Here is all the latest and greatest information on Mosquito Born Diseases, Newest Vaccine approval,  Nanobot Technology, Micro Weapons, and so much more.

Without further ado, I will let the material speak for itself.

Be sure and check out the following related posts, for more information on the use of insects as weapons:






Billions will die because of COVID but not from disease.



Introducing IXCHIQ®—the first and only vaccine indicated to help prevent mosquito-borne chikungunya in adults who are at increased risk of exposure to CHIKV

CHIKV=chikungunya virus.


IXCHIQ is a vaccine indicated for the prevention of disease caused by chikungunya virus (CHIKV) in individuals 18 years of age and older who are at increased risk of exposure to CHIKV.

This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on anti-CHIKV neutralizing antibody levels. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory studies.



Do not administer IXCHIQ to individuals who are immunodeficient or immunosuppressed due to disease or medical therapy (e.g., from hematologic and solid tumors, receipt of chemotherapy, congenital immunodeficiency, long-term immunosuppressive therapy or patients with HIV infection who are severely immunocompromised), or to individuals with a history of a severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine.

Warnings and Precautions

Appropriate medical treatment used to manage immediate allergic reactions must be available in the event an acute anaphylactic reaction occurs following administration of IXCHIQ.

Vaccination with IXCHIQ may cause severe or prolonged chikungunya-like adverse reactions. Severe chikungunya-like adverse reactions that prevented daily activity and/or required medical intervention occurred in 1.6% of 3,082 IXCHIQ recipients and no placebo recipients. Fourteen IXCHIQ recipients had prolonged (duration at least 30 days) chikungunya-like adverse reactions.

Potential for vertical transmission of vaccine virus and fetal/neonatal adverse reactions. Vertical transmission of wild-type CHIKV from pregnant individuals with viremia at delivery is common and can cause potentially fatal CHIKV disease in neonates. It is not known if the vaccine virus can be vertically transmitted and cause fetal or neonatal adverse reactions. Decisions to administer IXCHIQ during pregnancy should take into consideration the individual’s risk of exposure to wild-type CHIKV, gestational age, and risks to the fetus or neonate from vertical transmission of wild-type CHIKV.

Syncope can occur with administration of IXCHIQ. Procedures should be in place to avoid injury from fainting.

IXCHIQ may not protect all individuals who receive the vaccine.

Adverse Reactions

In clinical studies, the most common injection site reaction (>10%) was tenderness (11%). The most common systemic adverse reactions (>10%) were headache (32%), fatigue (29%), myalgia (24%), arthralgia (17%), fever (14%), and nausea (11%).

Use in Specific Populations


There is a pregnancy registry to monitor outcomes in women exposed to IXCHIQ during pregnancy and it may be reached by contacting OXON Epidemiology at 1-855-417-6214. There are no adequate and well-controlled studies of IXCHIQ in pregnant individuals, and human data available from clinical trials with IXCHIQ are insufficient to establish the presence or absence of vaccine-associated risk during pregnancy.

To report SUSPECTED ADVERSE REACTIONS, contact Valneva at 1-844-349-4276 or VAERS at 1-800-822-7967 or

Please click here for full Prescribing Information.

Reference: IXCHIQ. Prescribing information. Valneva USA Inc.; 2023.

FDA approves world’s first vaccine for ’emerging global health threat’: ‘Prevention of a potentially debilitating disease’

Story by Kaiyo Funaki  November 12, 2023

Valneva said it hopes to commercialize the vaccine in the U.S. early next year.  © Provided by The Cool Down

Earlier this month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved IXCHIQ, the world’s first licensed vaccine for the mosquito-borne chikungunya virus.

US approves world’s 1st chikunguya vaccine

The single-dose vaccine was developed by Valneva, a French biotech company, and fast-tracked by the FDA via the Accelerated Approval pathway.

Valneva Announces Formation of Scientific Advisory
Board › press-release › valneva-announc…

Saint Herblain (France), July 29, 2019 – Valneva SE (“Valneva” or “the
Company”), a biotech company developing and commercializing
vaccines for infectious diseases with major unmet needs
, today
announced the formation of a Scientific Advisory Board (“SAB”) as
part of the evolution of its governance structure.

The newly formed SAB will consist of distinguished academic and
industry professionals who will provide the Company with guidance
and expert advice on Research & Development (“R&D”) strategies
The SAB remit will also include program execution considerations in the
framework of innovation, market dynamics and trends.

Former Valneva Supervisory Board members, Dr. Ralf Clemens, MD , Ph.D. and Dr. Alain Munoz, MD, Ph.D., will join the SAB. Both have a deep understanding of the Company after serving on its Supervisory Board for many years. Dr. Clemens will chair the SAB.

