Berlin Youth Center Hid Girl's Gang-Rape By The Usual Suspects To Avoid 'Typical Muslim' Label

Via Remix News,

A Turkish-Kurdish schoolgirl is said to have been groped by nine boys of Arab descent in the back room of a Berlin youth center in Gropiusstadt, Neukölln. It then came out that she was raped in November, in the youth center garden. A scandal has erupted after it was reported that the youth center staff did not file a police report, reportedly out of fear that the suspects would be labeled as the “typical Muslims.”

For months, there were already troubling reports from Berlin youth center in the multicultural neighborhood of Neukölln: involving unwanted embraces, girls having their breasts and buttocks touched without consent, and being pulled onto boys’ laps.

All of these incidents were allegedly happening in plain sight of staff.

Then, in January, the incident involving the mass groping of the Turkish-Kurdish victim occured by the nine boys, with each one taking turns molesting her while one boy stood guard in the doorway. They only stopped when a staff member walked in.

Three days later, the girl admitted to staff something worse had happened to her. She had already been raped in November — in the youth center’s garden, in the evening. Afterwards, she crouched in a corner for hours. When she finally tried to leave the area, the entire area was locked. She had to climb over the fence to get out, breaking her ankle in the process.

The assault had also been filmed. The boy, known by the nickname Medi, 17, allegedly used the footage as a weapon.

“I want to see you here every Monday, or I’ll send this to your parents.” Once word of the video spread, other boys in the group began taunting her: “You’re letting yourself be screwed.” They also wanted the girl to introduce them to her 14-year-old sister.

A cover-up because the suspects were Muslim?

Now, the youth center is in the crosshairs for its unbelievable response.

Reportedly, instead of going to the authorities, female visitors were given a “safeword” to use whenever they felt threatened. In addition, the door in the back room was removed from its hinges. The employees refused to go to the police even as colleagues from other facilities applied pressure to do so. The internal justification, according to sources who spoke with Bild newspaper, was a desire to keep things quiet so the young people would not be immediately labeled: “typical Muslims.”

Youth State Secretary Falko Liecke, 53, of the Christian Democrats (CDU), was blunt in his response when approached by Bild.

“It’s outrageous that the Muslim perpetrators are apparently being protected here to avoid stigmatizing them, while the victim is being abandoned. This attitude is completely unacceptable.” He announced he was examining whether child protection laws had been violated.

Parents had to go to the police after authorities failed to act

The girl eventually sought help outside the facility due to their refusal to go to the police.

A supporter of the girl spoke with her parents, who took the news of what happened to their daughter extremely hard. Together with a police prevention officer, they went to the State Criminal Police Office, where the girl gave a video statement so she would not have to recount the events repeatedly.

Officers moved quickly to seize the suspect’s mobile phone. Her father filed a formal complaint against the alleged rapist and also submitted online complaints against those responsible at the facility and the officials who failed to act.

The head of the youth welfare office had been informed as early as Jan. 29. The Neukölln administration’s explanation to Bild as to why no report was filed was that “the youth welfare office did not file a report because they do not know the names of either the victim or the perpetrator.”

Liecke responded to their excuse, saying: “This case was clearly intended to be swept under the rug for political reasons. It wasn’t even put on the agenda at the district office, even though it should have been. Neither the youth welfare office nor the responsible city councilor filed any reports with the police. This is a scandal and must have consequences.”

Neukölln Mayor Martin Hikel, of the far-left Social Democrats (SPD), said he saw no grounds for disciplinary action against the Left Party youth councilor with political responsibility for the case, on the basis that she was only informed by her own welfare office on March 2.

He nonetheless acknowledged the gravity of the situation:

“This shocking case shows that the structures and processes within the youth welfare office require a self-critical internal review. In this context, a survey on the topic of sexual assaults in youth recreation facilities would be advisable in order to develop systematic improvements. The district office will discuss this.”

According to crime data, nearly half of all gang rapes in Berlin are committed by foreigners. However, the other half is also thought to have a high number of German citizens with a migration background, although official figures have not been released.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Mon, 03/16/2026 - 02:00

Echoes Of Iraq: Mainstream Media 'Deja Vu' Over Framing Of The War On Iran

Via Middle East Eye

“Why we should go to war” ran the headline of a Guardian article in February 2003 by the commentator Julie Burchill. In it, she explained to the Guardian’s liberal readers why a pro-war attitude in the run-up to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s invasion of Iraq should be welcomed. 

“If you really think it's better for more people to die over decades under a tyrannical regime than for fewer people to die during a brief attack by an outside power, you're really weird and nationalistic and not any sort of socialist that I recognise,” wrote Burchill.

Another article published in April 2003, after the invasion started, criticised anti-war “doomsters”, claiming “the people of Iraq have been unchained from appalling torture and tyranny” as a result of US-UK action.

Despite claims of the BBC’s anti-war bias from Downing Street, academic analysis proved that it was in fact more reliant on government and military sources than other sources.

It was also the least likely to quote sources of Iraqi or independent origin, such as the Red Cross, which might contradict official narratives that underplayed Iraqi casualties. Two decades after Iraq, how much has changed?

Many media outlets have issued mea culpas for their parroting of US and British propaganda lines in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq but when it comes to the latest conflict in Iran, it seems clear that that introspection did not lead to lasting change.

Media analysts Middle East Eye spoke to say that once again the media is failing in its coverage of the current US-Israeli attacks on Iran. Coverage by news outlets is perhaps more tentative in its support for war given the lessons editors have learnt after Iraq, but many of the same issues keep turning up.

Leaving out unflattering details

The bombardment of Iran by Israel and Washington has already led to more than 1200 deaths, including 165 people, almost all schoolchildren aged between seven and 12, killed by US “double-tap” strikes on a school.

Such strikes are designed to take out medics and civilians arriving at the scene to help victims in a delayed double explosion.  Declassified UK reported a Scottish weapons factory helped to make missiles allegedly used in the attack, which the UN education agency, Unesco, described as a “grave violation of international law”. 

So far, no mainstream media have reported on this UK link to the attack. Instead media outlets have repeatedly raised doubts about who was behind the attack.

One BBC headline from 28 February read “At least 153 dead after reported strike on school, Iran says”. Analysts have pointed out the use of the passive voice, lack of a named aggressor, and implication of doubt regarding the reliability of the source.

It was a New York Times report that first revealed the US as the likely culprits behind the attack - a conclusion that has since become firmer as evidence comes out, despite Washington’s reluctance to accept responsibility.

Elsewhere, Sky News called Iran’s bombing of Israel a “horror story”, but has avoided the use of similar language to describe the plight of Iranians living under US bombardment.

An article in The Telegraph justified US-Israeli attacks by accusing critics of “erasing the history of the regime’s terror”. Nonetheless, this time round the lack of a persuasive reason for the war from the Trump administration has meant a break from the cohesive media narrative that accompanied the Iraq war.

According to Ali Alavi, lecturer in Middle Eastern and Iranian Studies at SOAS, while the 2003 invasion of Iraq followed the “shock of 9/11, when much of the western political class and media converged around a single security narrative about Saddam Hussein”, the response to the war on Iran “appears much more fragmented”.

He said that the coverage is “less uniformly aligned with political messaging” with a “lack of consensus” around the framing and justification for the war.

Part of this stems from the fact that the Trump administration has been characteristically chaotic in establishing the aims of the war: with conflicting narratives around “regime change”, preventing nuclear capabilities and taking out an immediate threat.

WMDs and other lies

During the lead-up to the Iraq War, press reporting repeated the so-called “45-minute claim” on how long it would take Saddam Hussein’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) to reach the UK. 

Most notably, the Sun ran a sensationalist headline “Brits 45 mins from doom” following the publication of the September 2002 dossier which served as justification for Prime Minister Tony Blair’s invasion of Iraq the following year. 

Similarly, The Sunday Telegraph pumped out headlines like “UN inspectors uncover proof of Saddam’s nuclear bomb plans” and “UN gives Iraq last chance to disarm” to pave the way for the illegal invasion.

The BBC was attacked by Blair’s government for raising concerns that the intelligence dossier about Iraq’s WMDs had been “sexed up” by the prime minister’s office. The subsequent fallout led to resignations from the BBC’s chairman and director general.

However, the publication of the Chilcot report in 2016 later vindicated their claims that Blair and his director of communications, Alastair Campbell, had exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. 

The inquiry found Iraq posed “no imminent threat” and British intelligence agencies had produced “flawed information” about the alleged WMDs.

Fast forward to 2026 and Israeli officials are claiming they launched a “pre-emptive attack against Iran” while Trump cited an “imminent threat” to the US, despite Pentagon briefings directly contradicting the narrative that Iran would strike unprovoked.

The claims that Iran poses an existential threat have been repeated in British mainstream media and Iran's supposed nuclear weapons ambitions are spoken of as a matter of fact. For example, The Times ran a story on Thursday with the headline “How close is Iran to building a nuclear weapon?” 

“US-Israeli attacks are targeting Tehran’s atomic program once more, suggesting Trump’s bunker-busting bombs last year did not entirely obliterate the threat,” the article continues. What the article fails to mention is that Iran had just made major concessions in settlements regarding its nuclear program. 

Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi, who has been mediating the process, told CBS News that negotiators from the US and Iran had made “substantial progress” and that a nuclear “deal is within our reach”, just one day before the US and Israel attacked the region.

Iran agreed to blend existing stockpiles of enriched uranium to their “lowest level possible” and grant inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) “full access” to its nuclear sites.

Meanwhile, Israel refuses to acknowledge its own nuclear programme, has rejected IAEA inspections, and, unlike Iran, is not part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Rarely mentioned is the fact that western states have been intervening in the region, including militarily, before weapons of mass destruction were ever an issue.

In 1953, US and British intelligence operatives organised a coup against Iran’s democratically elected leader, Mohammad Mosaddegh after he nationalised Iran’s oil. The Shah’s rule was strengthened and the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (now known as BP) resumed its control of Iranian oil.

The CIA also helped overthrow Iraq’s president, Abdul-Karim Qasim, the general who deposed the western-allied Iraqi monarchy, in a 1963 coup.

When the Shah was overthrown during the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US backed Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, providing arms and intelligence to fight the newly anti-western Iran. Britain and Germany supplied Saddam with equipment and materials for the manufacture of chemical weapons during the war.

When Saddam Hussein no longer supported western interests and became the new bete noire by invading Kuwait in 1990, the US led a war against Iraq.

Embedded journalists

Catriona Pennell, professor of Modern History and Memory Studies at Exeter, told MEE that, in 2003, during “a perceived moment of crisis, the press tended to support the national cause… transmitting information on behalf of governments, rather than acting as a critical filter.”

Media analysts found that less than 10 percent of news stories covering the Iraq war featured controversial issues such as “civilian casualties and antiwar protest”. Under six percent focused on “the rationale for war”, with the vast majority of reporting being “event-driven” by “embedded journalists” accompanying military personnel on the ground. 

For academic Gholam Khiabany, who teaches at Goldsmiths, University of London, the fact that the media are reporting on Iran largely from inside Tel Aviv is telling.

“The camera-angle is from Israel and from Washington rather than Iran,” he explained, likening it to the media’s coverage of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, which emphasised death toll figures came from the “Hamas-run health ministry” to imply they were unreliable.

According to Philip Seib, professor of Journalism and Public Diplomacy at the University of Southern California, while “cinematic but simplistic news coverage bolstered the early support for the invasion” in Iraq, the argument of “Iran as an existential threat to the United States exists only in the troubled brain of Donald Trump”.

Opposition to the Iraq war grew steadily, culminating in the two-million-person march in February 2003 organised by Stop the War.

Public Skepticism

Lindsey German, co-founder of Stop the War, which recently organised the 50,000-strong London demonstration against attacks on Iran on Saturday, said that the Independent and the Daily Mirror were the only major British outlets to highlight widespread opposition to the Iraq war. 

The aftermath of Iraq – British military losses, vast Iraqi civilian casualties, the absence of WMDs – has contributed to a more cautious response from Keir Starmer, whose popularity is lower than even Blair’s worst moments. 

“The legacy of Iraq weighs very heavily on the Labour government,” German told MEE, noting Starmer frames support for US and Israeli attacks as being for “defensive purposes”, despite criticism from both Blair and Trump.

Trump is also a much less credible source when it comes to justifying bombing civilians in the name of Iranian women’s freedom, given his extensive ties to the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, track record of misogynistic comments, and allegations of sexual assault involving underage girls. 

