Tony Blair Calls For UK To Get Closer To Trump And Ease Climate Change Targets

Authored by Rachel Roberts via The Epoch Times,

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the Labour Party to three election victories, said the government should repair its relationship with the United States rather than look to rejoin the European Union.

Blair, who remains a deeply divisive figure within the party, published an essay on Tuesday amid a crisis engulfing Prime Minister Keir Starmer, with a leadership challenge widely expected by September.

The influential former premier, who took the UK into the Iraq War in 2003 based on what an official UK inquiry later concluded was faulty intelligence, wrote that Starmer should not have prevented Washington from using British bases in the United States and Israel’s ongoing war with Iran.

“The initial request was simply for the use of our military bases for the refuelling of American planes. I understand the reasons for refusal but it’s not the best way to treat our ally,” Blair wrote, arguing this decision had made the UK’s partnership with the United States “weaker.”

America’s ‘Staunchest Supporter’

He wrote: “I know how hard it is to be an ally of the USA. We were its staunchest supporter post 9/11. We went through Afghanistan and Iraq together. But it mattered deeply to America and so it mattered to us also. America remains the indispensable core of Britain’s security alliance. But staying with it means even when it is difficult or unpopular.”

Blair argued for the government to smooth relations with U.S. President Donald Trump, who has been critical of Starmer over immigration and free speech issues as well as his decision not to back military action in Iran.

Polling in the UK suggests that while Starmer is personally unpopular as PM, most Brits back his decision not to involve the country in the war.

Blair also criticized cuts to international aid, which he said had weakened Britain’s influence on the global stage, including for the purpose of EU negotiations.

Known for his staunchly pro-European Union views, Blair said that Labour must resist reversing or weakening Brexit to please those within the party who view it as an economic disaster.

Likely Labour leadership contender Wes Streeting has made clear his desire to see the UK back in the EU “one day,” while another possible contender, Andy Burnham, has made similar musings in the past.

Blair was ​the party’s longest-serving premier, holding office between 1997 and 2007, and transforming the party from one with a traditional working-class voter base through his centrist “New Labour” ideological vision.

Starmer is currently being circled by party rivals after Labour’s disastrous results at the recent local elections, largely at the hands of Nigel Farage’s populist Reform UK, but also losing votes to the left-wing Green Party.

The former premier, who published the 5,600-word essay for his influential think tank, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, said the government should dial down its net zero commitment, intended to combat climate change.

Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaks to small business owners during a visit to Home Cafe and Kitchen in London, on May 18, 2026 Yui Mok/Pool Photo via AP

‘Cheap’ Over ‘Clean’ Energy

Blair backed the UK making the most of its resources to address the ongoing energy crisis, writing: “We must prioritise cheaper energy and electrification over net zero and use what is left of our North Sea oil and gas resources.

“At a minimum, the government should try to limit the effect of the changes made and, as we have argued consistently, remove those parts of the net-zero agenda which prioritise clean energy over cheaper energy; and from now on make sure the actions match the words on growth.”

Blair urged Labour, which won the last national election by a landslide in July 2024, to concentrate on policy to improve its standings in the opinion polls, as Starmer battles some of the lowest approval ratings historically of any leader.

“The government’s principal problem isn’t Keir’s personality. Or a ​failure to communicate ‘our achievements’. Or a need to assert more strongly Labour’s ’values’,” Blair wrote.

“Whether there is a ‌leadership change ⁠or not is irrelevant if it doesn’t start with a policy debate.”

Blair, who swept to power with his own landslide in 1997 following 18 years of Conservative rule, appeared to take aim at both Streeting and Burnham in his polemic.

Burnham, the current Mayor of Greater Manchester, who needs to win an upcoming by-election in order to return to national level politics before he can mount a challenge, is regarded as being on the so-called “soft left” of the party.

Streeting, who recently quit as health secretary, is considered further to the right. Streeting has been described by others as a Blairite but rejects the label.

Polling shows the party members prefer Burnham, a more experienced politician, who served as a junior minister in Blair’s government, and that he would defeat Starmer in a head-to-head leadership contest, whereas the prime minister would win in a one-on-one with Streeting.

Blair argued against both Streeting and Burnham’s mooted solutions to Britain’s various problems—either an attempt to rejoin the EU or a shift to the left.

The Labour mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, on a morning run in Manchester, England, on May 18, 2026. Jon Super/AP Photo

De-Brexit ‘Not the Answer’

“It is one thing when in opposition to indulge this perennial delusion that when we lose seats to the ​right the country is really signalling it wants Labour to move ​left; it ⁠is dangerous to do it in government,” he wrote.

“Just as Brexit was never the answer to Britain’s challenges back in 2016, reversing it isn’t the answer to the country’s far worse ⁠situation in ​2026.”

Blair wrote that the government should instead try to forge “a structured, formal relationship” with the EU—akin to Starmer’s stated ambitions for closer ties with the bloc while stopping short of an attempt to rejoin.

Blair suggested it was a mistake for Labour to remove Starmer as leader, writing: “The Labour party is playing with fire; or, more accurately with its future, and that of the country.”

“Trying to force the prime minister out, before we know what policy direction we’re bringing in, is not a serious way of conducting ourselves.”

Blair said there are two “epochal changes” happening in the world today—one geopolitical, with the rise of China and India, and the other technological, through artificial intelligence, with Britain “not prepared for either.”

‘The Radical Centre’

He said that these two shifts “require radical change in policy, system of government and politics,” and that in his view, the best political position from which this could be achieved is what he terms “the Radical Centre.”

“[Any renewal of Britain] requires a fundamental reset,” he wrote. “Labour’s only ​electorally viable strategy is to become the Radical Centre.”

