with Chinese netizens and Sinophiles sharing it excitedly in July 2020.

It was allegedly translated into English by Hong Kong-based analyst, Thomas Wing Polin, whose translation was widely circulated on social media

It is this English translation that has begun circulating again on social media, after tensions rose between the US and China.

Just now, the U.S. fighter plane flew over the South China Sea again.
Unexpectedly, it lost control halfway, and the U.S. finally admitted one thing.

Just now, the US CNBC website reported that several US Growler electronic warplanes were mysteriously attacked when they flew to the South China Sea again. These warplanes were all out of control midway, but these warplanes were out of control for only a few seconds. Then the US military ordered the request. All fighters over the South China Sea withdrew.

In this regard, the United States was at a loss as to why this happened. Finally, they mobilized reconnaissance satellites to discover that many electronic jamming devices appeared on the islands and reefs in the South China Sea. It was these devices that caused the short-term loss of control of the U.S. fighter planes. According to the pilots, when they were attacked electronically, all the instruments in the cabin were chaotic. The fighter planes were completely out of control and could not communicate with the outside world, but they did not know what happened.

After the accident, the United States negotiated with my country, demanding that my country dismantle the electronic equipment immediately, but it was rejected. These electronic devices are an important part of my country’s maritime defense and are not offensive weapons. Therefore, the US military’s request for dismantling is unreasonable. So why does this electronic device make the United States so afraid? First of all, it is an electronic jamming device that can cut off the enemy’s radio system. The attacked fighter will be out of control. Since it cannot be controlled, these fighters will soon crash.

The second is that its attack method is unpredictable. Compared with conventional air defense missiles, electronic jamming systems are more concealed. Because its attack method interferes with the radio, enemy fighter planes are often hit inadvertently. At the same time, this type of attack is almost impossible to intercept. That’s why the US military asks my country to dismantle these weapons.

On the same day, Swift, the former commander of the US Pacific, finally admitted that the US military had lost the best time to control the South China Sea. He believes that China has deployed a large number of Hongqi 9 air defense missiles, H6K fighter jets, and electronic jamming systems on islands and reefs. The defense can be said to be solid. If US fighter jets rush into the South China Sea, they are likely to encounter “Waterloo.”

In fact, since the construction of China’s island and reef defense began, the living space of US military fighters and warships has been shrinking. If China continues to develop like this, the United States will not have any chance of winning.

Whether it is islands or reefs or electronic jamming systems, these are part of our national defense system. According to the US military, my country’s electronic jamming system has covered more than half of the South China Sea. It can be seen from this that American fighters must be careful when entering the South China Sea.

 

US Navy Withdraws After Chinese Jamming : A Fantasy

That Chinese article was given some legitimacy after it was posted in Asia Times by Pepe Escobar.

However, it is COMPLETELY BOGUS, and is yet another example of Chinese propaganda warfare. Here are the facts…

Fact #1 : There Is No Such CNBC Report

A quick check on any search engine will show that CNBC never published a report on US Growler planes being attacked by Chinese jamming.

Fact #2 : No US Growler Planes Ever Lost Control From Chinese Jamming

No US EA-18G Growler planes ever lost control to Chinese jamming.

The Americans first detected Chinese jamming during USS Theodore Roosevelt’s deployment to the Philippines in 2018.

One EA-18G Growler pilot confirmed it in an interview with GMA News Online, but pointed out that they were not in danger :

The mere fact that some of your equipment is not working is already an indication that someone is trying to jam you. And so we have an answer to that.

A EA-18G Growler, XE 573 166857 of the VX-9 “Vampires” cruises over the desert during a mission. Shot 3/11/2009. RMS 227040

Fact #3 : EA-18G Growler Is An Electronics Warfare Aircraft

The Boeing EA-18G Growler is a two-seat electronics warfare aircraft, designed to jam enemy radar and electronics.

While the Growler is still vulnerable to powerful ground jamming, it is the worst aircraft for the Chinese to attack electronically because it’s the American aircraft most able to defend against, and respond to, a jamming attack.

Hence, the pilot’s response – “We have an answer to [Chinese jamming]“.

Fitted with a multitude of jamming pods and electronics, its electronics warfare officer can counter-jam Chinese radar and communications in the area.

And if they are ever in real danger, the pilot can fire an AGM-88 HARM (High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile) to destroy the Chinese jammer.

But perhaps that’s also the reason why the Chinese chose to attack the EA-18G Growler in 2018 – it was the aircraft best able to withstand such an attack.

Fact #4 : It Is Illegal To Jam Any Aircraft In International Airspace

While China has the right to jam foreign military aircraft entering its airspace without permission, the Chinese do not have the right to jam any aircraft, military or civilian, flying in international airspace.

While a jamming attack is not an act of war like firing a missile or shooting shells at the aircraft, it is still a hostile, provocative act that could result in the loss of aircraft and aircrew.

Needless to say – it is illegal for for anyone to electronically interfere with aircraft flying in international space, even if they are EA-18G Growler electronic warfare aircraft.

No nation that claims to be peaceful would behave so recklessly.

Fact #5 : China Pledged Not To Militarise The Spratlys

Back in 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping declared that China has no intention to militarise the Spratly islands :

Relevant construction activity that China is undertaking in the Nansha Islands does not target or impact any country and there is no intention to militarise.

President Xi Jinping also reiterated that China is “committed to freedom of navigation in the sea” and to “resolving disputes through dialogue“.

The presence of military jamming equipment in 2018 though would suggest that President Xi was lying, or has no control of what really goes on in the South China Sea.

It doesn’t help that the writer specifically pointed out how China has militarised those islands :

Since the construction of China’s island and reef defense began, the living space of US military fighters and warships has been shrinking. If China continues to develop like this, the United States will not have any chance of winning.

Fact #6 : Jammers Are Offensive Weapons

The claim that electronic jammers are defensive weapons is nonsensical. Electronic jamming is an offensive capability.

Imagine if your neighbour used an electronic jammer to disrupt your Wi-Fi network, claiming that he has the right to defend his own Wi-Fi network. Which court in the world would agree with him?