Dr. Clemens commented, “I am pleased that Valneva has decided to establish a
SAB and to chair this important group. Getting external advice from experts
with various backgrounds and competencies is especially important at this stage of the company where two major, promising assets have entered late stage development and the early stage development pipeline is building up. I am also pleased that Dr. Munoz has agreed to join the SAB and to bring in his
experience in pharmaceutical development and deep understanding of the

Additional permanent members, complemented by ad-hoc members with
strong expertise in specific areas, will join the SAB

Dr. Clemens previously headed vaccine development at GSK, Novartis and
Takeda. He advises and supports several very significant
organizations, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
the GHIT Fund and is Member of the Board of Trustees of the International
Vaccine Institute IVI. Over his years in the industry, he has led the clinical
development of more than 25 different vaccines globally and published
extensively in the fields of vaccines, immunization and tropical medicine.

Dr. Munoz previously served as SVP for international development at Sanofi
and as SVP of the pharmaceutical division at Fournier Laboratories.
Under his leadership, several important drugs, such as Plavix or
were brought from discovery to market. He serves on several boards,
including Hybrigenics SA, OxThera AB and Zealand Pharma A/S.

It is anticipated that the new SAB will be fully operational by the
end of 2019.

 Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Contact: (916) 210-6000,

LOS ANGELES–California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today sued
Abbott Laboratories and French drug company Fournier for devising “an
elaborate scheme” to block less expensive generic versions of TriCor, a drug
that controls cholesterol.

Through an elaborate scheme—involving multiple drug patents, baseless
lawsuits, and market manipulation
—Abbott and Fournier thwarted competition,”
Attorney General Brown said. “These companies made billions of dollars in annual
profits, while Californians were burdened with artificially high drug prices,”

Brown added.

After the Food and Drug Administration approved TriCor in 1998, Abbott and
Fournier immediately devised a complicated strategy to prevent generic
companies from entering the market and driving down Tricor prices.


Batavia Biosciences and Valneva Collaborate to
Accelerate Development of Low-cost Inactivated
Polio Vaccine

Leiden, Netherlands and Saint-Herblain, France, June 15, 2020 – Batavia
Biosciences (“Batavia”) and Valneva Sweden AB,
the Swedish subsidiary of
Valneva SE (“Valneva”),
today announced that they have entered into a
collaboration agreement to accelerate market-access
of a low-cost inactivated
polio vaccine (IPV). This work is supported under GPEI.[1]

In 2019, Batavia received a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to
use its novel, low-cost vaccine manufacturing process HIP-Vax™
, in
combination with Nevoline™ manufacturing equipment developed by
to deliver clinical grade IPV bulks to selected Developing Country
Vaccine Manufacturers (DCVMs)
for phase I/II clinical studies. The IPV vaccine is
based on the Sabin vaccine strains (sIPV), which Batavia has successfully
obtained from the World Health Organization (WHO).

Under the terms of the agreement, Valneva will manufacture the sIPV vaccine for clinical
trial purposes in its state-of-the-art GMP polio manufacturing facility operated under
GAPIII[2] polio containment in Solna, Sweden, using Batavia’s process. In return, Valneva
will receive an upfront payment and monthly service fees.

Batavia will remain responsible for release and supply of the GMP vaccine to the DCVMs.
The know-how generated will be made available to the DCVMs to facilitate transfer of the
technology and manufacture of the vaccine under GAPIII conditions in the future.

UK first to source coronavirus vaccines from biotech firms backed by Bill Gates

The UK’s potential coronavirus vaccine portfolio adds 90 million doses

The UK government revealed its stockpile of coronavirus (COVID-19) treatments on Monday, having recently secured 90 million doses of potential vaccines.

Britain’s fresh agreement with Germany’s BioNTech and the Bill Gates-backed Pfizer netted 30 million doses of their joint mRNA vaccine, a first for any world government. The two companies joined forces in March to fast-track development.

[Read: A look at the $17 billion stock portfolio of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation]

French biotech company Valneva will provide 60 million doses of their “inactivated whole virus” vaccine. The UK has the option to purchase a further 40 million doses if it proves to be “safe, effective, and suitable.”

The UK even acquired one million doses of a treatment containing COVID-19-neutralising antibodies produced by British-Swedish pharma outfit AstraZeneca. These are intended for those unable to receive the other vaccines, such as cancer and immunocompromised patients.

Last month, Hard Fork reported Gates’ foundation had given $750 million to AstraZeneca to fund the manufacturing and distribution of 300 million doses of another one of its potential treatments, the AZD1222 vaccine. The UK is already scheduled to receive 100 million AZD1222 doses.

“As a result of these partnerships, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland could have access to enough doses to vaccinate and protect priority groups identified, such as frontline health and social care workers and those at increased health risk,” reads the associated government press release.

Investors have so far reacted positively to the news. US-listed BioNTech and Pfizer are respectively up 6.5% and 3.25% during pre-market trade. Over in Europe, Valneva is up more than 12%, and AstraZeneca has risen 2.5%.

Chikungunyawhich is spread by mosquito bites means “to become contorted” or “that which bends up” in the East African language of Kimakonde, referring to the position that infected persons frequently take.