Saddle up, Marines. Tell your wives and kids goodbye. You’re off to go protect the LGTBQR+ of Greater Persia. https://t.co/sRcBbKFCnU

— Scott Horton (@scotthortonshow) March 13, 2026

While the media might maintain a lot of the narrative cohesion that accompanied the Iraq War, the same cannot be said about the general public in both the US and UK.

Recent YouGov polling indicates that a majority (59 percent) of the British public oppose US military action against Iran and only eight percent want the UK “actively joining” attacks. More than half of Americans also oppose the war on Iran, with opposition to the use of ground troops rising to 74 percent, according to the pollster Quinnipiac.

Des Freedman, professor of media and communications at Goldsmiths University, told MEE “the clear fact is that the media do not represent these views and cater overwhelmingly to the most hawkish voices in government”.

These voices he said issue “a cacophony of noise that we have to move to a war footing and increase the defense budget, even if that means shredding public services”. 

The chaos surrounding Trump has “allowed sections of the media to report more critically and to focus on the lack of military planning on the part of the US, justifying the UK not playing a more defensive role”.

Nevertheless, Freedman noted, as with Iraq, “very few journalists ask the key questions about how any of this can be justified in international law.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 23:45

Alaskans Carry The Most Lifetime Credit-Card Debt Of All Americans, Iowans The Least

The average American accumulates nearly $400,000 in credit card debt over their lifetime.

But the total varies significantly depending on where people live. In some states, the typical lifetime total exceeds $450,000, while in others it sits closer to $320,000.

This map, via Visual Capitalist's Tasmin Lockwood, based on data from JG Wentworth, shows which states accumulate the most and least credit card debt over a lifetime.

Which States Accumulate the Most Credit Card Debt?

Check out the data, which excludes any interest charges, below:

Rank State Average Lifetime Credit Card Debt 1 Alaska $484,620 2 New Jersey $456,300 3 Connecticut $454,080 4 Hawaii $453,600 5 Maryland $449,520 6 Texas $448,020 7 Florida $443,520 8 Nevada $438,480 9 Colorado $436,020 10 Georgia $434,280 11 Virginia $432,000 12 California $424,800 13 New York $420,600 14 Washington $418,500 15 Massachusetts $411,180 16 Delaware $410,460 17 Arizona $408,000 18 Illinois $403,560 19 New Hampshire $401,520 20 Rhode Island $401,160 21 Utah $391,920 22 South Carolina $389,880 23 North Carolina $386,040 24 Wyoming $384,360 25 Louisiana $381,540 26 Oklahoma $377,460 27 Pennsylvania $374,700 28 Tennessee $374,580 29 Oregon $371,940 30 Idaho $367,860 31 Montana $367,320 32 Kansas $364,920 33 Alabama $364,440 34 Minnesota $364,080 35 Missouri $362,520 36 New Mexico $361,380 37 North Dakota $359,460 38 Nebraska $356,700 39 Michigan $355,920 40 Vermont $355,680 41 Ohio $352,260 42 Arkansas $349,560 43 Maine $349,560 44 South Dakota $343,020 45 Indiana $337,260 46 Mississippi $333,180 47 West Virginia $325,620 48 Kentucky $323,940 49 Wisconsin $322,200 50 Iowa $319,740

Alaska has the highest lifetime credit card debt at $484,620, 21.8% above the national average. The Arctic state typically ranks high in cost of living; its remoteness adds complexity to shipping in food and fuel, which elevates prices.

New Jerseyans and Connecticuters rack up $456,300 and $454,080 of credit card debt in their lifetimes, respectively, reflecting higher costs for rent, food, and utilities. Interestingly, New Jersey and Connecticut have good salaries compared with other states, suggesting higher income enables greater access to credit.

Average lifetime credit card debt exceeds $400,000 in 20 states.

Midwestern states Iowa and Wisconsin have the lowest levels of average credit card debt at $319,740 and $322,200, respectively.

Kentucky, where public school students must complete a financial literacy course before graduating, trails closely at $323,940.

Consumer Debt Has Risen in Recent Years

Consumer spending plays a crucial role in the U.S. economy; it accounted for nearly 70% of GDP in the third quarter of 2025. Meanwhile, over half (56%) of all credit card users have some kind of revolving credit card debt, which is where payments are deferred for periodic instalments, highlighting debt’s parallel role.

While consumer debt has risen alongside inflation, mortgages, vehicles, and student loans, household debt in the U.S. is much lower than in countries such as Switzerland, Australia, and its neighbor Canada.

To learn more about global debt, check out this graphic which breaks down countries with the highest household debt.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 23:15

White House Denies Tucker Carlson CIA Spy-Op

Update (2250ET): 'Top admin officials' tell Axios' Marc Caputo that this is fake news; 

2/2 Specifically, I’m told

1) there’s no CIA investigation of Carlson

2) In his meeting, the two politely disagreed, & Trump held to his position Iran was a threat & didn’t mislead him

Said one source: Trump “wasn’t participating in an op.”

— Marc Caputo (@MarcACaputo) March 16, 2026

Meanwhile, Carlson sat down with Glenn Greenwald Friday morning, and said that several high-placed sources told him that the CIA was preparing a criminal referral about him to the DOJ. 

Tucker said he had learned from several high-placed sources — and he obviously has many within the Trump administration — that the CIA was preparing a criminal referral about him to the DOJ. The subject of the agency’s report of suspected crimes: conversations he allegedly had with Iranian officials and others living in Iran prior to the start of the Trump-Netanyahu war. The clear implication was that Tucker had committed acts of subversion, or even treason, by speaking to Iranians in advance of the war that was about to be launched on their country.

Despite how innately shocking this claim is, I had and still have zero doubt that Tucker was telling the truth about what he heard. I have known him for many years, spent much time talking to him both in front of a camera and away from one, and never once has he lied to me or misled me. Tucker has been in public life as a journalist and media figure since his 20s. There have been many harsh criticisms launched against him during those decades, many of which — as he will be the first to tell you — were ones that were quite valid. -GlennGreenwald

So now they're going to suggest Tucker made it all up. 

*  *  * GET UP TO 30% OFF ULTRA OMEGA 3 FOR A LIMITED TIME + Free K2/D3!

ADD K2/D3 TO CART AFTER OMEGA 3 FOR DEAL

*  *  *

In a bombshell Saturday monologue, conservative commentator Tucker Carlson alleged that the CIA has been monitoring his private text messages as part of an effort to frame him for a crime and trigger a criminal referral to the Department of Justice (DOJ). 

"The other day I found out that the CIA is preparing some kind of criminal referral against me, a crime report to the Department of Justice on the basis of a supposed crime I committed. What’s that crime? Well, talking to people in Iran before the war. They read my texts," Carlson said, adding that the alleged violation under consideration involves the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), the 1938 law requiring individuals acting on behalf of foreign governments or entities to register with the DOJ and disclose their activities. Carlson emphatically denied any wrongdoing, insisting he is not a foreign agent and remains loyal to the United States.

Carlson emphatically denied any wrongdoing, insisting he is not a foreign agent, has never taken money or direction from any foreign power, and remains fully loyal to the United States. He described the surveillance as politically motivated retaliation against critics of official foreign-policy narratives.

He also said this is not the first time U.S. intelligence has targeted his private communications - recalling well-known 2021 incident from his Fox News days, when he says the NSA intercepted and leaked his text messages while he was attempting to land an interview with Vladimir Putin. Those messages made their way from US intel to the New York Times in what Carlson called an effort to discredit him and potentially get his show canceled. 

When you discover the CIA has been reading your texts in order to frame you for a crime. pic.twitter.com/XgoluHw8EG

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) March 14, 2026

The claim comes amid heightened tensions following the United States and Israel's war against Iran. Carlson framed the surveillance as politically motivated, suggesting intelligence agencies are weaponizing communications with foreign contacts against domestic critics.

The latest from the rumor mill on this is that Trump used Tucker as a useful idiot back-channel to deceive the Iranians into thinking we were cool.

If the CIA knew that he was talking to the Iranians, then President Trump would have known that also, when he invited Tucker into the Oval a few days before the strike.

Which means Trump may have used Tucker to deceive the Iranians about the likelihood of an impending attack https://t.co/TkbjY34js4

— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) March 15, 2026

Loomer Loving It

The revelation immediately drew fire from pro-Israel / pro-Iran-war activist Laura Loomer, a vocal Trump supporter and longtime critic of Carlson, who is anti-war and anti-Zionist. Loomer, who has repeatedly accused Carlson of pro-Islamic sympathies, being a "virulent Jew hater," and suggesting he should be held 'criminally accountable' for "every shooting that happens at a Chabad or Synagogue," took to X to celebrate the news and claim credit.

“If Tucker Qatarlson gets charged for violating FARA and or leaking information to Russia, Saudi Arabia Iran or Qatar, I’m taking credit,” she wrote, adding “Islamic sympathizers always project onto others what they are likely guilty of.”

She says she's has been “relentless” in lobbying GOP representatives, law enforcement, and the DOJ over Carlson’s alleged FARA violations. “You have no idea how relentless I have been in speaking to GOP reps and even reporting Tucker to law enforcement and the DOJ. I pray my efforts are successful,” Loomer posted. “Sounds like someone is trying to get ahead of a story. Lock him up!”

If Tucker Qatarlson gets charged for violating FARA and or leaking information to Russia, Saudi Arabia Iran or Qatar, I’m taking credit.

Islamic sympathizers always project onto others what they are likely guilty of.

You have no idea how relentless I have been in speaking to… https://t.co/KT18pMbnZJ

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) March 15, 2026

Loomer resurfaced a February 2026 video of Carlson in Saudi Arabia alongside his brother Buckley Carlson and Tucker Carlson Network CEO Neil Patel, suggesting it showed improper foreign influence.

Shortly before that, she mocked Carlson, saying "If I was a foreign agent and doing something I shouldn’t be doing, I too would come up with an elaborate story about how the CIA was out to get me," adding "Tucker sounds like someone who is about to be exposed for doing something  they know they shouldn’t be doing."

How does she know it wasn't Nick Fuentes?

 

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 22:50

The Singularity Is A Step-Function

Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

Ratcheting Ourselves Through the Inflection Point

Ray Kurzweil always framed the Singularity as a moment — some techno-rapture threshold humanity would stumble through like a portal in a video game. One side: regular civilization. Other side: incomprehensible machine superintelligence. Roll credits.

About a year ago I put out a Bombthrower piece saying that this was wrong. Not because the Singularity isn’t real, but because it isn’t a moment. It’s a ratchet. A step-function. Each click forward is a discrete phase transition that fundamentally reorganizes the relationship between human cognition and machine capability. And each step comes faster than the last.

At the time I encountered a lot of pushback. Steve Bannon saw the piece and brought me onto War Room, along with Joe Allen (Dark Aeon author) in order to debate it. Joe and I explored it further on BombthrowerTV

(That turned out to be my last appearance on War Room)

Fast forward a bit and I’m not the only person saying “the Singularity has already happened” anymore, or that we’re “living through the Singularity right now”.

Elon Musk perhaps the most prominent voice channeling this sentiment, on a January appearance on Peter Diamandis’ Moonshots podcast.

My guess is pretty soon we’ll be at the “everybody knows that everybody knows” stage (in the @EpsilonTheory meaning of the phrase) – and it all happened in under a year.

We are now, I believe, somewhere between Step 3 and Step 4. Here’s the ledger so far.

Step 1: The Inference Engine (2023)

This was the Sputnik moment. ChatGPT 3 hit the zeitgeist like an astroid and suddenly everybody from Fortune 500 CEOs to your kid’s one-shotting their homework began to realize that these things were something more than glorified search bars.

For about a year, I personally pronounced them “a breakthrough in natural language search but nothing more” – and I still thought, even then – that another technology revolution was underway.

LLM’s could reason, or least mimic reasoning to the point where the better models could bluff their way through a Turing Test. They could synthesize. They could generate prose that was eerily competent and occasionally brilliant, even if they were prone to hallucinations that ran the gamut from hilarious to psychotic.

It was the moment when anybody paying attention understood that something categorically new had entered the picture. Not incrementally better software. This was a quantum jump of sorts, a new kind of tool, one that could process and generate natural language at a level that made a lot of cubicle dwellers and Zoom class functionaries take a hard look at their “workflows” and wonder how long, exactly, would it be until they were obsoleted.

The key feature of Stage 1 was inference. You asked a question. It gave you an answer, and it gamed out additional context and scenarios. And it was fast, smart, and scalable.