The Chinese author of that fantasy piece actually debunks his own claim that jammers are defensive weapons, noting that “it is an electronic jamming device that can cut off the enemy’s radio system. The attacked fighter will be out of control. Since it cannot be controlled, these fighters will soon crash.

Does that sound like a defensive weapon to you? Serious lack of logic and common sense.

Russian Krasukha ground jamming system

Fact #7 : Electronic Jammers Do Not Affect Flight Controls

While electronic jammers can suppress or disrupt radar and communications, they cannot render an aircraft uncontrollable.

Airplanes will not crash simply because they lose radar and communications. Planes that lose radar and communications can still fly…

So the claim that Chinese jammers caused the Growler planes to almost crash is ludicrous.

Fact #8 : Chinese Jammers Do Not Cover Half The South China Sea

While the writer claims that the US military acknowledged that China’s electronic jamming system has covered more than half of the South China Sea, this is yet another fantasy.

The Chinese only deployed military jamming equipment to several artificial islands they created on Mischief Reef and Fiery Cross.

And as powerful as ground-based jamming can be, their effectiveness is greatly reduced by range. That’s why China launched their Xi’an H-6G airborne jamming aircraft in 2018.

These long-range jamming aircraft would not be necessary if China is already capable of jamming electronics across such a vast distance.

Xian H-6G jamming bomber

Fact #9 : The United States Did Not Withdraw

The United States did not withdraw from the South China Sea in July 2020, as claimed by the article.

In fact, they sent two aircraft carriers – USS Nimitz and USS Ronald Reagan – together with their battle groups into the South China Sea just before the Chinese article was published.

It was the first time two carrier groups operated together in the South China Sea since 2009. The third US carrier – USS Theodore Roosevelt – was also nearby, in the Philippine Sea.

The US Navy Chief of Information left no doubt that the two carriers were there to assert that the South China Sea are international waters, not Chinese waters.

Not did it withdraw in April 2021 when the same article went viral again.

In April 2021, the US Navy posted this famous photo of the captain and executive officer of USS Mustin (DDG-89) –  an Arleigh Burke guided missile destroyer watching the Liaoning carrier group in the Philippine Sea.

The photo left no doubt that the US Navy was not going anywhere, and would shadow Chinese naval forces wherever they are in the South China Sea… and beyond.

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | TravelHome

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!


Fact Check : China Lifted KRI Nanggala From 838 Metres?

Did China lift the Indonesian submarine, KRI Nanggala, from the depths when no other country could?

Find out what’s going on, and what the FACTS really are!

 

Claim : China Lifted KRI Nanggala From 838 Metres!

This viral message has been circulating on WhatsApp, together with a gruesome video showing naked and half-naked bodies of dead men lined up on the floor.

The submerged Indonesian submarine was successfully lifted from a depth of 838 meters, killing 53 people. previously asked for help from neighboring Singapore, Australia, Malaysia. but they were unable to lift from below 800 meters, in the end Indonesia asked the Chinese Government for help. China immediately lifted it with heavy equipment. Finish this job.

We will not show you the video, but we can share this screenshot with you.

 

China Lifted KRI Nanggala From 838 Metres? Another Fake Story!

This is yet another fake story about the awesomeness of the Chinese government… and here are the facts.

Fact #1 : KRI Nanggala Has Not Been Recovered… Yet

The Chinese Navy has been assisting in the recovery of KRI Nanggala since 4 May 2021, using three ships :

  • Nantuo-195 – an ocean tug
  • Yongxing Dao-865 – an ocean salvage and rescue ship
  • Tan Suo 2 – a scientific research vessel

As of 17 May 2021, they have NOT recovered the Indonesian submarine, KRI Nanggala, or any bodies from the wreck.

Fact #2 : Singapore, Australia, Malaysia Were Not Asked To Recover KRI Nanggala

It is false to claim that Singapore, Australia and Malaysia were asked to help recover KRI Nanggala from the depths of over 800 metres, but failed.

None of those countries were asked to assist in the recovery of KRI Nanggala, so how could they fail at a task they never even attempted?

Recommended : KRI Nanggala Submarine : Was Its Wreck Recovered?

Fact #3 : The Video Is Not Of KRI Nanggala Sailors

The gruesome video was used to imply that the Chinese government recovered the bodies of KRI Nanggala sailors.

After analysing the video, we can safely say that the video does NOT show the bodies of KRI Nanggala sailors.

For one thing – no body from KRI Nanggala has been recovered so far.

Secondly, the KRI Nanggala went down with 53 people onboard, but there are about 100 dead bodies in the video!

Finally, at least three men can be seen wearing the longyi – the Burmese sarong, and one of the men in the video is wearing a vest with Burmese script.

Therefore, the video was very likely taken in Myanmar, and the dead men could well be people killed by the junta after the coup.

 

Who Would Create Lies About KRI Nanggala???

With China’s aggressive foreign stance in recent years, it is not uncommon to see such fake stories being created and shared.

Some believe it’s part of a concerted attempt to burnish China’s image overseas.

Others believe the many fake stories are being created to drown out the negative coverage of China’s controversial Belt and Road Initiative, and their aggressive moves in the South China Sea.

Whatever the reasons may be, it is our duty as global citizens to stop the proliferation of such fake stories.

Please share this fact check with your friends, so they know the truth!

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact CheckTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

Did China Threaten West With Waterloo In South China Sea?

Did China threaten the West with a repeat of the Battle of Waterloo in the South China Sea?

Find out what is this Chinese threat going viral on social media, and what the FACTS really are…

 

Claim : China threatens West with Battle of Waterloo in South China Sea!

In the viral poster being shared on social media, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying is seen warning Western powers – Don’t Let It Become Your Waterloo! with a hypothetical scenario.

It was originally posted sometime in July 2020, but was “reactivated” in May 2021 during heightened tensions with the West.

WARNING ISSUED TO WESTERN ALLIES IN SOUTH CHINA SEA

Don’t Let It Become Your Waterloo!