While it is considered non-fatal, affected individuals typically experience fever and severe joint pain that typically lasts for weeks but can persist for years. Other symptoms include headache, rash, nausea, muscle soreness, and fatigue, making chikungunya difficult to differentiate from other mosquito-borne illnesses such as dengue and Zika, both of which have also become increasingly concerning.
Chikungunya is an “emerging global health threat,” per the FDA, and at least 5 million cases have been reported since 2008. According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, there have been 440,000 cases of chikungunya reported just this year.

Related video: FDA warning over several eyedrop products (FOX 26 Houston)

The areas most susceptible to the virus include the tropical and subtropical regions of Africa, Southeast Asia, and South and Central America.

However, researchers have theorized that rising temperatures across the globe may increase the geological range of mosquitoes and the diseases they carry, which could potentially expose the United States to the infection.

With the development and approval of Ixchiq, though, the cause for concern has been mitigated.

In Valneva’s press release, the company noted that Ixchiq is geared toward the 60-plus million Americans who travel each year to locations where mosquito-borne diseases are endemic.

Valneva also said it hopes to commercialize the vaccine in the U.S. early next year (2024) while securing a vote of approval from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices by the end of next February. People over the age of 18 and at risk of exposure to chikungunya are eligible for the shot.

The approval “is an important advancement in the prevention of a potentially debilitating disease with limited treatment options,” said Peter Marks, the director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.




Drug Resistant TB, Dengue Fever and Chikungunya

In the aforementioned interview, Dr. Orient spoke of a mosquito-transmitted disease known as Dengue fever,. Dengue fever comes from Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and northern South America. According to my Border Patrol contact, many more illegal immigrants from these regions are making their way into the United States. This illness took a fatal hemorrhagic form. There is no vaccine and no drug therapy for this viral disease that is almost always fatal. Dr. Orient speaks and writes about Chikungunya, a mosquito-borne virus from both Africa and Asia, which surfaced in the Caribbean in December 2013. As of June 3, 2014, more than 100,000 confirmed and suspected cases had been reported from 17 countries in the Caribbean and South America. Dr. Orient stated that the CDC predicts the disease will continue to spread in the Americas and it did. If people from these regions are coming to America, Chikungunya is spreading to the United States.
Chikungunya and dengue are carried by the same mosquitoes and can be difficult to distinguish between the two. Chikungunya is not always fatal, unless it has been weaponized,


A chikungunya vaccine is nearing approval. Who will get it?

U.S. travelers at risk of getting the disease are first in line

A patient infected with chikungunya looks out from beneath mosquito netting at the Clinicas Hospital in San Lorenzo, Paraguay, 3 March, 2023.
Paraguay this year has had one of the world’s largest outbreaks of chikungunya virus, which led this man in San Lorenzo to be hospitalized.JORGE SAENZ/AP

issue cover image

Table of contents
A version of this story appeared in Science, Vol 382, Issue 6670.Download PDF

The first vaccine against the mosquito-borne viral disease chikungunya will likely come to market next month.  (Nov 2023) With the debilitating disease now afflicting more than half the countries in the world and threatening to spread further, the imminent U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the vaccine is “great news,” says Scott Weaver, a virologist at the University of Texas Medical Branch whose own lab started to work on a chikungunya vaccine nearly 2 decades ago.

The vaccine, made by the French company Valneva, will likely be recommended mainly to U.S. travelers at first. But many expect an FDA approval will also grease the wheels for the vaccine to become available in the most affected countries.

First documented in 1952 in modern-day Tanzania, chikungunya means “disease that bends up the joints” in Kimakonde, an East African language. Although rarely fatal, chikungunya virus causes long-term, debilitating joint pain in up to 40% of people it infects, most of whom live in warm climates that have large populations of two mosquito species, Aedes aegypti and A. albopictusAlmost all cases in the United States have been in travelers who have returned from affected countries.

The vaccine consists of a lab-weakened version of the virus that does not cause disease, and it is likely to be approved without the usual efficacy data from human trials. FDA agreed with Valneva—and wide consensus in the field—that a standard efficacy trial comparing rates of disease in people who receive the vaccine versus dummy shots was not feasible. “The virus spreads tremendously fast,” leaving too little time to launch and complete a trial, says Barbara Schnierle, a virologist at the Paul Ehrlich Institute who studies chikungunya. (Schnierle advises the European Medicines Agency about HIV vaccines but is not involved with Valneva’s application there.) “Logistically, you will never be able to do a normal phase 3 study.”

Valneva instead staged studies that showed 99% of people who received a single shot developed long-lasting antibodies that could neutralize the virus in test tubes. The company went on to show that when it infused monkeys with these antibodies and then gave them the virus, the animals controlled viral levels and did not develop any symptomatic disease. If the vaccine wins approval, FDA will require Valneva to conduct a postmarket study in humans to evaluate whether it actually protects against disease in the real world.

Valneva’s expected approval comes after years of frustratingly slow progress. More than 5 decades ago, the U.S. Army made a chikungunya vaccine that protected monkeys and even entered a small human trial, but the military saw little need for it and didn’t advance the research. Other efforts similarly languished, in part because at the time, the disease surfaced only sporadically in a few African and Asian countries.