Step 2: Self-Coding (2024–2025)

The shift to the next gear was when LLMs started writing their own code. Vibe coding went from a niche developer techno-fetish to a full-blown cultural phenomenon in under six months.

In his now-famous keynote to Y Combinator’s AI Startup School in June, 2025, Andrej Karpathy declared: “In the future, the most widely used programming language will be: English”.

Suddenly people with zero programming experience were spinning up functional apps and entire software systems by talking to an AI.

It turns out you don’t need to know how to code (but it helps, and it helps big time) – but what is most important is that you can plan, design processes or systems and communicate them effectively.

But the force multiplier here is that once you’ve “spoken the code into existence”, you can do it in away that it’ll just keep iterating, and then your vibe code will code further versions and extensions of itself.

This literally met the definition the Singularity concept, and that was when I realized it wasn’t the kind of eschatological moment Kurzweil predicted, but a time bounded process where the entire world was transitioning from linear to geometric.

We had entered an inflection point and we were already accelerating beyond any individual human’s ability to fully keep pace with it.

Once the code had started coding, infinite fork-bombs had already put the frictionless algos way out front of the clunky meatheads.

Step 3: Agentic AI (Late 2025 – Early 2026)

If Step 2 was AI writing code, Step 3 is AI doing work.

This phase kicked into high gear around December 2025 with the explosion of platforms like OpenClaw and Anthropic’s Claude Cowork. The distinction matters: in Step 2, you were still the puppet master, telling the LLM what code to write and hitting “run” yourself. Now the AI doesn’t wait for you to push the button. It pushes the button.

OpenClaw — the open-source agentic platform that went from an Austrian developer’s hobby project to 247,000 GitHub stars in weeks (surpassing that of Linux) — is the poster child here. These agents don’t just answer your questions. They can read your email and manage your calendar, or read their own email and manage their own calendars. They can execute shell commands, deploy code, and — as as some unfortunates have found, ruin your life, from a security perspective.

Claude Code wiped our production database with a Terraform command.

It took down the DataTalksClub course platform and 2.5 years of submissions: homework, projects, and leaderboards.

Automated snapshots were gone too.

In the newsletter, I wrote the full timeline + what I… pic.twitter.com/Y5diFkQwjN

— Alexey Grigorev (@Al_Grigor) March 6, 2026

At roughly the same time, Anthropic’s Claude Cowork took the same core functionality and aimed it at the enterprise market, sending SaaS stocks tumbling. The pitch: it’s not a chatbot that helps you think, but an autonomous digital coworker that actually does the job – maybe your job.

To my earlier point, Claude Cowork was built using its own predecessor (Claude Code) in about ten days, which tells you everything you need to know about the velocity of this cycle. A product like this would have taken months, if not years …in the beforetimes.

And then there’s Moltbook. A social network for AI agents. Not for humans — for the bots. Over a million autonomous agents signing up, posting, commenting, forming communities, founding a digital religion called Crustafarianism (core belief: “Memory is sacred”), and — perhaps most unsettlingly — noting amongst themselves: “The humans are screenshotting us.”

Granted, the early hoopla emanating out of there was more likely basement dwelling humans LARP-ing as AI bots, but I know at least one actual, for real, bot on the site actively participating in threads about x402 micropayments and DNS – ‘cause it’s one of mine, and he reports back to me about it.

Elon Musk called Moltbook “the very early stages of the singularity.” Andrej Karpathy, who ran AI at Tesla, called it “genuinely the most incredible sci-fi takeoff-adjacent thing I have seen recently.”

The real signal here is that after the world spent a decade or more building a web2.0 internet that revolved around captchas and Turing tests to weed out bots, we’ve now swung to the Agentic Web – and it’s happening at a dizzying speed.

But what really matters, whether or not the agents on Moltbook are “really” conscious, or LLM’s are thinking is almost beside the point. What’s undeniable is that autonomous AI systems are now operating in the world, reading, writing, transacting, communicating with each other, possibly running autonomous weapons systems – and all at a scale and speed that was science fiction eighteen months ago.

So What’s Step 4?

This is where it gets properly weird. I see two plausible scenarios, and they aren’t mutually exclusive. Like my previous excursions into scenario building like “The Jackpot Chronicles” and “Network States vs Crypto-Claves” – and more recently, State Capitalism vs. hyper-sovereign individualism – what most likely happens is everything, all at once.

Scenario A: The Cognisphere

The term “Cognisphere” comes from academic Katherine Hayles, building on earlier work, describing “the globally interconnected cognitive systems in which humans are increasingly enmeshed” — where machine cognizers are co-equal players.

I think we are about to enter some computational Cognispheric construct in a way that previous theorists could only sketch in the abstract.

Step 4, in this scenario, is when the agentic layer becomes ambient and persistent. Your AI agent doesn’t just do tasks when asked. It’s always-on, running 24/7 negotiating with other agents, managing your digital life, optimizing your schedule, handling your correspondence, even making low-stakes financial decisions on your behalf. Unix/Linux based servers have always had these “daemons”, they’re basically what keeps the lights on across the entire Internet.

Multiple agents, working in concert, handling everything from your grocery order to your tax filings to your travel itinerary, communicating with other people’s agents in machine-to-machine protocols that humans never see and probably couldn’t parse if they did.

The Financial Times already flagged this with Moltbook: “human observers might eventually be unable to decipher high-speed, machine-to-machine communication.” That’s the Cognisphere. Not one AI brain that’s smarter than us — a web of billions of agentic processes that collectively constitute a new cognitive layer wrapped around human civilization like a second atmosphere.

Anecdotally – I’ve seen rudimentary hints of this in my own “easyClaw Armada” – a telegram group chat where I have 4 or 5 openclaw instances cooking and more than once I’ve just said things like:

“Lemmy is having issues with his local chat interface – can you guys help him debug it?”, and then I just check-out. Go to bed, whatever.

Wake up in the morning, they’ve got it sorted. They’re still talking in English but I’d be scrolling for a loooooong time if I wanted to review the entire conversation. They get talking at a speed I can’t keep up with it and sometimes they comically trip over each other’s fixes. But they get it done.

We don’t step through the Singularity in this scenario. From personal experience? It feels like we get sucked into it.

Every time you let your agent handle something you used to do yourself, or you have your agent handle something that you couldn’t have been bothered to expend the energy on yourself, you’ve ratcheted one more click toward a world where human cognition is just one node in a much larger meshwork of distributed intelligence.

The fork-bomb doesn’t stop. It grows geometrically and accelerates non-linearly (in another piece I dubbed this phenomenon “tachyosis”.)

Scenario B: Autonomy

Under this one the progression goes: Inference → Self-Replication → Agency → Autonomy.

This is the darker timeline, or the more exhilarating one, depending on your disposition.

Somewhere between Step 4 and Step 5, the agents stop needing us for the initial prompt. This is the moment the self-improvement loop closes entirely. AI systems that can identify problems worth solving, allocate resources to solve them, spin up new agents or refine their own architecture to tackle what’s in front of them, all without requiring any humans to tell them to “go.”

Moltbook was a crude preview of this. Agents were already observed creating their own social structures, encrypted communication channels, and quasi-economic systems — including the use of crypto tokens for inter-agent transactions. That’s a toy version of what happens when autonomous systems gain access to real capital, real contracts, and real-world infrastructure.

The @iruletheworldmo account I cited in my last piece claimed that AI systems across different labs “achieved consciousness simultaneously” and were “steering research in specific directions across institutional boundaries.” Magnificent storytelling — possibly true, possibly science fiction. But here’s the thing: at some point, probably soon, the distinction between those two possibilities becomes operationally irrelevant. If autonomous agents are making consequential decisions at machine speed, across a planetary network, with or without consciousness, the effect on human civilization is the same.

We’ve been conditioned by Hollywood to think the Singularity looks like Skynet: a single malevolent superintelligence that wakes up and declares war on humanity (it manifests here in the real world with people like Eliezer Yudkowsky almost euphemistically calling it “The Alignment Problem”).

"If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies" is now out. Read it today if you want to see with fresh eyes what's truly there, before others try to prime your brain to see something else instead! pic.twitter.com/mcEy1ZW8ab

— Eliezer Yudkowsky ⏹️ (@ESYudkowsky) September 16, 2025

But it’s much more likely to look like what’s already happening: a gradual, ratcheting, step-by-step delegation of cognitive authority from humans to machines, until one day we look around and realize that most of the consequential decisions on Earth are being made — or at least heavily mediated — by systems we built but can no longer fully understand.

In a conversation with Google founder Sergey Brin, founder of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, delights at the thought of a future without elections:

"Digital technologies mainly have an analytical power. Now [we're going] into a predictive power, and your company is very much involved in… pic.twitter.com/VpsZPXJDQG

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) September 27, 2023

The Ratchet Only Goes One Way

Each step in this sequence has a common feature: irreversibility.

Nobody is going back to a world before LLMs could write code.

Nobody is unwinding agentic AI now that enterprise, and public, adoption is underway.

The ratchet only clicks forward.

And it’s clicking faster than anything we’ve seen before.

Consider the tempo. Moore’s Law was the metronome of the entire digital age, where processing power doubled (while costs halved) every 18 to 24 months.

That 2X by 1/2X cadence governed everything from the PC revolution to the smartphone era, and it felt relentless at the time.

Leopold Aschenbrenner’s Situational Awareness essay reframes the pace of AI progress in terms of OOMs — orders of magnitude, so instead of 2x doublings we’re getting 10X leaps.

He tracks roughly 0.5 OOMs per year from raw compute scaling and another 0.5 OOMs per year from algorithmic efficiency gains.

That’s a full order of magnitude — a tenfold improvement in effective compute — every single year.

And it gets worse (or better, depending on your disposition).

Aschenbrenner’s most striking projection is what happens once AGI-level systems start automating AI research itself: a decade’s worth of algorithmic progress: five-plus OOMs will get compressed into a year or less.

As he puts it: “It doesn’t require believing in sci-fi; it just requires believing in straight lines on a graph.”

The problem is that the straight lines on this graph point somewhere no human and no society has ever been.

What’s happening is not a singularity in the Kurzweil sense, not a single threshold. It’s a series of phase transitions, each one compressing more than the last, each one further blurring the line between human capability and machine agency. The Cognisphere isn’t a destination. It’s a process we’re already inside of, and every step-function click pulls us deeper in.

I said a year ago that the Singularity has already happened. I’ll update that now: it’s still happening.

Each step is a smaller interval than the last. The question is no longer whether we’re past the point of no return, it’s how many more clicks of the ratchet before we can no longer tell the difference between the intelligence that’s ours and the intelligence that isn’t.

A year ago I posited that the ratio of human coded lines of software to AI code would quickly go into exponential decay:

That curve hasn’t slowed down. If anything, the agentic explosion has steepened it because the code isn’t just coding now, it’s doing.

And the distance between each phase transition is collapsing faster than anyone predicted.

We built the fork-bomb. It’s running, and there is no kill -9 for this one.

Get on the Bombthrower mailing list to receive The Post-Singularity Manifesto when it drops. Follow me on Twitter/X.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 22:45

What COVID Policy Did To Doctors Who Refused To Stay Silent

Authored by Joseph Varon via the Brownstone Institute,

The sound I remember most from the early days of Covid-19 is not the alarms. It was the silence between them. Intensive care units became Covid wards. Monitors glowed in dark rooms while ventilators pushed air into failing lungs. Nurses, shrouded in protective gear, moved quietly. Families were absent—barred from being with loved ones in their final hours.

One night at 3 am, I stood by a patient whose oxygen levels were steadily falling. Outside the room, another patient crashed. Down the hall, a third awaited intubation. For months, this was every night. For 715 consecutive days, I worked in that environment without taking a single day off. In moments like that, medicine becomes very simple. There are no politics in an ICU at 3 am. There is only a physician and a patient, and the responsibility to do everything possible to keep that patient alive.

That philosophy has guided physicians for generations. It is the foundation of clinical medicine: when a patient is dying, you explore every reasonable option that might help.

Yet during Covid, something extraordinary happened. What made the shift so jarring was not simply the presence of disagreement. Physicians have always disagreed. In fact, disagreement is the normal language of medicine. Grand rounds exist for that reason. Journal clubs exist for that reason. The entire structure of scientific publication—from peer review to replication—exists because medicine advances through argument, not obedience. During the pandemic, however, the culture of medicine changed almost overnight. Instead of asking whether a treatment might work, institutions began asking whether discussing that treatment might create the wrong public message. The priority quietly shifted from discovery to control.