The scenario :

  • An attack by US, UK, Australia & Japanese naval forces will be met with electronic disabling of all ships and planes making them sitting targets…
  • US & allies missiles will fail to fire & if they do may explode mid air or re-directed to return to base!
  • The Chinese will give them one warning to withdraw or be sunk!
  • WATERLOO REPLAYED IN 60 MINUTES OF LESS

 

China threatens West with Waterloo in South China Sea : Complete BS

While it may excite pro-China netizens, this is yet another piece of “fan fiction”, like US Navy withdrawing from South China Sea or Mark Zuckerberg’s Not Pretty China Wife.

Fact #1 : Hua Chunying Never Threatened Waterloo

Anyone who checks Hua Chunying’s official Twitter account can confirm that she never posted such a threat.

She may be sarcastic and controversial in her remarks, but she is the official spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Such an overt threat of military action against the US, UK, Australia and Japan, will be seen as an official declaration of hostile intent by China.

It would certainly free the West to ramp up their support of Taiwan, and to actively prepare for hostilities with China.

Fact #2 : Chinese Censors Would Not Have Allowed Such Fake News, Unless…

Such a fake post would not be allowed to be shared on social media, especially Chinese microblogs, without the expressed permission of the Chinese government.

Chinese censors actively and quickly remove all references to anything remotely critical of the Chinese government, like the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest and massacre, or the Hong Kong protests.

We should also not forget that they quickly clamped down on Dr. Li Wenliang when he tried to warn his fellow doctors about COVID-19, forcing him to sign a letter promising not to do it again.

So it would only be possible for any Chinese-related fake news to be spread so widely, with the tacit approval of the Chinese government.

Fact #3 : EMP Weapons Can Disable Ships + Planes, But…

EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse) weapons can be used to disrupt or destroy electronics on ships and planes, but they are not magical weapons as claimed in the post :

  • High-Altitude EMP (HEMP) weapons detonate nuclear warheads in the stratosphere to disrupt electronics in a wide area.
  • Non-Nuclear EMP (NNEMP) weapons that use high explosives to deliver a much smaller electromagnetic pulse.
  • High-Powered Microwave (HPM) weapons like magnetrons and vircators – think of them as primitive versions of the ion cannons you see in Star Wars.

A Chinese HEMP weapon would destroy electronics in a very large area (including their own), so it won’t be deployed close to their own coast. This is something they would deploy against the US homeland.

An NNEMP missile would be something the Chinese would use against a carrier group, affecting a relatively small area – several dozen kilometres. However, these missiles would require constant targeting data, or the carrier group could simply move out of danger in mere minutes.

HPM weapons are still rather primitive with very short range. They also cannot target mass targets like EMP weapons.

Fact #4 : Disabled Missiles Won’t Return To Base

We applaud the writer for his/her creativity, but unlike regular mail, missiles don’t come with a return address.

Missiles disabled by EMP weapons, or electronic jammers, will just lose direction or fall harmlessly out of the sky.

They won’t, however, fly back to their base like homing pigeons. Neither can the Chinese reprogram them to return to base…

Fact #5 : China Is The Aggressor Here

While the writer warns of reprisals if the US, UK, Australia and Japan attack, the fact of the matter is – China is the aggressor in the South China Sea.

Whatever may have happened in the past, the US, UK, Australia and Japan are not the ones illegally building artificial islands, or militarising them, or threatening harm to passing ships and planes.

There is no danger of the US, UK, Australia or Japan attacking China. No one in the right mind would believe in such nonsense.

Rather, the danger lies in Chinese overreach in the South China Sea sparking a war, like how Hitler’s overreach with the invasion of Poland started World War 2.

Arguably, only an attack on Taiwan would draw the Western powers (sans Japan) to intervene militarily, and a military occupation of the Senkaku Islands would force Japan and the US to respond militarily.

Fact #6 : China Would Be The French At Waterloo

It’s not certain why China would warn the Western powers and Japan that they would face their own Battle of Waterloo.

In the Battle of Waterloo, it was Napoleon who attacked the allied forces from Prussia, the UK, the Netherlands, Hanover, Brunswick and Nassau.

In this fan fiction, China would be the French at Waterloo, fighting against the allied forces from the US, UK, Australia and Japan.

Is the writer suggesting that China is bound to lose against the allied forces? Interesting…

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Checks | AerospaceTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!


KRI Nanggala Submarine : Was Its Wreck Recovered?

Was the wreck of the Indonesian submarine, KRI Nanggala, just recovered from the sea?

Find out what has gone viral on social media, and what the FACTS really are!

 

KRI Nanggala Submarine : Was Its Wreck Recovered?

People have been sharing a picture purportedly showing the wreck of he Indonesian submarine, KRI Nanggala, being lifted from the sea.

The picture shows a crane apparently lifting the wreckage of a submarine with the hull number 402 circled in red, with pictures of women crying and hugging each other.

402 is the hull number of KRI Nanggala – the Indonesian submarine that sank 95 kilometres north of Bali on 21 April 2021.

Some also shared part of the Indonesian article – Tangisan Keluarga Korban Pecah, Tim Evakuasi Berhasil Angkat Puing Puing KIR Nanggala 402 Kepermukaan.

In English, the long title translates as “The Victims’ Families Cried, The Evacuation Team Succeeded In Lifting The Wreckage of KRI Nanggala 402 To The Surface“.

 

KRI Nanggala : Submarine Wreck Has Not Been Recovered!

The truth is – this is yet another piece of FAKE NEWS circulating through social media. Here are the facts..

Fact #1 : The Photo Was Edited

Obviously, the photo was edited – it is a collage.

But more to the point – the photo of the submarine was edited to add the hull number 402.

The person who created the photo lifted the 402 hull number from this picture of the actual KRI Nanggala submarine, and added it to the submarine in the photo above.

Fact #2 : That Submarine Was K-141 Kursk

The submarine used in the fake photo is actually K-141 Kursk of the Russian Navy, flipped horizontally.

This is the photo of the Kursk they used to make the fake photo, which we flipped horizontally to make the comparison easier.

As you can see, they edited out the Kursk coat of arms from the sail, and paste the 402 hull number next to it.

Fact #3 : KRI Nanggala Has Not Been Recovered… Yet

Efforts to recover the wreck of KRI Nanggala started on 4 May 2021, with the assistance of the Chinese Navy.