In 2004, Kenya had the world’s first documented large-scale outbreak of chikungunya in 30 years. The next year, a large outbreak hit Réunion Island, an overseas territory of France in the Indian Ocean that had never detected a case. Estimates suggest nearly 40% of the population was infected, and 85% of people developed debilitating symptoms.

Analyses of the circulating virus showed it had mutated to allow replication in the A. albopictus mosquitoes, which have a different range from its original host, A. aegypti. The virus also became better at copying itself in both species, increasing transmission to humans. Outbreaks soon exploded in India, Thailand, the Caribbean, and Brazil. Chikungunya did so well that in many locales, it bumped out dengue virus, which the same mosquito species transmit. To date, more than 100 countries have reported local transmission of the virus. “It just took over entire mosquito populations and caused large outbreaks,” says virologist Timothy Endy, who heads a chikungunya vaccine program at the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), a nonprofit that provides funding to Valneva and other developers.

Serious interest in vaccines finally ramped upincluding the one made by Valneva, which it licensed from a group at the Karolinska Institute. An inactivated virus candidate from India’s Bharat Biotech, which may be safer for pregnant and immunocompromised people, is close on the heels of the Valneva shot.

Last week, a chikungunya vaccines working group that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended the Valneva shot primarily be offered to U.S. adults who will be visiting countries that have active outbreaks. Travelers older than 65 or with preexisting medical conditions that might make them more susceptible to severe disease also “may be considered” for a vaccine if they are visiting a country that had an outbreak within the past 5 years, CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) said. Also eligible: people staying in endemic countries for at least 6 months and lab workers who handle the virus as part of their research. Endy, a U.S. Army researcher for 24 years, suspects the military will recommend the vaccine for its members traveling to affected areas, because chikungunya could “bring battalions down.”

Now, “We need to invest in the appropriate conversations and regulatory approvals” to make the vaccine available to people beyond wealthy travelers, Endy says. Among the countries that could really use the vaccine are Brazil and Paraguay, which together have seen 75% of the world’s 440,000 reported chikungunya cases this year. With CEPI’s help, Brazil’s Butantan Institute is now partnering with Valneva to bottle the vaccine and make it affordable there and to other middle- and low-income countries. At the ACIP meeting, a Valneva representative said it will likely sell for about $350 a dose to U.S. travelers. Although the discounted price has yet to be determined, Endy expects it will be about $10 to $20 per dose.

Climate change may make chikungunya vaccines even more important. Warming climates are altering mosquito populations, which Schnierle notes are already moving north in Europe. “We’ve had local outbreaks in Italy, Spain, and France from travelers coming back from tropical countries,” Schnierle says. “Climate change will change the whole situation.”


September 26th, 2023.


#TPMR #PERA #McGuire

September 16th, 2021.
July 10th, 2023.

Does ANYONE KNOW how the HELL Bill Gates of Hell has gotten FDA or whatever permission to breed some 30 Million genetically engineered mosquitoes per week and then release them all over South East Texas, and into Florida…and God only knows where else!? Supposedly, he’s combating Malaria by releasing MORE of these disease spreading creatures!??????? WTF!????
4 months, 2 weeks ago

video image 9519:09
 July 10th, 2023.

The Lotus Eaters cover the fact that Bill Gates has sponsored a program to distribute millions of genetically modified mosquitos into Florida and Texas. Coincidentally, at the same time we begin to see case of malaria for the first time in decades in these areas. You be the judge.  4 months, 2 weeks ago

July 3rd, 2023.

What do Bill Gates & Genetically Engineered Mosquitos Have in Common? I did a deep dive on this. The experimental technology, funded in part by the Gates Foundation, aims to eradicate mosquitos and the diseases they spread however there are significant safety concernsSource: RedpillUSAPatriots
4 months, 3 weeks ago


Unlocking Minds
July 2nd, 2023
In 2008…Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab discuss at the World Economic ForumMalaria, Reducing the Population and ‘Congratulatory Praises’ on their ‘Achievements’. It’s been 15 years since these ‘goals’ were planned…and this entire Planet has been turned into a Living Nightmare.
June 29th, 2023
DOJ Epstein report & Bill Gates (Mosquitos)
If you like the content, like, comment, and subscribe.
Ending Music: Copyright Free – Artist KaizonBlu
June 28th, 2023

new mic setup tonight…. and this is another strange coincidence.

 June 8th, 2023

He is manufacturing 30 million mosquitoes a week to release in 11 countries. I can’t stand this piece of shit excuse for a human being. Don’t ever believe this Epstein Island visiting mass murderer is trying to help anyone but himself.

UTL COMMENT:- Can anyone believe the reality that we are currently living in?? Shouldn’t the Public have a right to decide whether or not it can undergo a medical procedure? And mosquitos ‘vaccinating’ you is a medical procedure right……..? WIll the people ever stand up to this or are they sooo brainwashed by all the propaganda, IQ lowered by the fluoride in the water, and zombified by the bioweapons that they have already allowed to be injected into their bodies?