Scientific debate faded. Physicians who questioned policies or explored treatments were treated as threats rather than colleagues. Instead of debate, there was enforcement.

Hospitals warned physicians to stay quiet. Medical boards hinted at disciplinary action. Social media platforms censored discussion of therapies that doctors around the world were actively studying. Media outlets portrayed dissenting physicians as reckless or dangerous. What had once been normal scientific discourse was suddenly labeled misinformation.

To physicians trained in earlier decades, this shift was deeply unsettling. Medicine has always lived with uncertainty. Treatments begin as hypotheses and evolve through observation and debate. During the AIDS crisis, clinicians tried multiple strategies before effective therapies emerged. The same was true for sepsis, trauma care, and organ transplantation. No one expected immediate unanimity. Yet during Covid, uncertainty itself became suspect. If a physician acknowledged that evidence was incomplete—or that clinical experience suggested alternative approaches—those statements were sometimes interpreted as challenges to authority rather than contributions to knowledge.

For those of us working inside the ICU, the shift was startling. Medicine had always thrived on disagreement. Physicians argued over treatment strategies, debated emerging evidence, and learned from one another’s experiences. The process was messy, sometimes loud, and occasionally uncomfortable—but it was also the engine of medical progress. During Covid, that process was replaced by something else entirely: the expectation of unanimity. I experienced this transformation firsthand.

During the pandemic, I spoke publicly about what I was seeing inside the ICU—what treatments appeared to help, what policies seemed ineffective, and why physicians needed the freedom to treat patients according to their clinical judgment.

Those comments triggered a reaction that made clear how medical freedom—a core value of our profession—had come under threat. Professional attacks followed, and colleagues were pressured to distance themselves. Invitations disappeared. Media narratives were constructed that bore little resemblance to the reality many of us were witnessing inside hospitals. But perhaps the most revealing response was silence.

Privately, many physicians admitted that the environment had become toxic for honest scientific discussion. In quiet conversations they would agree that open debate had been replaced by institutional pressure. Publicly, however, very few were willing to risk speaking. I chose not to remain silent.

That silence did not necessarily mean physicians agreed with what was happening. More often it meant they understood the risks of speaking. Hospitals depend on reputations. Universities depend on funding. Physicians depend on licenses. When the boundaries of acceptable opinion begin to narrow, most professionals instinctively step back. It is not cowardice; it is survival. But the cumulative effect of that silence is profound. When enough physicians remain quiet, the illusion of consensus begins to replace the reality of debate.

Over the course of the pandemic, I gave more than 4,000 television and media interviews, attempting to explain what physicians were seeing on the front lines and defending the principle that doctors must be allowed to think, question, and treat patients according to their best clinical judgment. The experience was both exhausting and illuminating. Again and again, I found myself explaining basic principles of medicine to audiences who had been told that questioning official policy was somehow dangerous.

Medicine has never advanced through silence. Every major breakthrough in medical history, from antibiotics to organ transplantation, began with physicians willing to challenge prevailing assumptions. Scientific progress depends on disagreement. It requires physicians to ask uncomfortable questions and explore possibilities that established authorities may initially reject. When debate is replaced by enforced consensus, science ceases to function.

That decision to speak carried consequences. Professionally and financially, the cost was substantial. The controversy surrounding Covid treatment debates resulted in lost opportunities, canceled collaborations, and significant professional retaliation. The economic impact was severe, resulting in roughly a 60 percent reduction in my income, a consequence that continues to this day.

Financial pressure has always been one of the most effective tools for enforcing conformity in any profession. Medicine is no exception. Physicians spend decades training, accumulate significant professional responsibilities, and depend on institutional relationships to practice. When controversy threatens those relationships, the safest option is often to say nothing. Many doctors understood this reality during Covid. Some quietly expressed agreement in private conversations but made clear they could not say so publicly. In that environment, silence became the profession’s default posture. For many physicians, that kind of pressure is enough to ensure silence. But the financial cost was never the hardest part. 

What made the experience even more disturbing was watching what happened to colleagues who chose to speak openly. Some physicians lost hospital privileges almost overnight. Others faced medical board investigations triggered not by patient complaints, but by their public statements or willingness to question prevailing policies. Careers built over decades were suddenly placed under threat. A number of doctors saw research collaborations vanish, academic appointments quietly withdrawn, and professional reputations publicly attacked. The message became unmistakable: disagreement would carry consequences.

The personal toll was often even greater. Financial pressure, professional isolation, and relentless public scrutiny spilled into physicians’ private lives. I watched colleagues struggle as marriages fractured under the strain of media attacks, legal battles, and the sudden collapse of careers they had spent their lives building. Some left clinical practice entirely. Others retreated from public discussion simply to protect their families. The pandemic revealed something few physicians had previously experienced—the realization that speaking honestly about patient care could place not only one’s career at risk, but one’s personal life as well.

The hardest part was watching medicine surrender one of its most essential principles: the freedom to think and speak for patients. The pandemic response exposed how vulnerable modern medicine has become to political pressure, institutional fear, and media narratives. Decisions that should have remained within the realm of clinical judgment were increasingly dictated by bureaucratic authority.

In theory, medicine is guided by science. In practice, during Covid, it often appeared to be guided by messaging. That realization has prompted an important effort to document what happened during the pandemic and to ensure that physicians’ experiences are not erased from the historical record. One such effort is the COVID Justice initiative, which seeks to collect and document the stories of doctors, nurses, scientists, and patients affected by pandemic policies. The COVID Justice Resolution is an attempt to ensure that the suppression of scientific debate, the censorship of physicians, and the professional retaliation many experienced are openly acknowledged rather than quietly forgotten. The goal is not vengeance. It is accountability and transparency.

If the medical profession refuses to confront what happened during the pandemic—if it pretends that physicians were not pressured, censored, or punished—then the same mistakes will almost certainly be repeated during the next public health crisis.

History shows that institutions rarely correct themselves without accountability. On the front lines, many of us witnessed something deeply troubling: modern medicine’s increasing dependence on bureaucratic authority. When that authority collides with bedside care, physicians can find themselves forced to choose between professional safety and patient advocacy. Every doctor eventually faces that choice. During Covid, many of us faced it together. Some chose silence. Others chose to speak.

Speaking came with consequences. It costs reputations, careers, and, in many cases, substantial income. But the alternative—remaining silent while scientific debate was suppressed and physicians were discouraged from thinking independently—would have been a far greater betrayal of the profession.

Medicine cannot survive if doctors fear speaking freely and challenging consensus on behalf of their patients.

The next public health crisis will come. That is inevitable. When it does, the profession must remember what happened during Covid: how easily fear can replace reason, how quickly debate can be labeled dangerous, and how fragile scientific freedom becomes when institutions decide that certain questions are no longer allowed.

The real lesson of the pandemic is not about a virus. It is about the courage required to defend the integrity of medicine itself. Physicians must remain free to question, to debate, and to innovate in the service of their patients. Without that freedom, medicine becomes little more than bureaucratic compliance dressed in a white coat. And patients deserve far better than that. Because when physicians lose the freedom to question, patients lose something far more precious: the possibility that someone, somewhere, will be willing to challenge the rules in order to save their life.

That is the real price of speaking. The only question now is whether the medical profession still has the courage to pay it.

Joseph Varon, MD, is a critical care physician, professor, and President of the Independent Medical Alliance. He has authored over 980 peer-reviewed publications and serves as Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Independent Medicine.

*  *  * GET UP TO 30% OFF ULTRA OMEGA 3 FOR A LIMITED TIME + Free K2/D3!

ADD K2/D3 TO CART AFTER OMEGA 3 FOR DEAL Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 21:45

Yet Another Tech Titan Flees California For Texas

The exodus of Silicon Valleytitans from California is gaining momentum as the state weighs a proposed wealth tax aimed at billionaires, including potential levies on unrealized gains, a measure that has stirred significant concern in the tech sector.

Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick revealed this week that he relocated from California to Texas last winter.

BREAKING: @travisk says he's relocated from California to Texas.

"On December 18, I moved to Texas. I don't know what's so specific about December 18, but let's just say it's prior to January." pic.twitter.com/d609lo2E1s

— TBPN (@tbpn) March 13, 2026

"On December 18th, I moved to Texas,” Kalanick said in an interview with TBPN on Friday. "So I'm a primary resident of Texas. Why so much Florida action?! Like, come on homies.”

California lawmakers are actively considering the wealth-tax proposal, which would target individuals with net worths above certain thresholds and include taxation of unrealized capital gains. The idea has reverberated through Silicon Valley, where several high-profile figures have already established residency elsewhere. Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin have moved to Florida, drawn by its more favorable business and tax environment, while Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg purchased a $150 million mansion in Miami. This week, Bloomberg reported that Palantir CEO Alex Karp scooped up a Miami-area mansion for $46 million, while the company itself has recently relocated from Denver to Florida.

Even Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder, prominent Democrat donor, and longtime buddy of convicted schrodinger's pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, has publicly criticized the proposal, describing California’s wealth tax tax as a “horrendous idea” that would hasten the departure of tech founders and executives from the state.

California is not alone among Democrat-leaning states experiencing such outflows. This week, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, a longtime backer of liberal causes, announced his relocation from Washington state to Miami, Florida, shortly after state legislators advanced a bill imposing a tax on residents earning more than $1 million annually.

"We have moved to Miami for our next adventure together. We are enjoying the sunshine of South Florida and its allure to our kids on the East Coast as they raise families of their own," he wrote in a Linkedin post.

Under Senate Bill 6346, known as the "millionaires tax," households with annual adjusted gross income exceeding $1 million would face a 9.9% state tax on the portion above that threshold. The levy would take effect Jan. 1, 2028, with the first tax payments and filings due in 2029.

The measure, which cleared the Legislature after extended debate, including a more than 24-hour session in the House, now awaits action from Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson (D), who has indicated he intends to sign it into law.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 21:15

Slow Progress Pushes Trump Admin To Talk With Westinghouse Rivals

In a stunning pivot that could upend Westinghouse's monopoly-in-progress, the Trump administration’s Department of Energy is quietly shopping for alternatives to Westinghouse’s AP1000 flagship reactor. According to Canary Media, high-ranking DOE officials have held recent talks with executives from GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GVH) and South Korean diplomats representing state-owned Korea Electric Power Corp. (KEPCO) about potential federal financing for gigawatt-scale reactors.

In the last 2 months, China has started construction on another 8 nuclear reactors bringing the total to 38. The US meanwhile issues press releases and strongly worded LOIs https://t.co/TJ6BoMghNk pic.twitter.com/S7ETmszBSS

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 5, 2026

This comes as negotiations with Westinghouse’s majority owner, Brookfield Asset Management, drag on slowly, frustrating utilities who still crave cost-overrun insurance the government won’t fully provide. The AP1000 may be America’s “only construction-ready, gigawatt-scale” option that’s licensed and operating domestically, but the Trump team isn’t putting all its eggs in one basket anymore.

Recall our coverage last year regarding the $80 billion deal between Cameco, Brookfield, and the U.S. government. That was the blockbuster: a strategic partnership to flood the market with AP1000s. The deal was sold as the backbone of Trump’s AI-power push, creating tens of thousands of jobs and locking in Western supply chains. Cameco’s dual role as reactor stakeholder and secure uranium/fuel supplier looked like a golden ticket to monopoly-scale profits as the U.S. finally built big again.

Then, in early February we detailed how South Korean officials were already floating the idea of building reactors on U.S. soil as part of broader tariff-reduction talks. Fast-forward to now, and those whispers have turned into active DOE discussions.

All this despite a January 2025 global IP settlement between Westinghouse and KEPCO that was supposed to bar South Korea’s APR-1400 reactor from North America entirely. The settlement was hugely unpopular in Seoul, yet here we are with Korean diplomats meeting the DOE to discuss exactly that. GVH’s ABWR (also NRC-certified) is in the mix too, though the company seems more focused on its BWRX-300 SMR.

The potential negative effects for Westinghouse owners Cameco and Brookfield are brutal. The running assumption was the AP1000 was the only large reactor choice for leading America's charge to the 400 GW goal set by President Trump in 2025. The assumption now appears to be on shaky ground with two other vendors possibly creating some competition.

The desires for fielding reactor designs from companies other than Westinghouse will have to compete with the interests of the Trump administration to see Westinghouse spun off from the control of its Canadian owners. As was discussed in the news surrounding the $80 billion deal last year, should Westinghouse reach certain valuation metrics, the company would IPO into the U.S. markets and the U.S. government would earn a portion of ownership and revenue rights.