However, as of 11 May 2021, no part of its hull has been recovered from the depth of 838 metres where the wreck has rested.

Fact #4 : Original Article Was Deleted

The original article was posted on 1 May 2021 but recently removed after being exposed as fake news.

However, the video with that fake photo is still available on YouTube, and it was copied and posted by other websites eager to capitalise on the disaster.

Note : We added the FALSE overlay to prevent the article from being further shared as fact.

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! 

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact CheckHealthHome

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

China : Was COVID-19 Created In Fort Detrick Bio Lab?

China keeps suggesting that COVID-19 was created as a bioweapon by the US Army bio lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

Find out what why China wants the world to believe this, and what the FACTS really are!

 

China : Was COVID-19 Created In Fort Detrick Bio Lab?

For more than a year now, Chinese spokespersons and media have aggressively promoted the claim that the SARS-CoV-2 virus did not originate in Wuhan.

Instead, the virus was created as a bioweapon by the US Army at their bio lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

Their evidence? The fact that the CDC shut down the Fort Detrick lab on 2 August 2019 after finding “biosafety lapses” there.

But how did the SARS-CoV-2 virus get from Maryland in the United States to Wuhan, China?

They claimed that the US Army sent their soldiers to spread COVID-19 in Wuhan during the 2019 Military World Games held there from 18 to 27 October 2019.

They even spread a fake video, claiming to show an American soldier spreading the COVID-19 virus in a subway in Wuhan.

The theory heavily promoted by Chinese media and even Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian, who asked, “When did patient zero begin in the US? It might be the US army who brought the epidemic to Wuhan!

They also spread the fake story that Japanese Nobel laureate Professor Dr. Tasuku Honjo confirmed that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was created at the Fort Detrick lab.

Recommended : Nobel laureate Tasuku Honjo confident US created COVID-19?

 

Fort Detrick COVID-19 Origin : Just Chinese Propaganda

The Fort Detrick origin story of COVID-19 is really nothing more than Chinese propaganda.

And here are the FACTS…

Fact #1 : SARS-CoV-2 Is Natural, And Related To Bat Coronaviruses

Genomic analysis have proven that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is natural, for these reasons :

  • an artificial virus would have to be created from existing viruses
  • the SARS-CoV-2 virus has components that have never been seen before
  • it is very similar to existing bat coronaviruses.

Therefore, it is unlikely to be created in a biological lab like the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases lab at Fort Detrick; or the Wuhan Institute of Virology, for the matter.

Fact #2 : Multiple Strains Denote A Later Time Line

Viruses mutate and create new strains over time. A novel virus like SARS-CoV-2 would start with a single strain and evolve into multiple strains as it spreads globally and mutate over time.

Hence, the very fact that there are five strains in the United States would actually refute it as the source of SARS-CoV-2 – the COVID-19 coronavirus.

In fact, by analysing the genomic changes of these strains, scientists have pretty much concluded that SARS-CoV-2 did indeed originate in China.

Fact #3 : Fort Detrick Sterilisation Plant Failed

The CDC temporarily shut down the US Army lab at Fort Detrick on 2 August 2019, after finding “biosafety lapses” there.

However, that was not because viruses actually leaked from the facility, but rather :

  • the lab was no longer able to decontaminate wastewater from its highest security labs.
  • their steam sterilisation plant was damaged in a flood in May 2018, and they had been using a chemical decontamination method instead.
  • no disease-causing materials were found outside authorised areas

USAMRIID Steam Sterilisation Plant at Fort Detrick, when it first became operational in May 2012 | Photo Credit : US Army Corps of Engineers

Fact #4 : Wuhan Was Epicentre Of COVID-19 Outbreak

China’s continuous suggestions that there may have been a leak at the Fort Detrick laboratory is illogical.

If SARS-CoV-2 leaked from Fort Detrick, Maryland would have been the epicentre of the initial COVID-19 outbreak, not Wuhan.

Now, this does not mean that the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It merely means the Chinese claim about Fort Detrick is nonsensical.

 

Why Would China Push Fake Fort Detrick Claim?

With China’s aggressive foreign policy moves in recent years, it is not uncommon to see fake pro-China, anti-America stories being created and shared.

Many believe it’s part of a concerted attempt to burnish China’s image overseas, and drown out negative coverage of China’s controversial Belt and Road Initiative, and their aggressive moves in the South China Sea..

China has also been blamed for not handling the initial epidemic better, and unfairly – for being the origin of this new virus.

Hence, they have been trying their best to deflect blame by casting aspersions unto others, using aggressive Wolf Warrior diplomacy tactics, propaganda outlets like GlobalTimes and CTGN, and their 50 Cent Army.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Fact CheckTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

Can Donald Trump Really Blame Iran For Rocket Attack?

Donald Trump just accused Iran of the rocket attack on the US embassy in Baghdad, threatening retaliation!

Take a look at the picture of three rockets he posted, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Donald Trump : Iran Responsible For Rocket Attack On US Embassy

Even in the waning days of his Presidency, Donald Trump isn’t quite done with Iran.

In a new threat against the Islamic Republic of Iran, Trump posted a picture of three unfired rockets, which he claimed were from Iran.

Our embassy in Baghdad got hit Sunday by several rockets. Three rockets failed to launch. Guess where they were from: IRAN. Now we hear chatter of additional attacks against Americans in Iraq…Some friendly health advice to Iran: If one American is killed, I will hold Iran responsible. Think it over.

As Trump isn’t a very popular president outside of his fanatical base (no kidding), there is much skepticism about his post.

Some have pointed out that the rockets have English markings and could be American-made. Others wonder if these are even rockets – they look more like large versions of a rifle cartridge than rockets.

 

Rocket Attack On US Embassy : A Quick Primer

Before we look into the veracity of Trump’s claims, here’s a quick primer on the rocket attack on the US embassy in Baghdad, Iraq.

At around 8:30 PM on Sunday, 20 December 2020, approximately 21 rockets were fired on the US embassy in Baghdad.

Only about half of the rockets hit the embassy compound, while the others missed and hit an Iraqi apartment complex and vehicles near the embassy.