October 3rd, 2022

“The mosquitoes being produced in this factory carry bacteria called Wolbachia that block them from transmitting dengue and other viruses, such as Zika, chikungunya and yellow fever, to humans. By releasing them to reproduce with wild mosquitoes, they spread the bacteria, reducing virus transmission and protecting millions of people from illnesses.”

Interestingly, these are the same viruses Ivermectin was shown to treat…

May 4th, 2022

NOTE: Clearly their position with Covid-19 restrictions and ever tightening mandates our not in our interest, especially our children, and we have to fight back and demand our leaders act. As of today, I have gotten no response from our Chancery Office or any of their supporting documentation (including informed consent info) I requested. Of course not, there is absolutely no medical evidence whatsoever in favour of the Covid-19 vaccine or mandates.

Both of these downloadable documents, ‘Bishop2021-10-06(redacted).pdf’ and ‘Ultimate Proof Covid-19 links.pdf’ are also presented in my (MyCatholicRedPill letter to my local Chancery Office and Bishop with no response to date. – Marcum)


April 5th, 2022
mirrored from BNTomg channel


 January 12th, 2022

Microdrones: the AI assassins set to become weapons of mass destruction

We are entering the much prophesied age of the killer robot but do we really know what we’re unleashing?

Drones are in the news again, but not as we have come to know them. In August, Britain announced it was sending 850 Black Hornet “microdrones” to Kyiv for use in close-quarters combat.

The idea was (before the spectacular Russian collapse in recent weeks) that they would lend Ukrainian troops a crucial edge in the vicious urban fighting that was expected as they sought to liberate their towns and cities.

These machines are a far cry from the large unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) associated with the war on terror, the ubiquitous Predator and Reaper drones that delivered death from the upper skies with almost god-like insouciance.

Black Hornets are actually more like a child’s toy. Measuring just over six inches and weighing a little less than a plum, they will literally peer round corners and sneak through windows.

Black Hornets are more like a child’s toy than military weapon CREDIT: Ben Stansall/WPA Pool/Getty Images

Due to their minimal rota noise, they can creep right up on the enemy, entering Russian compounds and defensive positions (any that are left) and beam back high-definition footage and stills via three cameras mounted in the nose.

The Hornet is piloted by a frontline soldier via a small iPad-style screen and a hand controller that would not look out of place on a 1990’s games console. At £10,000 a pop, but bound to get cheaper, it offers what soldiers since before Thermopylae have craved: situational awareness and the ability to “see over the hill” – without having to send some poor blighter to the top of it.

Dominic Nicholls, The Telegraph’s Associate Editor, knows only too well the value of a remote pair of eyes. He used drones, big and small, on numerous operations, including in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ukrainian soldiers launch a drone in northern Kherson CREDIT: HANNIBAL HANSCHKE/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

“The drones I worked with allowed us to make decisions based on the best available real-time information,” he says. “That might have been selecting the best helicopter drop-off points for soldiers assaulting a position, or talking other assets on to potential threats.”

Just as in civilian life we will shortly be using small drones to deliver our packages, militaries are now finding uses for them that a few short decades ago would have been written off as science fiction.

Ukraine in particular offers a very public demonstration of their versatility – and a glimpse of the future.

The first major war to be played out in real-time on social media, the conflict has sparked a small revolution in drone innovation, with commercial and domestic models – many of them donated by the West – hacked and modified to deliver lethal force.

It is now commonplace to go onto Twitter and see footage of an adapted drone, which last year might have filmed your wedding, dropping a grenade onto a bivouac of sleeping Russian infantry, or through the hatch of a tank. Intelligence suggests this has been somewhat bad for morale. The invaders feel hunted, spending as much time looking up as forward.

In short, drones are having a very good war. They are clearly the future. And if the machines can help technologically advanced nations like the West and its allies win battles while sparing their troops, what’s not to like?

‘A moral line is being crossed’

Well, if a growing movement of really quite eminent scientists is anything to go by, rather a lot. What, they ask, if the machines are becoming too effective? 

For the apparently positive example of Ukraine, they might well counter with those of Libya and Gaza. That’s because these are locations where – amid all the usual horrors – small drones are recently suspected not only to have killed people, but to have done so autonomously, independent of human control. 

Minor blips on the radar, you could argue. But across the world a moral line is being crossed. We are entering the much prophesied age of the killer robot a march put on steroids by the availability of increasingly cheap and effective unmanned flying machines and the artificial intelligence driven by the demands of the smartphone.

The question is, do we know what we unleashed? And, by the time we’ve worked it out, will it be too late?

To illustrate the point, it is worth understanding what systems like Black Hornet cannot do. 

Announcing the UK’s aid package, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace described them as “cutting-edge”. But even a lowly computer science graduate student would roll their eyes at that. Why? Because it ignores the fact that the Hornet still requires a soldier to put him or herself in danger by getting close enough to the enemy (less than 2km) to pilot it into position, and that once there the drone can only act passively, as a reconnaissance tool. In short, it cannot think for itself and it cannot kill.