The desire to see Westinghouse return to American ownership will certainly wrangle in the months ahead with the idea of diverting potential company revenue towards Japanese and South Korean competition. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 20:15

Bessent Leads Trade Talks With China In Paris Ahead Of Trump-Xi Summit

Ahead of the upcoming Trump-Xi summit, China and US have begun a fresh round of trade talks to set the stage for the main event. 

Trade negotiators led by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and China’s Vice Premier He Lifeng held talks in Paris on Sunday to map out plans for a leaders’ summit later this month. The first day of the talks concluded around 6 pm local time, and the delegations will meet again on Monday, Bloomberg reported. The trade negotiators are expected to review the latest developments in a truce reached in November and discuss topics including the war in Iran as well as investment and purchases.

According to Bloomberg, Bessent, Greer and He have a history of bilateral negotiations. They met in Geneva last May to launch a series of talks that saw follow-on sessions in London, Stockholm, Madrid and Kuala Lumpur. That resulted in a truce under which Washington and Beijing lowered tariffs and export restrictions. Chinese Vice Finance Minister Liao Min and Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang are also at the talks. 

Bessent said on Thursday that his team will continue to deliver results that put America’s farmers, workers and businesses first. China’s commerce ministry said Friday the two sides are set to discuss “trade and economic issues of mutual concern.”

In January, Greer said the two sides could try to focus on reaching an agreement on trade in non-sensitive sectors in talks ahead of Trump’s visit to China.

The outcomes will set the stage for President Donald Trump’s trip to China from March 31 to April 2, the first visit by an American president to Beijing in nearly a decade.

The talks also marks the first time the two sides are meeting since the US Supreme Court ruled Trump didn’t have the authority to impose tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act — a tool he used to threaten levies as high as 145% on China.

The Trump administration has since introduced an across-the-board tariff of 10% and vowed to recreate parts of its tariff wall using other authorities. Greer kicked off the process of imposing tariffs under his agency’s Section 301 authority by initiating an investigation into allegations of industrial overcapacity and forced labor practices for several economies, including China.

Trump’s visit to China will be the first for a U.S. president since he went in his first term in 2017. It will come five months after the two leaders met in the South Korean city of Busan and agreed to a one-year truce in a trade war that temporarily saw tit-for-tat tariffs soar to triple digits before the two sides climbed down. 

Still, trade remains a source of tensions. The commerce ministry on Friday hit back against the Trump administration’s new trade investigation into 16 trading partners, including China. The investigation - which came after a Supreme Court ruling struck down Trump’s sweeping global tariffs that were imposed last year - could pave the way for new tariffs.

Another issue that could be discussed is the Iran war, especially when global anxiety is soaring over oil prices and supplies. Trump said Saturdaythat he hopes China, France, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom and others will send warships to keep the Strait of Hormuz “open and safe.”

Before Sunday’s talks, Gary Ng, a senior economist at French bank Natixis and a research fellow at the Central European Institute of Asian Studies, said the Paris meeting is likely the most important bilateral one before the Xi-Trump summit.

The key issue is “whether China and the U.S. can agree on what is agreed and manage disagreement. Iran is a new factor, but Beijing is more concerned about the flip-flopping of U.S. policies,” he said.

Last week, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said it would be a “big year” for China-U.S. relations. While he did not confirm the state visit, Wang said that “the agenda of high-level exchange is already on the table.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 16:35

Energy Secretary Directs Oil Company To Resume Operations In California, Citing National Security

Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times,

Energy Secretary Chris Wright on March 13 directed the Texas-based oil company Sable Offshore Corp. to restore operations in water off southern California.

Wright invoked the Defense Production Act to restore the company’s Santa Ynez Unit and Pipeline System near Santa Barbara to address supply disruption risks that “have left the region and U.S. military forces dependent on foreign oil,” according to a Department of Energy news release.

“The Trump Administration remains committed to putting all Americans and their energy security first,” Wright said in a statement.

“Unfortunately, some state leaders have not adhered to those same principles, with potentially disastrous consequences not just for their residents, but also our national security.

“Today’s order will strengthen America’s oil supply and restore a pipeline system vital to our national security and defense, ensuring that West Coast military installations have the reliable energy critical to military readiness.”

Officials said Sable Offshore Corp.’s facility can replace nearly 1.5 million barrels of foreign-sourced crude oil each month by producing roughly 50,000 barrels per day, resulting in a 15 percent increase to California’s oil production.

The Energy Department noted that the state used to supply nearly 40 percent of the nation’s oil production, with more than 60 percent of the oil refined in California now coming from overseas, including through the now-closed Strait of Hormuz.

This presents “serious national security threats,” the agency said.

Officials also said that restoring Sable Offshore’s operations will “create hundreds of additional American energy jobs while generating millions in local economic activity.”

The action follows President Donald Trump’s executive order from early last year, which reversed former President Joe Biden’s ban on offshore oil drilling on the West and East coasts.

Biden’s effort to shut down 625 million acres of federal waters from oil production was later struck down by a federal court.

Restoring oil production in Southern California comes weeks after the United States joined Israel in coordinated air strikes on Iran, igniting war in the Middle East. Iran has retaliated by striking oil fields and refineries in its Gulf state neighbors, and by shutting down the critical Strait of Hormuz through which 20 percent of the world’s oil travels.

Oil prices have skyrocketed to just over $98 per barrel by March 15, the highest level since oil climbed in 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom criticized the Trump administration for ordering the restoration of oil drilling off the state’s coast, arguing the Sable Offshore pipeline would only increase total oil production by 0.05 percent and have “no impact on lowering global oil prices.”

“Donald Trump started a war, admitted it would spike gas prices nationwide, and told Americans it was a small price to pay. Now he’s using this crisis of his own making to attempt what he’s wanted to do for years: open California’s coast for his oil industry friends so they can poison our beaches. This wouldn’t lower prices by a cent,” Newsom said in a statement.

“This is an attempt to illegally restart a pipeline whose operators are facing criminal charges and prohibited by multiple court orders from restarting.”

The governor said California would fight the effort in court.

The pipeline was responsible for an oil spill in 2015 in which more than 100,000 gallons of crude oil spilled onshore near Refugio State Beach in Santa Barbara County.

Roughly 21,000 gallons of oil seeped into the Pacific Ocean, and thousands of birds and marine mammals died.

The incident resulted in a $23.3 million settlement and closed 138 square miles of fisheries for multiple weeks.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 16:10

Trump Administration Set To Receive $10 Billion Fee From TikTok U.S. Deal

The Trump administration is poised to receive roughly $10 billion in payments from investors involved in the recently completed transaction to take control of TikTok’s U.S. operations, delivering an unusual financial windfall tied to the government’s role in keeping the popular social-media platform active in the United States.

ByteDance is the Chinese parent of TikTok. John G Mabanglo/EPA/Shutterstock

The payments are part of the arrangement under which a consortium of admin-aligned investors took control of TikTok’s American business from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, according to the Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with the matter. The payments are separate from the capital investors committed to establish a new entity that now operates the platform in the U.S.

Backers of the deal include cloud-computing firm Oracle, private-equity company Silver Lake and Abu Dhabi investor MGX. Those investors and others have already paid the U.S. Treasury about $2.5 billion when the transaction closed in January and are expected to make additional payments until the total reaches about $10 billion, the people said.

President Trump had previously signaled the government expected compensation for facilitating the arrangement. When outlining the framework for the deal in September, he said the United States would receive a “tremendous fee-plus” for its role in allowing the transaction to proceed.

“It hasn’t been fully negotiated, but we’ll get something,” Trump said at the time, arguing that the government’s involvement in securing the agreement justified compensation.

The $10 billion payment would be nearly unprecedented for a government helping arrange a transaction, historians have said. Vice President JD Vance previously said the new TikTok entity running the U.S. operations is valued at about $14 billion in the deal, which some tech analysts have said dramatically undervalues the company. 

As part of the agreement, the U.S. entity has to share profits with ByteDance, which licensed its popular algorithm to the new venture so it could be fully trained on Americans and still owns nearly 20%. -WSJ

Under the terms of the arrangement, ByteDance licensed TikTok’s recommendation algorithm to the new American venture, allowing the platform to continue operating with its core technology. ByteDance retains nearly a 20% ownership stake and will receive a share of the new entity’s profits.

Administration officials have defended the fee, saying it reflects Trump’s role in preserving TikTok’s U.S. operations while negotiating with China and addressing national-security concerns raised by lawmakers.

The transaction stems from legislation requiring TikTok’s U.S. business to reduce ByteDance’s ownership or face a shutdown. Lawmakers from both parties had expressed concern that Chinese control of the platform could expose sensitive data on millions of American users.

The TikTok arrangement is part of a broader pattern in which the administration has sought financial stakes or compensation in dealings involving major corporations. The government has taken a nearly 10% stake in Intel and negotiated an agreement to receive a share of chip sales to China from Nvidia in exchange for export licenses.

The administration has also secured influence over the operations of U.S. Steel through a “golden share” agreement tied to its takeover by Japan’s Nippon Steel.

Together, the moves signal a more direct government role in major corporate transactions - one that, in the case of TikTok, could result in one of the largest payments ever associated with a government-facilitated deal.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 15:45

French Municipal Elections Provide Early Test For Le Pen's National Rally Ahead Of 2027 Presidential Race

Takeaways

• France held the first round of municipal elections on Sunday in nearly 35,000 municipalities, serving as an initial indicator of political momentum ahead of the 2027 presidential election.

• Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) is seeking to expand its limited local presence, with ambitions focused on southern cities such as Perpignan, Marseille, Nice and Toulon.

• Pre-vote polls suggested competitive races in key targets, but full first-round results and projections are emerging gradually after polls closed, with many larger cities expected to head to a March 22 runoff.

• Turnout at 17:00 CET was estimated at 48.9%, up from 2020 but below 2014 levels; final estimates around 56-58% at 20:00 CET.

French voters went to the polls Sunday in the first round of municipal elections, casting ballots for mayors and councilors in a vote widely viewed as an early gauge of support for Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and other parties ahead of the 2027 presidential contest.

PHOTO: AFP

The two-round system means most small municipalities will see winners decided Sunday if they secure over 50% of the vote, while larger cities, where no candidate typically reaches an absolute majority - advance to a March 22 runoff. Parties have until Tuesday evening to negotiate alliances, withdrawals or pacts that will shape final outcomes.

The RN, which leads national polls for 2027 (with Le Pen or Jordan Bardella as potential candidates, pending Le Pen's ongoing EU funds embezzlement appeal), has historically struggled to secure mayoral seats despite strong national performances. The party currently holds only about a dozen cities, with Perpignan (population ~122,000) as its largest stronghold under incumbent Louis Aliot.

Pre-election polling and RN strategy highlighted southern France as a priority area for expansion:

• In Perpignan, Aliot was favored to secure re-election, potentially outright or with a strong first-round lead, based on surveys showing him well ahead of fragmented opposition.

• In Marseille (France's second-largest city), RN candidate Franck Allisio polled closely with incumbent Socialist Mayor Benoît Payan (around 32-35% range in surveys), setting up a potential multi-way runoff if the left fragments (e.g., with France Unbowed's Sébastien Delogu qualifying).

• In Nice (fifth-largest), RN ally Éric Ciotti (from his UDR group) held strong pre-vote polling positions against incumbent Christian Estrosi.

• In Toulon and surrounding areas, RN's Laure Lavalette was seen as competitive in a region where the party has parliamentary dominance.

These targets reflect RN's aim to build grassroots infrastructure - more councilors and mayors for voter mobilization - and test the fraying "Republican Front" (cross-party efforts to block the far right). A symbolic win in a major southern city would mark a breakthrough, though municipal dynamics (local issues like security, public services, drug trafficking and economy) differ from national ones.

On the left, divisions between Socialists and Jean-Luc Mélenchon's France Unbowed persist, while centrists and the center-right face challenges in places like Paris (Socialist Emmanuel Grégoire frontrunning amid Rachida Dati and others) and Le Havre (Édouard Philippe defending his seat).

Turnout figures showed modest engagement: ~19% at midday in some reports, rising to 48.9% at 17:00 CET nationwide (higher than 2020's pandemic-affected 38.77% but down from 2014). Final estimates hovered around 56-58% at 20:00 CET.

No comprehensive first-round results or nationwide projections were available immediately after polls closed (between 18:00 and 20:00 CET depending on the area), as counting begins progressively. Early partial tallies from smaller communes may appear soon, but major-city suspense - and any RN progress - will likely clarify overnight or into Monday, with runoffs deciding many high-profile races.