Photo Credit : Reuters/Landov

In the end, two buildings and a gym in the embassy, vehicles outside the embassy and a generator at the apartment complex, were damaged.

There was only one injury – an Iraqi soldier – no one else died or were injured by the attack.

 

Is Iran Responsible For Rocket Attack On US Embassy?

Unfortunately, the answer isn’t quite so simple as yes or no, Iran did or did not fire those rockets at the US embassy in Baghdad.

Let’s take a look at the facts…

Fact #1 : Those Are 107 mm Haseb Rockets

The Haseb is an Iranian copy of the Chinese Type 63-2 – a spin-stabilised 107 mm rocket with a high-explosive (HE) warhead.

The entire rocket weighs about 18 kg, with an 8 kg cast TNT warhead and a Chinese MJ-1 (Jiàn-1) impact and graze fuse.

Fact #2 : Iran Manufactures + Uses 107mm Haseb Rockets

Haseb rockets are manufactured by Iran’s Armaments Industries Group (AIG), and used by Iranian forces as a short-ranged barrage weapon.

In this picture, IRGC commandos are seen loading a Type 63 rocket launcher mounted onto a pickup truck.

Fact #3 : The English Markings Are Genuine

Some sharp-eyed netizens noticed that rockets have English words on them, instead of Farsi or Arabic words :

107mm ROCKET
LOT : 573
DATE : 2016
N.W : 18kg
R.No. : 2103

This has led to suggestions that the rockets may be fake, or made by Americans themselves, or replicas of the real rockets used in a false flag operation.

Here you can see the actual rockets (on the left) and inert replicas of the Haseb rockets. No doubt they look very similar.

However, there is really no need for the US military to purchase replicas even for a false flag operation. Many Haseb rockets have been captured over the years.

The English markings do not mean they are American-made. The Haseb rocket is also made for export by Iran’s Armaments Industries Group (AIG), and so uses English markings.

The inert replica above has English markings, because the real Haseb rockets have English markings.

Fact #4 : Haseb Rockets Have A Very Short Range

Haseb rockets have a very short range – up to 9 kilometres, and are not very accurate.

That means they would have to be fired very close to the Baghdad Green Zone in order to have a reasonable chance of hitting the US embassy inside.

Any suggestion that Iranian forces fired them inside Baghdad itself would be ludicrous. Even if Iran wanted to strike at the Americans, they would use an allied militant group to make attribution difficult.

Fact #5 : Attribution Is Difficult

The Haseb rockets are not exclusively used by Iranian forces. They are exported to Iranian auxiliary forces and allied militant groups like the Hezbollah.

So it would not be possible for the United States to directly attribute the rocket attack to Iran, unless they capture the people who actually fired the rockets.

It could also be a rogue militant group, or even a false flag action by a rival nation-state. After all, numerous examples of the Haseb rocket have been captured by other militant groups and even countries like Israel.

In fact, Gen. Frank McKenzie, who leads the US Central Command and once warned that American forces imminent threat from Iran specifically told The Wall Street Journal,

I do not know the degree to which Iran is complicit. We do not seek a war, and I don’t actually believe they seek one either.

Even Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah described the rocket attack on the US embassy as “undisciplined“.

Fact #6 : We Don’t Know Who Owned Those Rockets

The three Haseb rockets that Donald Trump posted were obviously not fired.

But whether they “failed to launch” as Trump claimed, or were simply captured unfired, is unknown. Trump likely can’t tell the difference.

Unless the rocketeers were captured together with these three rockets, it would be impossible to also attribute the rocket attack to any particular group, never mind Iran.

Even so, the mere possession of these rockets does not mean that they actually launched that particular attack.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Cybersecurity | AerospaceHome

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

Will BeiDou Give HUAWEI Phones FREE Calls + Internet?

Now that the final BeiDou satellite will soon be launched, people are claiming that it will give HUAWEI phones free calls and Internet!

Find out what the facts are, and why people believe BeiDou will really give HUAWEI phones free calls and Internet!

 

BeiDou : What Is It?

BeiDou is China’s own satellite positioning and navigational system, functionally similar to GPS, GLONASS and Galileo.

So far, the Chinese have launched 59 satellites, from three generations, with the last BeiDou-3 satellite scheduled to launch in a few days.

 

Will BeiDou Give HUAWEI Phones FREE Calls + Internet?

People are sharing this message, claiming that BeiDou will give every HUAWEI phone unlimited calls and Internet without a SIM card!

If u r able to change/ upgrade ur hp then u may want to consider Huawei devices.

Please buy Huawei hp because after the End of June 2020. All Huawei hp will be equipped with Huawei Own Satellite BEIDOU Chipset which will allow you to make Phone Calls and Internet DATA usages without any Charges for Life and No Sim Card is required. Save a lot of money in the long run??

Baidu is do much more powerful than old uncle Google. Baidu is the major driver for 5G, free satellite calls, wider coverage, higher speed, etc. Anyway no one can stop u fr using uncle Google if u so loved him using any type of hp (iOS, Android, Symbian of others)!! U can also VPN to tunnel into many networks & firewalls….!!

 

BeiDou + HUAWEI Phones : The Facts!

The message is yet another fake story about HUAWEI. Here is a video explanation, with details below :

Fact #1 : Smartphones Have Supported BeiDou For Years

HUAWEI, like many other brands, have long introduced multi-constellation support for navigational signals.

Their smartphones not only support GPS, but also BeiDou, GLONASS, and Galileo, switching to whichever satellite system offers the best performance or accuracy.

The first smartphones to support BeiDou were introduced in 2013. It’s not like BeiDou is only being introduced after June 2020.

Fact #2 : BeiDou Is Supported By Foreign Mobile Platforms

BeiDou civilian signals can be used by foreign mobile platforms, and are in fact supported by Samsung Exynos and MediaTek mobile platforms.

Qualcomm, for example, introduced support for BeiDou signals in their Snapdragon 800 (MSM8974) platform back in 2013. So did MediaTek with their MT3332 / MT3333 SoCs.

So many non-HUAWEI smartphones use chipsets that support BeiDou.