But that is changing rapidly.

In 2017 a short film was premiered at a United Nations diplomatic conference in Geneva which, to put it mildly, ruffled some feathers. Slaughterbots an award-winning short film from the Future of Life Institute – portrayed a fictionalised slick, Steve Jobs-style tech presentation introducing a microdrone small enough to fit in the palm of your hand.

The audience laughed and clapped as the machine playfully dodged the presenter’s attempts to grab it. Even when he didn’t try, it seemed to dance in the air, apparently displaying its “stochastic motion” anti-sniper function. 

The best part? “It’s all AI,” the presenter says smugly, in the film. “Its processor can react 100 times faster than a human.” In other words, it controls itself. He goes on: “Just like any mobile device these days, it has cameras and sensors, and just like your phones and social media apps, it does facial recognition.”

He then reveals that inside the tiny four-rotored drone, which has by now landed gently in his hand, is three grams of “shaped” explosive.

He throws it into the air, whereupon it swiftly recovers its orientation and charges like a bolt of lightning at a nearby mannequin, blowing a small hole in its forehead. “That little bang,” we are told, “is enough to penetrate the skull and destroy the contents.”

Pretty terrifying: a small, inexpensive drone using facial recognition to select and kill a target, free from any direct human control.

A still from the short film, showing a human target in the crosshairs of the fictional microdrone CREDIT: Slaughterbots/The Future of Life Institute

Slaughterbots, of course, is not a documentary. But how close are we to the real thing?

Stuart Russell is professor of computer science at the University of California, and was a sponsor of the 2017 film, which has now been viewed more than 75 million times.

Perhaps it’s his measured British accent, or the box of PG Tips visible in his Berkley office as we talk via Zoom, but he doesn’t come across as a common or garden doom monger. In fact, he is one of the world’s leading brains in this field and delivered last year’s Reith Lectures on the subject of living with artificial intelligence.

The key point, he says, is that the technologies required for a lethal microdrone of the type portrayed in the film already exist. They just need to be improved in some areas, shrunk down and integrated.

“There are some technical issues in miniaturisation which have to do with batteries and range and how much onboard power you need to support the computer processing you need to have a fully autonomous system,” he said. “But really that’s an engineering task. There’s no science fiction stuff that needs to happen. On most of that we’re already there.”

To build a truly high-performing microdrone, you would probably design your own lighter and more power-efficient computer chip, known as an Application-Specific Integrated Circuit (Asic), rather than using a general purpose chip. But that’s perfectly doable.

A still from the film shows plane releasing a swarm of microdrones CREDIT: Slaughterbots/The Future of Life Institute

The fictional Slaughterbots presenter said it himself: a lot of the tech that would enable that microdrone to find you and then decide whether or not to kill you – cameras, facial recognition, geolocation – already exists in your smartphone.

Had the film ended there it would have been unsettling enough. But it goes on to show the devices operating as part of a pack, or “swarm”, hunting down a bunch of supposed bad guys. And this is really the whole point of the armed microdrone concept. On its own, one could be very nasty, but as part of a coordinated group, an absolute nightmare.

AI computer systems could be “trained” to operate multiple drones as a team, penetrating buildings, trains, cars, pretty much immune to bullets and less vulnerable to electronic jamming because they’re not being controlled remotely.

‘No measure of security’

Just picture it: a couple of the team attach themselves to an air duct on the side of a building, blow themselves up, and the rest swarm in through the filtration system, perhaps programmed with facial, iris or even gait recognition software.

Dominic Nicholls imagines their use in war. “Once let loose across enemy lines to hunt for specific targets, no senior commander, no matter how close to the action, will ever feel any measure of security on the battlefield.”

Again, we are not there yet, but if this scenario is futuristic, then it’s the near future. 

For years now, drones have been working autonomously in teams for tasks like search and rescue and cleaning up oil spills. And the first signals of their use for lethal force are beginning to emerge.

Programming drones to attack gun-carrying humans in military uniforms is technological ‘child’s play’ CREDIT: Slaughterbots/The Future of Life Institute

In 2020 a skirmish in Libya involved the possible use of a Turkish-made autonomous lethal drone called Kargu-2. According to a UN report, this was used to hunt down and engage a logistics convoy affiliated to the warlord Khalifa Haftar, marking the known battlefield debut for that class of weapon.

Last year, meanwhile, it was reported that the Israel Defence Forces deployed a swarm of drones to locate, identify and attack Hamas militants, thought to be the first time a swarm has been used in combat. 

None of these strictly speaking were microdrones. But the proof of concept, particularly in the case of the Gaza incident, is clear enough.

“So what?” you might ask. After all, the history of warfare is in one sense defined by the introduction of new and unpleasant weapons that make it easier to kill the enemy. Aren’t microdrones merely the latest?