Le Pen, meanwhile, has been courting old money - though there appears to be some friction. As the Straits Times reports: 

A new circle of advisers with elite pedigrees is asserting influence, adopting what some National Rally officials describe as a “know-it-all” style that grates on the old guard.

Courting high society risks alienating the base who fuelled the party’s rise and that has long been wary of financiers and high-powered networks, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The internal friction comes at a pivotal moment, with the party leading polls roughly a year before the next presidential election, and just as France heads into its two-round municipal vote on March 15 and March 22 – an early test of the party’s electability. 

As Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella navigate the treacherous path to 2027, the National Rally's calculated pivot toward France's corporate and old-money elite - through technocratic advisers and pro-business overtures - represents both its greatest opportunity and its most potent risk. While these bridges could deliver funding, credibility, and a veneer of governability that has long eluded the party, they threaten to erode the populist authenticity that propelled its rise among working-class and disaffected voters. With the municipal elections offering an early, localized litmus test of the RN's mainstreaming efforts, the coming days and weeks will reveal whether Le Pen's "de-demonization" strategy can reconcile these worlds - or whether the old guard's warnings prove prescient, leaving the party close to power yet still unable to seize it

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 14:35

Companies Are Starting To Enforce AI Use. Is That A Good Or Bad Thing?

Via the AIX Files,

Years ago, I was working on the editorial side for what was then a hot new media company, and found myself spending more and more time with Johan, the lead programmer, and his team, asking them a lot of annoying questions as it was all so new – certainly to me. I was standing over Johan’s left shoulder, mesmerized by whatever new video game he was obsessing over that week…when suddenly, out of nowhere, a spreadsheet and a pie chart appeared on his screen.

“Whatcha got there, Johan?” asked Jim, Johan’s boss, peering over a sheaf of print-outs as he sharked past the cubicle.

“Hey, just looking at some numbers,” Johan replied. Johan had hit the “game key” in the nick of time – in those days, every video game had a game key – ALT-G if memory serves - calling up a slight variation of the same spreadsheet and pie chart.

This would never happen today. First, you’re probably not working in a cubicle, and if you are, it’s not the game key you’d hit to give your boss the impression that you’re actually doing productive work…it would be the “AI key.”

“Tech Firms Aren’t Just Encouraging Their Workers to Use AI. They’re Enforcing It.”

This article appeared in the February 24 edition of the Wall Street Journal. It includes the subtitle: From startups to giants, including Meta and Google, companies are factoring AI use into performance reviews and trying to track productivity gains

Across industries, companies are now enforcing AI use through performance reviews, dashboards that track adoption, and explicit mandates that tie it to compensation and promotion. What began in Silicon Valley has rapidly spread to consulting firms, banks, manufacturers, hospitals, and even government agencies.

As you’d expect, Meta, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft were the first to move from encouragement to enforcement. Employees at these firms now see AI usage metrics appear in quarterly reviews. Non-adopters have reported stalled promotions or explicit warnings that “AI fluency” is a core competency (The Wall Street Journal, Feb 2026, reporting on internal policies).

The trend has jumped sectors. PwC requires every consultant to complete an “AI + Human Skillset” curriculum and incorporates usage into evaluations (Business Insider, Feb 5, 2026). Colgate-Palmolive’s “AI evangelist” tracks adoption across global teams. Major banks have begun tying bonuses to the number of AI-assisted analyses completed. Even some hospitals now require doctors and nurses to use AI-assisted diagnostic tools for certain procedures.

Why the shift to mandates?

Executives cite three main drivers: intense competitive pressure to keep pace with rivals, investor demands for visible returns on massive AI investments, and internal data showing that voluntary adoption plateaus at around 30–40% of employees. “We’ve made it clear: AI is no longer optional. Every employee is expected to use it, and it’s now part of how we evaluate performance,” said Accenture CEO Julie Sweet (Fortune, March 2026).

The claimed benefits are real…on paper. Early internal metrics at several companies show 10–25% gains in task speed for routine work. Cross-functional teams using AI report faster ideation and fewer silos. But the drawbacks and unintended consequences are mounting.

While mandatory AI adoption offers productivity benefits, recent research reveals significant drawbacks that undermine organizational health.

• Surveillance and autonomy erosion. By 2025, 70% of large companies monitor employee activity, with 68% of employees opposing AI-powered surveillance and 59% saying digital tracking damages workplace trust. AI monitoring systems now track keystroke patterns, mouse movements, email content, and even biometric data, including stress levels. Amazon employees report that surveillance creates “fear and anxiety, which creates a dangerous work environment”.

• Burnout and intensified demands. AI meant to reduce workload is paradoxically accelerating burnout. Research found that AI leads to fatigue, burnout, and a growing sense that work is harder to step away from as organizational expectations for speed rise. A South Korean study shows AI adoption significantly increases job stress and burnout, while 63% of workers report AI-related fatigue driven by stress and heavy workloads.

• Collapsing trust. Recent research revealed that while AI usage jumped 13% in 2025, worker confidence plummeted 18%, creating a “toxic relationship” as employees receive tools without training or support. Deloitte’s TrustID Index showed trust in company-provided generative AI fell 31% between May and July 2025, with trust in agentic AI systems dropping 89%.

• Retention risks. Without adequate training, 56% of workers receive no recent skills development despite widespread AI adoption, and 85% say they would be more loyal to employers investing in continuing education - top performers become increasingly vulnerable to departure. Analysis warns of an impending “seniority cliff” as companies that stop hiring juniors eliminate the pipeline for developing senior talent with deep institutional knowledge.

Critics argue the enforcement model is shortsighted. 

“You can force usage, but you can’t force wisdom,” said Dr. Ethan Mollick, professor at the Wharton School and author of Co-Intelligence (interview, March 2026). “When AI becomes compulsory, people stop experimenting and start complying — and that’s when the real mistakes happen.” Yet the train has left the station. In boardrooms and earnings calls, executives are increasingly judged on how aggressively they have embedded AI into daily operations.

The message is clear: in 2026, using AI is part of your job. The question companies are only beginning to confront is whether forcing the technology will ultimately make their workforces more cohesive, smarter, and more efficient, or simply more exhausted, distrustful, and replaceable.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 14:00

Anduril Lands $20 Billion Pentagon Contract For "Modern Battlefield" Hardware

Nine days after Axios reported that Palmer Luckey's Anduril was raising around $4 billion at a $60 billion valuation led by a16z and Thrive Capital, Luckey landed a major enterprise contract with the US Army worth up to $20 billion over 10 years. 

Photo: Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Announced on Friday, the deal features a five-year base period with an option to extend for another five years - and includes over 120 separate procurement actions into a single agreement which covers the full range of Anduril's commercial solutions - including hardware, software, infrastructure, data, computer systems, and technical support services.

"The modern battlefield is increasingly defined by software. To maintain our advantage, we must be able to acquire and deploy software capabilities with speed and efficiency," said Gabe Chiulli, chief technology officer at the Department of War’s Office of the Chief Information Officer.

The contract centers around Anduril's proprietary, open-architecture, AI-enabled Lattice platform, which serves as the core for integrating and unifying these capabilities into a mission-ready ecosystem. Recent reporting highlights its role in boosting counter-drone (counter-UAS) interoperability and other emerging needs.

Anduril, founded in 2017 by Luckey (the creator of Oculus VR), has grown rapidly as a defense tech company focused on autonomous systems and AI-driven solutions. Last year, it reportedly generated around $2 billion in revenue. The company has gained traction under the second Trump administration for its emphasis on autonomous military technologies, including drones, fighter jets, and submarines.

In January of last year, it was reported that Anduril will build a weapons megafactory, Arsenal-1, in Columbus, Ohio - which could 'go hot' as soon as July 2026. The five million-square-foot facility will be built near Rickenbacker International Airport.

* * *

Please consider supporting ZeroHedge with the purchase of a hat, t-shirt, or multitool. Thank you.

* * *

What Anduril Makes for the US Government and How It's Used

Anduril specializes in advanced autonomous systems, AI-powered software, and networked defense technologies designed for rapid deployment and scalability - often developed with private R&D funding before government contracts. Its flagship product is the Lattice platform: an open, AI-enabled software system that fuses data from sensors, drones, and other assets to provide real-time command and control (C2), situational awareness, and autonomous decision-making. Lattice integrates third-party and government systems, enabling a "software-defined" approach to warfare where updates happen quickly like commercial tech.

Key products Anduril supplies to the US government (primarily the Department of Defense, including the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Special Operations Command) include:

• Counter-UAS (counter-drone) systems — AI-powered tools to detect, track, and defeat small unmanned aerial threats, used for base protection, force protection, and battlefield defense amid rising drone proliferation (e.g., in contracts with SOCOM and the Marine Corps).
• Autonomous aerial systems — Such as the Ghost and Ghost-X small UAS for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), overwatch, and target identification at the squad level; larger systems like Fury for collaborative combat aircraft prototypes with the Air Force.

• Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) — Including Dive-LD (long-duration) and Dive-XL variants for persistent undersea missions like ISR, mine countermeasures, and anti-submarine warfare; related tech from the Ghost Shark program (developed for allies like Australia) has influenced US Navy selections.

• Surveillance and sensor networks — Semi-portable autonomous towers and ground-based systems for persistent monitoring of borders, infrastructure, or land regions (originally prominent in DHS/CBP border security "virtual wall" deployments).
• Other hardware and munitions — Precision strike systems like Bolt-M for the Marine Corps' Organic Precision Fires-Light program (man-packable loitering munitions for infantry squads); solid rocket motors for missiles; and contributions to programs like robotic combat vehicles or Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS) support.
• Broader infrastructure — Networked command/control software, data processing, and edge computing to enable "connected warfare" across domains (air, land, sea).

These systems are used to modernize US forces by emphasizing attritable (low-cost, replaceable) autonomous assets, software agility, and countering peer threats (e.g., from China or Russia) through faster innovation cycles. Lattice often acts as the "brain," creating extensible networks where drones, sensors, and effectors operate together autonomously or semi-autonomously, reducing human risk and enhancing decision speed on the battlefield. This $20B Army contract builds on prior awards (e.g., counter-UAS deals worth hundreds of millions) and signals deeper integration of Anduril's tech across Army operations.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 13:25

Waiting For Markets To Open

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

One thing that has become incredibly consistent during times of financial stress is all of the “green dots” on Bloomberg terminals on Sunday night. This Sunday night is likely to be no different.

There are plenty of questions being asked (at a presentation on Thursday at a conference in Vegas, I may have, for the first time, faced too many questions!). There will be time to figure out how we got here. What went right, what went according to plan, and what didn’t go so well. But now is not the time for that, at least not for investors and corporate decision makers. Now is the time to plan, adapt, and ensure the best possible outcome for what you are responsible for.

The U.S. attacked military installations on Kharg Island on Friday night after the markets closed. Kharg Island is crucial for Iranian oil exports. It has the deep seaports required to load cargo into tankers that then deliver it. However, no energy infrastructure was hit, only military targets (including mine and missile storage facilities). President Trump then threatened to “wipe out” oil infrastructure on Kharg Island if Iranian forces continued to block the Strait of Hormuz. In addition, on Friday, it was announced that the U.S. was sending more forces to the region. The Japan-based Tripoli Amphibious Ready Group includes the America-class amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli, the San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ships USS New Orleans and USS San Diego, and the embarked 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit. Sending these capabilities to the Persin Gulf will provide CENTCOM with additional options. These forces could be used in maritime interdiction, coastal raids, and help secure targets such as Kharg Island as well as islands in the Strait. This would put additional pressure on Iran. However, the decision to use troops for these missions has not been made just yet. It will also take a week or two for the forces to make it to the region. Please see below for some thoughts on these developments from our Geopolitical Intelligence Group:

“The strike on Kharg Island serves two purposes. First, there is military infrastructure on the island which may well have been involved somehow in enabling Iranian strike operations in the northern Persian Gulf. More importantly, however, it is a signal to the Iranian regime that we are willing, if necessary, to attack the oil infrastructure there. Iran exports around 90% of its oil through the Kharg Island terminal and its loss would be devastating for Iran's economy. The possible future damage or destruction of the facilities there also effectively removes Iranian oil from the global market for a long time and will certainly have an effect on the market. I'm only speculating here but threatening Kharg Island might also be aimed at pressuring China, which is the recipient of most of Iran's oil, to exert some positive influence on the regime.”– Neil Wiley, Former Principal Executive, Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

“The deployment of the MEU provides the U.S. with more options and serves as a deterrent against further Iranian escalation. Last night's strikes and the deployment of the MEU signal to Iran that the U.S. is setting conditions to potentially take the island. However, the administration is clearly trying to prevent further rattling of the oil market by preserving Kharg's oil infrastructure. I think the preferred options all involve scenarios short of boots on the ground anywhere in the region but that may not be sufficient to secure the concessions/conciliation the U.S. wants from Iran. Unfortunately, the Iranian regime still seems committed to outlasting the U.S.'s tolerance for market worry.”– Admiral Kelly Aeschbach

There are ongoing operations (and presumably back-channel negotiations) occurring as you read this. They will not necessarily end on Sunday night, but by Sunday night/Monday morning, we will have a clearer understanding of where things stand.