Fact #3 : BeiDou Cannot Provide Calls / Internet

BeiDou is primarily a global positioning satellite system, with limited communications capability – just short messaging services (SMS).

However, only the military (or related security services like civil defence) are given access to the BeiDou SMS service, using special satellite phones.

Civilian devices, like HUAWEI smartphones, can only use its positioning services, and have NO ACCESS to any communications capability.

A CGTN news report is probably responsible for this misunderstanding (watch our video above).

Fact #4 : Calls + Internet Still Require A SIM Card / eSIM

While the latest HUAWEI P40 series smartphones support eSIM, other HUAWEI smartphones still require a physical SIM card.

But whether your smartphone uses a physical SIM card or eSIM, it needs some sort of SIM (Subscriber Identity Module) number to obtain call and Internet services from your mobile service provider.

Fact #5 : HUAWEI Offers A Free Video Call Service

HUAWEI recently introduced a new video call feature called MeeTime, which allows all HUAWEI devices to make video calls for free.

This includes tablets like the HUAWEI MatePad Pro, and computers like the HUAWEI MateBook X Pro.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Cybersecurity | Photo + VideoHome

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!


Fact Check : Lincoln Memorial Defaced By BLM Protestors!

Did Black Lives Matter protestors deface the famous Abraham Lincoln statue at the Lincoln Memorial?

Find out if the Lincoln Memorial was really vandalised, and what the FACTS really are!

 

Claim : Lincoln Memorial Defaced By BLM Protestors!

Black Lives Matter protestors are being accused of defacing the famous Abraham Lincoln statue at the Lincoln Memorial, and here is the picture to prove it!

This picture of the Abraham Lincoln statue spray painted with graffiti has been shared on Facebook, Twitter, etc. as evidence of the Black Lives Matter movement’s complete lack of respect for sacred American monuments.

The graffiti had messages like Black + Brown Lives Matter, #BLM, Justice, The Real Martyrs, George Floyd.

 

Lincoln Memorial Defaced By BLM Protestors : The Facts

Fact #1 : The Picture Is Fake

The picture is fake, and was edited by mapping graffiti over a picture of the Abraham Lincoln statue.

The creator did a poor job of it, lopping off the left side of the head. If that was intentionally meant to look like protestors did it, it was done badly.

The graffiti also looked odd, because he/she was mapping a 2D image over what’s really a 3D object.

Fact #2 : The Lincoln Memorial Was Protected By The National Guard

It would also be quite a feat for the BLM protestors to vandalise the Abraham Lincoln statue itself, since the DC National Guard was deployed to protect it.

Members of the D.C. National Guard stand on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial as demonstrators participate in a peaceful protest against police brutality and the death of George Floyd (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Fact #3 : An Outer Column Was Slightly Spray-Painted

One of the outer columns at the Lincoln Memorial had Yall Not Tired Yet? spray-painted in black on the night of 30 May 2020.

However, there is no way to know whether BLM protestors or anti-protestors was responsible. The message is ambiguous.

Photo Credit : Carolyn Kaster, early Sunday May 31, 2020

Further down, the National World War II Memorial was vandalised, this time with a clearer meaning – Do Black Vets Count?

Fact #4 : National Mall and Memorial Parks Confirmed The Limited Damage

National Mall and Memorial Parks confirmed both graffitis and cleaned them up by 4 June 2020.

Fact #5 : The Lincoln Memorial Had Been Vandalised In The Past

Frankly speaking, this isn’t the first time the Lincoln Memorial was vandalised or defaced. In fact, someone actually sprayed green paint on the Abraham Lincoln statue in 2013!

In 2017, explicit graffiti was spray-painted on an inner column in the Lincoln Memorial.

 

Disinformation Campaigns

This fake picture is part of a slew of similar fake news about the George Floyd / BLM protests in the US :

So beware of similar fake posts, because they appear to be part of disinformation campaigns.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Cybersecurity | Photo + VideoHome

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!


How Did Iran Shoot Down UIA Flight PS752 By Mistake?

It seems incredulous that Iran could shoot down UIA Flight PS752 by mistake, but the sad fact is that no military can always correctly identify bogies.

We examine how Iran mistook UIA Flight PS752 for a US cruise missile, and shot it down with a Tor M1 missile, killing all 176 people onboard.

 

The Circumstances Surrounding UIA Flight PS752

On 3 January 2020, US President Donald Trump escalated tensions with Iran by ordering the assassination of Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani.

Soleimani’s assassination by Hellfire missile could be construed as an act of war against Iran, and naturally compelled a military response. That came in the form of 22 ballistic missiles fired on two US bases in Iraq.

Recommended : Is Donald Trump RESPONSIBLE For UIA Flight 752 Deaths?

The Iranians expected a US cruise missile attack in retaliation, and appeared to have prepared for such an eventuality with the deployment of short range missile defence systems around Tehran.

Five hours after they fired those ballistic missiles, UIA Flight PS752 took off from the Imam Khomeini International Airport.

Unfortunately, a SAM operator mistook it for a US cruise missile, and shot it down with a Tor M1 missile.

So how could Iran’s veteran military forces have made such a colossal mistake?

 

Tor M1 / SA-15 Gauntlet

First, let’s consider the SAM platform that shot down UIA Flight PS752 – the Russian Tor M1, also known by its NATO designation SA-15 Gauntlet.

The Tor (Russian for Torus) missile system is an armoured tracked vehicle with a pulse-doppler radar, and eight 9K331 Tor M1 missiles.

Introduced in 1991, this mobile SAM system is designed to accompany and protect troops in a battlefield against hostile aircraft and cruise missiles.

It is not usually parked in defence of fixed installations, and have greater autonomy than centralised air defence systems. It is likely that the Iranians brought in these mobile SAM systems as the last line of defence in an impending conflict.

 

War-Like Situation Before PS752 Flight

Next, we have to consider the war footing that the Iranian military, and specifically, the IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) found itself in, after launching ballistic missiles at US bases.

Besides, the United States did earlier just assassinate one of their top military leaders – an action that could be considered an act of war.

Even if the Iranian government does not want a war with the United States, the Iranian military and the IRGC would have been compelled to prepare for the worst.