Yes and no. The crucial factor, according to Professor Russell, is “scalability” – not a particularly sexy word, but one with potentially era-defining implications.

Let’s return to Slaughterbots, the short film he backed that has gained such currency among LAWS (Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems) sceptics. In its second act we leave the imagined tech presentation theatre (with its deceased mannequin) and pan instead to a large military cargo plane in flight.

“We are thinking big,” the voiceover states. “A $25 million order now buys this…Enough to kill half a city – the bad half.”

With that the rear door of the aircraft opens and thousands of microdrones tumble out, activate in the air and begin buzzing towards the ground like malevolent wasps. This is a swarm, but on a different scale. The microdrone has effectively become a weapon of mass destruction.

If that sounds over the top, consider that only a few years ago the Black Hornet cost around $80,000 a unit; now they’re an eighth of that price.

It is astronomically difficult to build your own nuclear weapon, or even to buy one, if the international community disapproves. Just ask Iran. But as autonomous drone technology proliferates as an increasingly mainstream aspect of commercial and recreational life, the same will not be true of swarms.

How hard would it really be for a malign state to set up a super factory that pumps out hundreds of microdrones a week, or a terrorist group like Isis or Al-Qaeda simply to buy the machines on the open market?

Most observers believe – albeit perhaps wishfully – that Vladimir Putin will not resort to a nuclear attack for fear of the international response. But would the man who shows no compunction in flattening civilian areas with artillery hesitate to use a mega swarm of killer microdrones to re-take Kharkiv or Izium?

Programming drones to attack gun-carrying humans in military uniforms is technological child’s play. But why stop there? Why not also automatically track mobile phone use and take out civilians who have posted pro-Kyiv content on Twitter or Instagram?

This kind of integrated capability may still be years away; military procurement (the F-35 fighter, for example) is normally measured in decades. Equally, it could be much closer.

‘Easier than a Manhattan project’

Professor Russell says there are clear parallels with the creation of the atom bomb. By the end of the 1930s, much of the theoretical heavy lifting, such as identifying which uranium and plutonium isotopes to enrich, was in place.

But a big push was needed to engineer this into a working reality. In 1943 the US government opened its chequebook, gathered the nation’s finest scientists in Los Alamos, New Mexico and diverted one per cent of the country’s entire electricity supply to their endeavours. Two years later they had their bomb.

Just a few years ago the Black Hornet cost around $80,000 a unit; now they’re an eighth of that price. CREDIT: Luke MacGregor/Bloomberg

It’s a matter of will,” he says. “If we wanted to create that kind of weapon, I think we could do it in 18 months. It’s easier than a Manhattan project.”

These concerns are not confined to the university campus.

Chris Cole is a softly spoken, thoughtful kind of chap. He runs a website called Drone Wars UK from his home in Oxford which aims to document and warn against the use of armed drones, and particularly British involvement. 

There’s an ethical issue when machines decide who to kill,” he said. “That line is being corroded all the time. We are getting to the stage when humans are rubber-stamping decisions being made by machines.”

Mr Cole and his team spend much of their time organising public meetings and mass letter-writing campaigns, as well as occasionally taking to law to challenge alleged government secrecy on the subject.

If that sounds familiar, perhaps it’s because his organisation has firm links with the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and various anti-arms trade bodies. But that in itself is revealing: the potential for nuclear armageddon remains, but its longtime opponents now appear to view the rise of small plastic robots as a comparable threat.

Might we be entering a new arms race similar to that of the 1940s and 50s?

Leading military powers view autonomous weapons as the future of warfare CREDIT: Slaughterbots/The Future of Life Institute

The west is in a quandary. Its leading military powers clearly view autonomous weapons as the future of warfare. But they are understandably sensitive about public reaction to the idea of fully-independent killer robots. Many of us grew up on the Terminator movies, after all.

The US Department of Defence has since 2012 operated under self-imposed Directive 3000.09. It’s vague. Some understand it to mean that a human has to be present in the decision-making “loop”, although others disagree, or say this stipulation is easily overridable anyway.

Look carefully and the direction of travel appears plain. Announcing an update to its CODE (Collaborative Operations in Denied Environment) program some years ago, a DARPA (Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency) official said: “Just as wolves hunt in coordinated packs with minimal communication, multiple CODE-enabled unmanned aircraft would collaborate to find, track, identify and engage targets, all under the command of a single human mission supervisor.”

The fundamental nature of battle in the middle part of this century and beyond depends upon exactly what that supervision entails.

Some countries see the direction of travel and want it to halt: since 2014 dozens have signalled their support for a treaty banning the use of autonomous killer robots. Others want to get ahead.

These are big players. Neither the US, China, India, nor Russia has arguably shown much real willingness to sign up. Nor, for that matter, has Britain. This year the RAF killed off its Project Mosquito drone (swarm) program, under the auspices of 216 Squadron, but only in order to move forward with plans for a better replacement.