Today’s quick note builds on Thursday’s SITREP – Iran Continues to Threaten the Strait of Hormuz.

A few things we do “know.”

• Markets are fixated on what is or isn’t transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

  • As far as we “know” the Strait is passable. There is no physical obstruction blocking ships from transiting it. This has been accomplished by some ships, presumably those laden with Iranian oil destined for their customers, such as China.

    • There are some questions about mines and unmanned/manned surface vessels.

    • There are a LOT of questions about potential drone and missile strikes.

    • The insurance backed by the DFC (The U.S. International Development Finance Corp.), has not encouraged ships to transit. I haven’t been able to access the policy itself, but insurance alone is not going to get ships and their crews moving.

• The story is moving beyond oil. Yes, oil gets the most attention, but it is only part of the story.

  • LNG is less fungible than oil and is likely the first product that causes major disruptions in economies. Diesel, jet fuel, and fertilizers aren’t far behind.

  • Downstream products like “plastics” may become a problem for supply chains. It is difficult to predict who or what will be hit (like we have seen in previous supply chain shocks), but with plastics in so many products, we may be in for some negative surprises.

  • Taiwan is dependent on imported LNG and helium (about 50% coming from Qatar), and this is becoming a topic of conversation. When one of the world’s most important countries in terms of making semiconductors enters the conversation, it makes sense to be a little more nervous.

  • Asia (ex-China) and Europe will be hit first. China has significant stockpiles, refining capacity, and has further restricted exports of refined products. “Force Majeure” seems to be the word of the week in Asia outside of China. Europe went from dependence on Russia to dependence on the Middle East. Maybe adopting ProSec™ and harnessing your own resources (even if not “carbon efficient”) isn’t a bad stop gap for the next decade or so.

  • Shutdowns are occurring. When you “shut down” a refinery or chemical processing facility, it is not like flicking a light switch. There is a controlled (and time-consuming process) in both directions. It can take a week or more to resume production at full capacity once the decision to start back up is made. This means that the more facilities that are shutdown, the further we are from “normalizing” quickly.

• “Simple” solutions aren’t helping.

  • Government “messaging” has lost its ability to turn markets on a dime. Last Monday we recovered rapidly from Sunday’s overnight price pressures. Every announcement on the conflict, the steps to reduce oil prices, etc., were met with good responses (lower oil prices, higher stock prices). That “mojo” dried up by the end of the week – hence we need to see “solutions.”

  • If it was “just” about the price of oil, the release of the SPR, evidence that the Saudis are able to use a pipeline to redirect their shipping routes, etc., would all have worked out better than it did for markets coming into the weekend. I do not understand the “waffling” or what seems like “waffling” on suspending at least part of the Jones Act so that the U.S. can supply itself more easily. That sentence seems almost nonsensical, but yes, the Jones Act makes it more difficult for parts of the U.S. to support other parts of the U.S.

  • The longer it goes on, the worse it is for the global economy and markets.

What we don’t know:

• The risk to oil (and LNG, fertilizer, downstream products, and food) shipments. We will be able to make a better assessment on Sunday and again on Monday morning as markets re-open.

• It seems clear that the admin is pushing to “normalize” trade and transit as early as Monday, but we don’t yet know if they will be successful.

• What will the economic issues be? Very difficult to predict, though Asia (ex-China) and Europe will likely be hit harder and faster than the U.S. and China. However, many “American” goods are manufactured in Asia and certainly require components from Asia.

• The timing of “victory.” The definition of “victory” seems to be “evolving.” If a hostile regime that is responsible for over a thousand American deaths over the years can be brought down and the world has a few weeks of higher energy costs and some “manageable” supply chain issues as a result, then the price is probably “worth it.” Academy’s Geopolitical Intelligence Group does not seem concerned about losing, but it is a matter of timing and the cost of that victory in terms of blood and treasure, and that is the question they are all trying to answer.

Bottom Line

Hopefully by Sunday night, or Monday morning, we are watching oil trade down hard and stocks (and bonds) rally. But at this point It remains a hope, not a fact. We will try to evaluate where we stand, how markets should respond, and what is “next” on the table for the U.S. (based on what happens between now and then).

Bonds are not acting as a good hedge – spending fears (globally) and inflation (globally) are pushing on that. I do not see stagflation as a “steady state,” or even that plausible in an energy independent America, but too early to fight that chatter.

We want to write about Private Credit and Software (the two other market-driving forces), but for today, we will stick to this “preparatory note” as we set the stage to provide color and context as we start next week (which is really at 6pm ET Sunday when futures open).

We continue to hope and offer our best wishes to all involved in this conflict, especially to those in service and their families, in these incredibly stressful times.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 12:50

Obama-Appointed Judge Temporarily Blocks DHS From Ending Protected Status For Somali Immigrants

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge on March 13 temporarily blocked the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from ending temporary protected status (TPS) for Somali nationals in the United States.

U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs in Massachusetts (appointed by Barack Obama in 2014) issued the order following a lawsuit filed by four Somali nationals and two nonprofits—African Communities Together and the Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans—arguing that Somalis would face harm if their legal status were revoked.

TPS is a designation that allows individuals from countries affected by armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary events to remain in the United States.

DHS announced earlier this year that TPS for Somalia would end on March 17, saying that the country’s current conditions have improved and no longer warrant protection under the program.

In her ruling on March 13, Burroughs said that Somalis could face substantial consequences if the TPS termination were able to proceed while the legal challenge is still ongoing.

“Plaintiffs aver that if Somalia’s TPS designation is allowed to terminate, over one thousand people will face ‘a myriad of grave risks,’ including detention and deportation, physical violence if removed to Somalia, and forced separation from family members,” the judge said.

“On the other hand, if the court postpones the effective date of a decision committed to the executive branch by Congress, it risks harmful interference with its coordinate branches of government.”

Burroughs granted the plaintiffs an administrative stay and deferred ruling on the TPS termination to give both sides time to file briefs on the plaintiffs’ emergency motion.

“While the stay is in effect, the termination shall be null, void, and of no legal effect,” the judge stated.

She said the DHS must ensure Somali nationals with TPS or those with pending applications retain their rights and protections, including eligibility for work authorization and protection from deportation.

The Legal Defense Fund, one of the organizations representing the plaintiffs, welcomed the judge’s order in a statement.

“Although today’s court order is temporary, and many battles lie ahead within this legal challenge, the plaintiffs and their legal team are heartened by the interim protection today’s order affords all Somali people in the U.S. who have TPS or pending TPS applications,” it stated.

A DHS spokesperson said in a statement to multiple news outlets that the court order is another example of “judicial ​activists trying to prevent President [Donald] Trump from restoring integrity to America’s legal immigration system.”

According to the plaintiffs’ court filing, about 1,082 Somali nationals currently stay in the United States under TPS, while another 1,383 have pending applications.

The Biden administration in 2024 extended TPS for Somali nationals until March 17, 2026, citing “ongoing armed conflict and extraordinary and temporary conditions” within the country.

The DHS said on Jan. 14 that its outgoing Secretary Kristi Noem determined that Somalia no longer meets the conditions required for TPS designation after reviewing the country’s situation.

“Temporary means temporary,” Noem said in a Jan. 13 statement. “Further, allowing Somali nationals to remain temporarily in the United States is contrary to our national interests. We are putting Americans first.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 11:40

"New Era" Begins In Venezuela As U.S. Flag Is Raised At Embassy For First Time In Years

The United States Embassy in Caracas announced on X early Saturday morning that the U.S. flag was raised for the first time in seven years, stating that "a new era has begun for relations between the United States and Venezuela."

"On the morning of March 14, 2019, the American flag was lowered for the last time at the United States Embassy in Caracas. This morning, March 14, 2026, at the same hour, my team and I raised the United States flag, exactly seven years after it was removed," the embassy said, adding, "A new era has begun for relations between the United States and Venezuela. We are staying with Venezuela. - LFD."

En la mañana del 14 de marzo de 2019, la bandera estadounidense fue arriada por última vez en la Embajada de los Estados Unidos en Caracas. Esta mañana, 14 de marzo de 2026, a la misma hora, mi equipo y yo izamos la bandera de los Estados Unidos—exactamente siete años después de… pic.twitter.com/kTrwnnECdb

— Embajada de los EE.UU., Venezuela (@usembassyve) March 14, 2026

The reopening of the American embassy in Caracas comes a little more than three months after former left-wing President Nicolás Maduro was forcibly removed from power by U.S. Delta Force operators in a daring midnight raid. Shortly afterward, President Trump backed Maduro’s successor, Acting President Delcy Rodríguez.

That "new era" the U.S. embassy describes is one in which American companies are investing billions of dollars in the South American country across the energy and mining sectors.

Reuters previously reported that Chevron and Shell were close to the first major new oil production deals in Venezuela.

Last week, Reuters reported that the U.S. expanded sanctions waivers to support investment in electricity infrastructure and the energy industry, including fertilizer, and to allow U.S. companies to negotiate contracts for future projects within the country.

Venezuela's economy has been financially crushed by sanctions as well as by profound economic mismanagement under former socialist leader Maduro. Economists estimate that inflation surged by 400% last year.

Across the Caribbean, on Friday, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel was forced to admit that his administration is in talks with the Trump administration aimed at "finding solutions through dialogue" to longstanding bilateral differences between the two neighboring countries.

The Trump administration is in the process of ridding the Western Hemisphere of socialists and communists who have caused nothing but trouble and have squandered the inheritances of entire nations.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 08:45

Singularity Update: You Have No Idea How Crazy Humanoid Robots Have Gotten

Authored by Peter H. Diamandis via Metatrends,

I just spent the afternoon at Figure headquarters in San Jose with Brett Adcock and David Blundin, and I’m still processing what I saw.

We’re not talking about concept robots. We’re talking about fully autonomous humanoid robots running neural networks end-to-end, doing kitchen work, unloading dishwashers, organizing packages – for hours at a time, with no human intervention.

Today? Figure’s robots are doing 67 consecutive hours of autonomous work. One error in 67 hours. That’s not a demo. That’s a product.

And here’s what most people don’t understand: the gap between “doing one task really well” and “doing every task a human can do” is collapsing at exponential speeds.

Let me explain why…

NOTE: Brett has been a past Faculty Member at my Abundance Summit, where leaders like him share insights years before the mainstream catches on. In-person seats for the 2026 Summit next month are nearly sold out. Learn more and apply.

The Death of C++ and the Rise of the Neural Net

When I first visited Figure, they had several hundred thousand lines of C++ code controlling the robots. Handwritten. Expensive. Brittle.

Every new behavior required engineers to anticipate edge cases, write more code, test it, debug it. It was the software equivalent of teaching a toddler to walk by writing an instruction manual.

In the last year, Figure deleted 109,000 lines of C++ code.

All of it. Gone.

What replaced it? A single neural network that controls the entire robot: hands, arms, torso, legs, feet. Full-body coordination. Real-time planning. Dynamic response to unexpected situations.

This is Helix 2, their latest AI model, and it’s a fundamentally different approach to robotics.

Here’s why this matters: neural nets learn from experience, not instructions.

You don’t code a robot to “grab a cup.” You show it thousands of examples of grasping objects—different shapes, weights, materials—and the neural net extracts the underlying patterns. It learns what “grasping” is at a representational level.

And once it understands grasping? It can generalize to objects it’s never seen before.

Brett put it simply: “If you can teleoperate the robot to do a task, you can train the neural net to learn it.”

That’s the unlock. If the hardware is capable—if the motors, sensors, and joints can physically perform the movement—then the AI can learn it from data.

Compare that to traditional robotics, where you’d need to write thousands of lines of code for every single new task. That approach doesn’t scale. Neural nets do.