It is with that mindset in mind, that we consider how Iran could have mistaken UIA Flight PS752 for a cruise missile, shooting it down.

 

How Did Iran Shoot Down UIA Flight PS752 By Mistake?

Poor Training?

As one of Iran’s older SAM systems and a short range system at that, the Tor M1 is likely to be assigned to less elite units. So it is plausible that inexperience or poor training led to the tragedy.

No Central Command?

Multiple Tor vehicles can be linked to a Ranzhir-M mobile command center, for increased detection range and centralised command.

It is possible that the Tor vehicles were dispersed for localised defence, and not linked to a central command system. That would leave the decision to fire in the hands of a junior officer, possibly even a conscript!

Short Reaction Time?

The Tor M1 missile also has a narrow engagement range of 1.5 km to 12 km. It cannot be used against anything closer than 1.5 km, or further than 12 km.

When Flight PS752 popped up just a few kilometres from this Tor M1 vehicle, it would give the missile operator just a matter of seconds to identify it and decide whether to fire or not.

Heightened Expectations Of A Strike?

The expectation of a retaliatory strike would, no doubt, weigh heavily on the mind of the missile operator. After all, they just fired 22 ballistic missiles on two US bases.

In normal circumstances, the Tor missile system would not be “weapons hot”. But they were expecting a salvo of cruise missiles, so the missile operator would have been light on the trigger.

Failure To Whitelist Flight PS752?

When Flight PS752 popped up on the Tor missile system’s radar, the operator would have to decide if it was a hostile aircraft or a legitimate civilian aircraft.

Unfortunately, its pulse-doppler radar would not be able identify the type of the aircraft, only its speed and direction. But Flight PS752 and a Tomahawk cruise missile would have roughly similar subsonic speeds.

An example of a pulse doppler radar’s display

That’s why civilian airliners use transponders and the IFF system to ensure that everyone knows that they are not a threat. Flight PS752 would definitely have been squawking its transponder code.

Normally, SAM crews would receive the flight plans and transponder codes for airliners scheduled to fly in and out of the area, so they can be eliminated as threats.

It is plausible that this Tor missile operator did not, or could not, clear Flight PS752’s transponder code, and assumed it was a cruise missile attempting to masquerade as an airliner.

Failure To Establish No-Fly Zone

One thing is for sure though – the Iranians should have established a no-fly zone around Tehran, after firing their ballistic missiles. It was a serious and fatal mistake.

The danger of jittery, trigger-happy Air Defence crews in charge of weapons hot SAM systems cannot be understated.

It would also have made it easier to identify hostile aircraft in Iranian airspace. Yet they continued to let civilian aircraft fly in and out of Tehran.

 

Recommended Reading

[adrotate group=”2″]

Go Back To > Aerospace | Home

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!


Porsche Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter Revealed!

Porsche and Lucasfilm just unveiled the Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter that will be showcased in the premiere of Star Wars : The Rise of Skywalker in Los Angeles!

Take a look at the Porsche Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter, and how Porsche and Lucasfilm came to create it!

 

Porsche Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter : A Design Partnership

The Porsche Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter is a design DNA blend of Porsche and Lucasfilm.

Over a period of two months, the Porsche Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter project team worked at their respective design studios in Weissach and San Francisco to create initial ideas and drafts, before finally coming up with a concrete concept.

The final design, named Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter, will be presented as a detailed model measuring 1.5 metres (5 feet) in length at the film premiere of Star Wars : The Rise of Skywalker in Los Angeles.

“The design of the spaceship is harmoniously integrated into the Star Wars film world while at the same time demonstrating clear analogies with the characteristic Porsche styling and proportions,” says Michael Mauer, Vice President Style Porsche at Porsche AG.

“The basic shape of the cabin, which tapers towards the rear, and a highly distinctive topography from the cockpit flyline to the turbines establish visual parallels with the iconic design of the 911 and the Taycan. The very compact layout conveys dynamism and agility, lending emphasis to the Porsche design features mentioned.”

“This collaboration is an amazing opportunity to merge the design aesthetics of Porsche and Star Wars. I found it to be creatively challenging and extremely inspiring,” says Doug Chiang, Vice President and Executive Creative Director for Lucasfilm. “It is thrilling to infuse Star Wars with Porsche styling to create an iconic new spaceship that could exist both on Earth or in the cinematic universe.”

While legal requirements impose certain restrictions on creativity in the classic design process for a series-production vehicle, this project opens up a whole new dimension of freedom.

At the same time, the Style Porsche team faced fresh challenges, since creating a purely virtual design is demanding, too. On the screen, the starship is only seen in two dimensions, while classic series-production vehicles appear physically in three dimensions.

In addition, starships usually only appear dynamically in the film and are only visible for a brief moment – so the design has to create an impression and be recognisable within a matter of seconds.

 

Porsche Tri-Wing S-91x Pegasus Starfighter : The Final Design

A glance at the details reveals a number of features familiar from the Porsche design style.

The front is reminiscent of the so-called “air curtains” (air inlets) that go together with the headlights to create a single formal entity in the Taycan. In addition to the four-point daytime running light typical of Porsche, the so-called “blasters” – long gun barrels at the front – are located at the tip.

The rear grid with the louvres and integrated third brake light was inspired by the current 911 generation, and the rear section of the starship bears the brand’s hallmark light bar.

Porsche design criteria have been applied to the interior, too: the instruments in the cockpit are clearly aligned with the driver’s axis, while the low seating position is reminiscent of the sporty ergonomics in the Porsche 918 Spyder.

All in all, the design follows a basic principle that is characteristic of the brand – all the elements on the exterior have a clear function, and purely visual features have largely been dispensed with.

“Our collaborative project with Star Wars goes perfectly with the launch of the Taycan. The design teams have brought the differing worlds of Porsche and Star Wars together to make a very special gift for the fans of the two brands,” says Kjell Gruner, Head of Marketing at Porsche.

Porsche will also be showcasing the all-new Taycan at the premiere event in Los Angeles.

 

Recommended Reading

[adrotate group=”2″]

Go Back To > Automotive + Aerospace | Home

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!