‘Window to act is closing fast’

“This is one of the few areas where the US, UK and Russia are all in agreement: that we should create this new class of weapons,” Professor Russell chuckles ruefully (needless to say, he supports a ban). His frustration is evident. “I think the UK could have a significant role to play if it were to engage seriously with the issue. The window to act is closing fast.”

Approached ahead of this article, the Ministry of Defence denied that the UK possessed fully autonomous weapons systems, i.e. those without “context-appropriate” human involvement, or that it intended to use them.

It said its strategy was to promote “safe and responsible” military development of AI in concert with allies and push for compliance with current international law, which it described as “highly effective”.

Perhaps, as with nuclear, there is no halting the march of technology. And is it not natural, indeed humane, to seek ways to keep soldiers out of the line of fire?

Major General Jonathan Shaw has seen the bloody cost of conflict up close, first as a platoon commander with the Parachute Regiment in the Falklands, later commanding a multi-national division in southern Iraq.

“Why are people interested in the air?” he asks. “It’s because in the army we’re always asking ourselves ‘what’s over the hill’?” Microdrones, he says, “allow you to fight a war without human costs.”

Although not expressing a view on the question of automation, he said that with drones “you’re killing more of the enemy without any extra cost to yourself, and that’s always the goal. They would have been really useful in the Falklands. There were numerous casualties.”

As a simple statement of fact, which is no more than the General intended, it’s difficult to argue with. But perhaps this view begs a certain question.

Can artificial intelligence ever be better at deciding who lives or dies? CREDIT: DKosig

Artificial Intelligence – robots, in other words – are demonstrably better than humans at a large and growing range of activities, from playing chess to piloting aircraft. But, if you take into account the crucial moral factor, can they ever be better at deciding who gets to live and who should die?

Remember, the introduction of self-driving cars is currently snagged on just this dilemma.

For all their many messes and controversies, the Predator and Reaper drone strikes that we became so familiar with after 9/11 were, as far we know, fully controlled, not just “supervised”, by people. 

“There’s no euphoria after a drone strike,” says Dominic Nicholls. “I’d describe the overwhelming emotion as one of relief. You have to trust the intelligence that has taken you to the point of deciding to use lethal force against an individual. But once that decision is taken you want the act to be carried out in as efficient a manner as possible. 

I never saw anyone punch the air or in any way take delight in the violent death we had just brought about. Most people, if they expressed any thoughts at all, were measured, professional and glad all parts of the system had worked.”

It’s not perfect. But it is human.

Protect yourself and your family by learning more about Global Health Security


Pentagon Considers Allowing AI Weapons to Autonomously Decide to Kill Humans

US, China, Israel and other nations are taking a serious look at AI drone warfare where drones would decide whether humans live or die.

Image Credit:

Hakan Nural/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

The Pentagon and other nations are quietly debating whether to allow AI-controlled drones to autonomously decide whether to kill humans on the battlefield.

According to The New York Times, the US, China, Israel and other nations are taking a serious look at AI drone warfare where drones would decide whether humans live or die.

Via The Times:

It seems like something out of science fiction: swarms of killer robots that hunt down targets on their own and are capable of flying in for the kill without any human signing off.

But it is approaching reality as the United States, China and a handful of other nations make rapid progress in developing and deploying new technology that has the potential to reshape the nature of warfare by turning life and death decisions over to autonomous drones equipped with artificial intelligence programs.


Whereas drones in the past have required a human to pull the trigger, autonomous drones would make decisions by using AI systems to process and analyze information.

While some nations argue autonomous “killer drone” usage should remain on the table, other UN member states are warning the issue could lead to an existential crisis for humanity.

The prime minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Gaston Browne, recently warned UN officials at a meeting, “This isn’t the plot of a dystopian novel, but a looming reality.”

The issue could have terrible consequences for humanity, said the Austrian Foreign Ministry Director of Arms Control.

“This is really one of the most significant inflection points for humanity,” Alexander Kmentt, Director of Arms Control at Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told the Times. “What’s the role of human beings in the use of force — it’s an absolutely fundamental security issue, a legal issue and an ethical issue.”

The Times notes some Pentagon officials have already been advocating the use of drones in order to gain a tactical advantage on China.

“We’ll counter the PLA’s mass with mass of our own, but ours will be harder to plan for, harder to hit, harder to beat,” stated Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks.

US Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall also noted the time is coming where the world will have to adopt usage of the technology.

Individual decisions versus not doing individual decisions is the difference between winning and losing — and you’re not going to lose,” Kendall said.

I don’t think people we would be up against would do that, and it would give them a huge advantage if we put that limitation on ourselves.

According to, Ukraine has already started using AI-controlled drones in its war against Russia, using the killer robots to make tactical strikes without input from a human operator.

Mr. Kmentt says the time is approaching where we’ll have to decide to nip the new technology in the bud, or live in the nightmare dystopian sci-fi reality we’ve created.

If we wait too long, we are really going to regret it,” he said. “As soon enough, it will be cheap, easily available, and it will be everywhere. And people are going to be asking: Why didn’t we act fast enough to try to put limits on it when we had a chance to?”