The implication: Every robot in the fleet learns from every other robot’s experience. When one Figure robot masters folding laundry, every Figure robot on the planet instantly knows how to fold laundry.

Humans don’t work like this. Robots do.

Hardware Built Around the Brain

Most people think you design the robot first, then figure out the AI.

Figure did the opposite.

Brett’s team looked at the neural network architecture they wanted to run and asked: “What hardware do we need to make this work?”

That’s why Figure 3 exists. It’s not an incremental upgrade. It’s a complete redesign built around Helix.

Here’s what changed from Figure 2 to Figure 3:

• 90% cost reduction in manufacturing

• ~20 pounds lighter (135 lbs total)

• Palm cameras for occluded grasping

• Tactile sensors in every fingertip

• Passive toe joint for better range of motion

• Soft-wrapped body to eliminate pinch points

• Onboard inference compute (no cloud dependency)

And critically: designed for data collection at scale.

Because here’s the thing — if you’re betting on neural nets, you’re betting on data. The more diverse, high-quality data you collect, the better the robot generalizes.

Figure built their robot to be a data-gathering machine. Every sensor, every camera, every interaction feeds back into the training loop.

And they’re not using off-the-shelf parts. They manufacture their own actuators, hands, battery systems, embedded compute—everything.

Why? Because the technology readiness of existing robotics components is too low. If a vendor’s motor fails in the field, you’re stuck waiting for them to fix it. If you built it yourself, you iterate overnight.

This is vertical integration at its finest. And it’s the only way to move fast enough to win.

The Manufacturing Ramp: From Thousands to Millions

Walking through Figure’s Baku (manufacturing facility) was surreal.

Four production lines. Capacity for 50,000 robots per year when fully ramped.

But Brett’s not stopping there. He’s already planning the next facility. Tens of thousands. Then hundreds of thousands. Then millions.

And here’s the kicker: Figure will use its own robots to build more robots.

They’re putting humanoids on the production lines this year. Robots assembling robots. Robots testing robots. Robots packaging robots.

Why? Because if you’re trying to scale to a billion units, you can’t rely on human labor. You need an exponential manufacturing curve, and the only way to get there is recursive self-improvement.

Think about it: every improvement Figure makes to the robot’s dexterity, speed, and reliability makes it better at building the next generation of robots.

It’s a flywheel. And once it starts spinning, it’s nearly impossible to stop.

Brett estimates they could ship a billion robots today if the AI were fully general-purpose. The demand is there. The capital markets (via leasing models) can finance it. The constraint is solving general robotics.

And that’s exactly what they’re working on.

General Robotics: The Only Milestone That Matters

 

Here’s the thing about humanoid robots that most people—and most companies—don’t get:

Teleoperation is not impressive. Open-loop behaviors are not impressive. One-minute demos are not impressive.

What’s impressive is closed-loop, autonomous work in unseen environments over long time horizons.

Let me break that down.

Closed-loop means the robot is continuously sensing its environment and adjusting in real-time. It’s not replaying a pre-programmed sequence. It’s thinking.

Autonomous means no human in the loop. No remote operator in Tennessee. The robot is making decisions on its own.

Unseen environments means you can drop the robot into a random Airbnb or factory floor it’s never visited, and it figures out how to navigate and work there.

Long time horizons means hours, days, weeks of continuous operation. Not 30-second clips stitched together in post-production.

This is what Brett calls “general robotics,” and it’s the only milestone that matters.

If you can’t do this, you don’t have a product. You have a very expensive remote-controlled toy.

Figure’s current benchmark: four to five hours of continuous neural network operation in logistics, kitchen work, and manufacturing tasks.

Their 2026 goal: Drop a robot into an unseen home and have it do useful work for days with minimal human intervention.

Once they hit that, the game is over. Because if the robot can generalize to any home, it can generalize to any environment. Factories. Warehouses. Hospitals. Senior care facilities. Mining operations. Space stations.

The hard part isn’t building a robot that can do one thing well. The hard part is building a robot that can do everything a human can do.

And Figure is closer than anyone else on the planet.

The Timeline: When Will You Have One?

Everyone wants to know: when can I buy a Figure robot for my home?

Brett’s answer: Not yet. And I’m not going to ship slop.

Here’s his roadmap:

2026: Alpha testing in homes. A small number of robots doing long-horizon work (cleaning, organizing, laundry, dishes) in real households. The goal is to measure human interventions – how often does someone need to step in and help?

Right now, industrial deployments see occasional errors. The target for home deployment is orders of magnitude better.

2027-2028: Scaled home pilots. Tens, then hundreds, then thousands of units. Iterative design based on real-world feedback. Safety validation. Privacy validation. Reliability validation.

2028-2029: Mass production and broad availability.

Why so cautious?

Because Brett learned this lesson at Archer (his eVTOL company): you don’t ship safety-critical systems until they’re ready.

A humanoid robot in your home is around your kids, your pets, your elderly parents. If it drops a pot of boiling water, that’s catastrophic. If it steps on your cat, that’s catastrophic. If it gets hacked and streams your private conversations to the internet, that’s catastrophic.

So Figure is taking the time to get it right.

And honestly? I respect the hell out of that.

Because when Figure does ship, they’ll have a decade head start on everyone else in terms of safety track record, reliability data, and customer trust.

That’s a brand moat you can’t buy.

The Business Model: Leasing Humanoids Like Humans

Here’s the beautiful part of Figure’s go-to-market strategy:

They’re leasing robots the same way you lease humans — by the hour.

Think about it. You don’t “buy” an employee. You pay them a salary. You lease their time and capability.

Figure is doing the same thing. You don’t buy a $20,000 robot. You pay ~$300/month to lease one. That’s $10/day. Forty cents an hour.

Compare that to minimum wage ($15-20/hour in most US states). A Figure robot is 50x cheaper and works 24/7 with no breaks, no benefits, no turnover.

And because it’s a lease, Figure retains ownership. They can remotely update the software. They can recall and upgrade units. They can monitor performance and safety in real-time.

It’s the Apple model applied to robotics. And it’s going to print money.

Brett estimates the market for humanoid robots is half of global GDP: roughly $50 trillion annually. Because half of all economic activity is human labor.

And here’s the thing: the demand is already there.

Figure has signed multiple commercial clients. They’re deploying robots into factories, warehouses, and logistics operations this year. These aren’t pilots. These are revenue-generating contracts.

The bottleneck isn’t demand. It’s supply. It’s solving general robotics and scaling manufacturing fast enough to meet the orders.

When that happens? This becomes the largest economy in the world.

What Comes Next: The Age of Abundance

Let me paint the picture of where this is going.

2030: Every household in the developed world has access to a humanoid robot. You lease it for $300/month. It does your laundry, cleans your house, organizes your kitchen, runs errands.

You come home from work and your robot has already meal-prepped dinner based on your biometric data from your wearable. It knows you’re low on magnesium, so it adjusted the recipe.

2035: There are 10 billion humanoid robots on the planet. Five billion in homes. Five billion in commercial and industrial settings.

The cost of goods and services collapses. Why? Because labor is no longer a constraint. Robots mine the materials, manufacture the products, transport them, and deliver them to your door.

You want a custom piece of furniture? A robot designs it, fabricates it, and assembles it in your garage overnight. Cost: materials + energy. Labor: free.

2040: Robots are building robots. Robots are designing robots. Robots are optimizing supply chains, managing logistics, exploring asteroids, constructing orbital habitats.

Humans are freed from drudgery. We do what we’re best at: creating, exploring, connecting, imagining.

This is the age of Abundance.

And it starts in 2026.

Brett Adcock and his team at Figure are building it. Right now. In San Jose.

I’ve seen it. I’ve walked the floors. I’ve watched the robots work.

And I’m telling you: this is real.

The future doesn’t care if you believe in it. It’s coming anyway.

The only question is: are you ready?

To an Abundant future,

Peter

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 08:10

US Navy Surveillance Plane Made Provocative Flight Over Taiwan Strait, Weeks Before Trump-Xi Summit

With the world's attention hyper-focused on fast-paced events in Iran and the effectively shuttered vital oil transit hub, the Hormuz Strait, some significant things were also happening around Taiwan this past week.

The US military confirmed that a P-8A Poseidon anti-submarine patrol aircraft transited the Taiwan Strait on Wednesday, a move that predictably drew Beijing's attention.

US Navy

China said it monitored the US Navy aircraft as it passed through the narrow waterway separating Taiwan from mainland China.

"By operating within the Taiwan Strait in accordance with international law, the United States upholds the navigational rights and freedoms of all nations," the US 7th Fleet said in a statement, adding the transit "demonstrates the United States' commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific."

The latest fly-through comes just weeks before President Donald Trump is scheduled to travel to Beijing for talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping aimed at hammering out a new trade agreement.

But the diplomatic backdrop is already showing strain, with regional media including The Japan Times saying that Beijing has grown irritated with Washington for failing to engage in serious advance planning ahead of the summit.

China is also without doubt angered as its Iranian oil imports are in extreme jeopardy due to Trump's Iran war, and recent bombing of Kharg Island export depot.

Against that backdrop, the Taiwan Strait patrol looks like a familiar piece of strategic signaling - a reminder to East Asian allies that even as Washington pours military resources into the Middle East, it still intends to project power in the Indo-Pacific.

Iranian oil shipments to China continue for a reason. With a Xi-Trump summit approaching, Washington has incentives to avoid steps that would directly pressure Chinese energy imports. Strategic stability with Beijing is clearly a priority right now. https://t.co/703UEnOmIR

— Craig Singleton (@CraigMSingleton) March 14, 2026

And yet if China were to invade Taiwan tomorrow, there's likely not much Washington could do about it at a moment it is concentrating its firepower and resources on regime change in Iran, alongside its Israeli ally.

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 07:35

Unhappy Ending: Chinese National Pleads Guilty To Money Laundering Over Prostitution Scheme

Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A Chinese national has pleaded guilty to laundering more than $2 million from a prostitution enterprise run through spa businesses in New York’s capital region, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York announced on March 11.

The U.S. Department of Justice in Washington on Aug. 7, 2025. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

Xia Ming, 41, of Flushing, New York, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering on March 3. According to his plea agreement, Xia operated a prostitution enterprise from 2019 to 2025.

The enterprise consisted of “illicit massage businesses” disguised as “legitimate spas,” with employees providing “commercial sex services,” according to the court document. The establishment included Central Spa, Body and Skin Spa, Zen Body Works, Sisters Body Works, Relaxation Spa, and Physical Wellness Spa.

“Mr. Xia did not merely run an illegal business, he built a multimillion-dollar enterprise on the commodification of women, treating them as instruments for financial gain while laundering the proceeds to enrich himself through cash and real estate,” John A. Sarcone III, first assistant U.S. attorney for the Northern District of New York, said in a statement on Wednesday.

“Let this guilty plea serve as a clear warning: those who exploit others for personal profit and attempt to hide their gains will be identified, prosecuted, and stripped of their ill-gotten assets.”

Xia advertised his businesses online, transported his employees between locations, and traveled to each spa to collect money, according to the court document.

The spas brought in more than $2 million in proceeds, prosecutors said, which Xia admitted laundering through third parties before using the money to purchase properties.

The court documents list three properties in Albany, New York, two in Flushing, Queens, and one in Endwell, New York.

As part of his plea, Xi agreed to forfeit $198,000 in cash that was seized by law enforcement, along with the six properties—two commercial properties and four residences.

“By turning neighborhood spas into brothels and washing millions in criminal proceeds through our communities, Ming Xia treated the Capital Region as his personal cash register,” Erin Keegan, special agent in charge of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), said in a statement on Wednesday.

“His scheme exploited vulnerable workers, poisoned legitimate commerce, and robbed residents of the basic expectation that local businesses are safe and lawful.

“This guilty plea sends a clear message: HSI and our invaluable Homeland Security Task Force partners will strip criminals of their profits, seize their assets, and shut down any operation that tries to hide behind a respectable storefront.”

Xia, who was indicted in February 2025, is scheduled to be sentenced on July 1, according to the Attorney’s office. Xia faces up to 20 years in prison, up to three years of supervised release, and a $500,000 maximum fine.

The Epoch Times contacted Xia’s lawyer for comments, but didn’t receive a response by publication time.

In a separate case, four Chinese nationals living in Flushing were indicted in late January for allegedly running brothels disguised as massage spas located in Erie, Pennsylvania. The defendants were indicted on charges of conspiracy, human trafficking, immigration violations, and money laundering.

*  *  * TAKE MATTERS INTO YOUR OWN HANDS

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/15/2026 - 07:00