The Latest Cyber Technical Surveillance Counter-Measures

Jason Wells was a military intelligence officer for 17 years, before going into the private sector. He is now the Asia Pacific CEO of QCC Global – the world’s largest company specialising in TSCM (Technical Surveillance Counter-Measures). In this special presentation at the Kaspersky Lab Palaeontology of Cybersecurity Conference, he gave an overview of TSCM over the years before sharing the latest in Cyber TSCM, particularly with the upcoming 5G technology.

Don’t forget to check out the other Kaspersky Palaeontology of Cybersecurity presentations!

 

Cyber Technical Surveillance Counter-Measures

Like other members of QCC Global, Jason Wells is literally a poacher turned gamekeeper. He now helps organisations prevent their secrets from being leaked or intercepted by technical surveillance.

Here are the key takeaway points :

  • Physical keyloggers are still being used, because organisations ignore the risks.
  • Miniature GSM transmitters (smaller than a one Euro coin!) are now used to wirelessly transmit data over a third-party network.
  • Military-grade devices will use burst transmissions to avoid detection.
  • VOIP calls are possible to tap – as long as the device or line can be accessed, all conversations can be recorded or copied.
  • Light modulation or laser eavesdropping devices are now available to listen from a great distance.
  • WiFi light bulbs can be modified to pick up voices and transmit it to nearby devices via subtle modulation of the light wavelength or frequency.
  • A key concern, other than the typical eavesdropping of corporate offices, is backdoor access to Building Management Systems that are used in many modern buildings.
  • Public WiFi access points are a common source of “man-in-the-middle” attacks, where attackers set-up free access points that mimic actual public access points.
  • Bluetooth technology is a boon to surveillance devices because it is very low-powered. With Bluetooth Class 5, they now have a much longer range (400 m) and twice the speed, while drawing less power.[adrotate group=”2″]
  • Roughly 60% of the surveillance devices that QCC Global detects use cellular technology to transmit their data. The rest still use radio to transmit their data wirelessly.
  • Cellular technology gives an attacker great flexibility in areas of good coverage because he can dispense with additional requirements like a listening post, or rebroadcasters.
  • Using the cellular network also allows the listening device to hide amongst the many mobile devices nearby.
  • 5G technology will be a game-changer, offering new possibilities for technical surveillance.
  • With every 5G device always connected, they will make it much, much harder for counter surveillance companies like GCC Global to detect 5G listening devices.

Don’t forget to check out the other Kaspersky Palaeontology of Cybersecurity presentations!

 

The Presentation Slides

Here are Jason’s presentation slides on cyber technical surveillance counter-measures for your perusal :

Go Back To > Articles | Home

[adrotate group=”1″]

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

The South Korean Cyberattacks – From Military To ATM

Following a detailed malware analysis, Kaspersky Lab researchers have connected a 2016 cyberattack on South Korea’s defense agency with a later cyberattack that infected 60 ATMs and stole the data from over 2,000 credit cards. The malicious code and techniques used in both cyberattacks share similarities with earlier cyberattacks widely attributed to the infamous Lazarus group.

At the Kaspersky Lab Palaeontology of Cybersecurity conferenceSeongsu ParkSenior Security Researcher, Global Research & Analysis Team, APAC, detailed how Kaspersky GReAT researchers traced the disparate South Korean cyberattacks and found the similarities that connected them.

Don’t forget to check out the other Kaspersky Palaeontology of Cybersecurity presentations!

 

The South Korean Cyberattacks – From Military To ATM

In August 2016, a cyberattack on South Korea’s Ministry of National Defense infected around 3,000 hosts. The Defense Agency reported the incident publically in December 2016, admitting that some confidential information could have been exposed.

Six months later, at least 60 South Korean ATMs, managed by a single local vendor, were compromised with malware. The incident was reported by the Financial Security Institute and, according to the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), resulted in the theft of the details of 2,500 financial cards and the illegal withdrawal in Taiwan of approximately US$ 2,500 from these accounts.

Kaspersky Lab researched the malware used in the ATM incident and discovered that the machines were attacked with the same malicious code used to hit the Korean Ministry of National Defense in August 2016. Exploring the connection between these attacks and earlier hacks, Kaspersky Lab has found similarities with the DarkSeoul malicious operations, and others, which are attributed to the Lazarus hacking group.

The commonalities include, among other things, the use of the same decryption routines and obfuscation techniques, overlap in command and control infrastructure, and similarities in code.

 

What Is The Lazarus Group?

Lazarus is an active cybercriminal group believed to be behind a number of massive and devastating cyberattacks worldwide including the Sony Pictures hack in 2014 and the $81 million Bangladesh Bank heist last year.

 

Preventive Measures

In order to reduce risk, Kaspersky Lab recommends implementing the following security measures:

  • Introduce an enterprise-wide fraud prevention strategy with special sections on ATM and internet banking security. Logical security, physical security of ATMs and fraud prevention measures should be addressed altogether as attacks are becoming more complex.[adrotate group=”2″]
  • Ensure you have a comprehensive, multi-layered security solution in place. For financial organizations, we recommend using specialized solutions with Default Deny and File Integrity Monitor capabilities such as Kaspersky Embedded Systems Security. These solutions can detect any suspicious activity within the payment devices infrastructure. We also recommend implementing network segmentation for ATM or POS devices.
  • Conduct annual security audits and penetration tests. It is better to let professionals find vulnerabilities than to wait for them to be found by cybercriminals.
  • Consider investing in threat intelligence so that you can understand the rapidly evolving and emerging threat landscape and can help your organization and customers to prepare. Find out more at intelreports@kaspersky.com.
  • Train your employees so they can better spot suspicious emails that could be the first stage of an attack.

Don’t forget to check out the other Kaspersky Palaeontology of Cybersecurity presentations!

Next Page > The South Korean Cyberattacks Presentation Slides

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!

The South Korean Cyberattacks Presentation Slides

Here is the complete set of slides from Seongsu Park’s presentation on the South Korean cyberattacks.

Don’t forget to check out the other Kaspersky Palaeontology of Cybersecurity presentations!

Go Back To > First PageArticles | Home

[adrotate group=”2″]

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!