Blair said there is “no point in debating“ whether the AI revolution ”is a good or bad thing.”

“Just know it is a ‘thing’. In fact, it is ‘the thing’. It will displace jobs, though creating new ones, but no one yet knows the full consequence,” he wrote.

Under a subsection entitled, “The New World Order,” Blair said he understood Europe’s anxiety over Trump’s “America First” policies, but countered that the U.S. president has identified “the principal threats—in the Arctic from Russia; longer term, globally, from China; and in the Middle East from Iran—no differently from how Europe sees the world.”

“President Trump has demanded increases in NATO spending not dissolution of the alliance,” Blair added.

He said that Starmer had been “absolutely right” to visit China in January because “we need a functioning relationship with the other superpower.”

The wide-ranging essay sparked much commentary and debate within the UK media, with criticism coming mainly from the left faction of the Labour Party. Starmer has made no public response so far.

Burnham, who will contest the Makerfield by-election in the northwest of England on June 18, told the Observer that Blair had misunderstood why voters had abandoned the political center in the first place.

Burnham said Blair’s essay “doesn’t mention inequality once” and argued that 40 years of widening inequality and declining living standards for many people were the driving reasons for voters turning away from the two main parties.

“If you don’t get how that’s driving politics now, if you are not rooting your analysis in the fact that people are unable to live and that things that were taken for granted are no longer affordable, then you are not understanding what’s going on,” Burnham said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 09:15

'He's Having A Stroke': Jill Biden Admits Joe's Debate Disaster Scared Her 'To Death'

Opportunistically timed to boost sales of her soon-to-be released memoir, Jill Biden has come clean on her reaction to Joe Biden's catastrophic performance in his June 2024 debate with Donald Trump. Though she publicly lauded his performance at the time, now she admits she thought her husband was having a stroke. 

Immediately after the debate, Jill took a stage with Joe to tell him how well he had performed, in a manner that some at the time compared to a teacher praising a kindergartner:  "Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question, you knew all the facts."  

Former First Lady Jill Biden previously said she thought then-President Biden did a “great job” after his 2024 debate. She now tells CBS News that she thought he was “having a stroke.” https://t.co/JVINZzMu0h pic.twitter.com/O2e7mgsSIo

— Akayla Gardner (@gardnerakayla) May 27, 2026

Now, however, Jill Biden says he did so terribly that she thought he was having a major medical episode that was affecting his brain. “I don’t know what happened,” Jill Biden told CBS News Sunday Morning. “As I watched it, I thought, ‘Oh, my God, he’s having a stroke.’ And it scared me to death.”

Timing is everything: Next week, the former first lady will release her memoir, "View From The East Wing." Publisher Simon & Shuster's promotional copy for the $32 book quotes an unnamed novelist "who once wrote, 'There are stories one must tell, and years when one must tell them.' Jill Biden’s time to discuss her four years in the White House is now." 

Trump just released a brutal 95 second ad of Joe Biden's debate lowlights: pic.twitter.com/enusIKHhwN

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) June 28, 2024

Though Jill Biden may be offering some overdue candor about the debate that led to a tumultuous summer for the Democratic Party -- culminating in Biden withdrawing from the race after the Democratic primaries had already run their course -- she's not done putting Americans' credulity to the test. In particular, anyone who observed any number of painfully awkward Joe Biden press conferences and interviews in 2024 is going to have a hard time buying Jill Biden's ending of this sentence in her CBS interview:  "I wasn't horrified, I was frightened, because I had never, ever seen Joe like that, before or since."  

Jill Biden said she feared Joe Biden was “having a stroke” during his widely criticised 2024 debate against Trump.

In an interview with CBS News, she said she had “never seen Joe like that before or since” and was “frightened” by his performance.pic.twitter.com/e2jgY0nRST

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 27, 2026

Even some Biden-administration insiders are scoffing at Jill Biden's new-found honesty. “Unfortunately, when you wait this long to tell your own story in your own words, it’s extremely hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube," Michael LaRosa, Jill Biden's communication director in 2021, told the New York Post. "She owed it to herself to be candid and transparent in the moment or the days after.” Another said her memoir should be called, "View From the East Wing, Blindfold On," adding, "Find it in the fiction aisle of your local bookstore."

As Americans staggered away from their televisions, the Biden White House tried to attribute the fiasco to jet lag and a common cold. “Why did we push out he had a cold if she thought he had a stroke?” an anonymous former Biden administration team member rhetorically asked the Post. 

Though the debate sealed Biden's political doom, it risked being a strategic disaster for then-incumbent Trump. Recall that, even as he led the polls, Trump aggressively pushed for an extraordinarily-timed debate to take place even before the Democratic convention officially made Biden the nominee. By prematurely thrusting Biden's crumbling mental capacity into the spotlight, Trump opened the door for the Democrats to substitute a more formidable foe. Fortunately for Trump, the leftists completely squandered the opportunity, railroading profoundly uncharismatic Kamala Harris into the presidential-nominee slot, and the rest is history. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 08:50

Americans' Savings-Rate Slumps In April As Fed's Favorite Inflation Signal Soars

After accelerating significantly in March, The Fed's favorite inflation indicator - Core PCE (a measure of price changes in consumer goods and services that excludes volatile food and energy costs) - rose 0.2% MoM in April (less than expected +0.3% MoM), but pulled up the YoY measure to +3.3% (as expected) - its highest since Nov 2023.

The rise in Services costs (headlined by Housing & Utilities, Financial Services, and Healthcare) dominated the increase in Core PCE YoY...

The headline PCE jumped 0.4% MoM (+0.5% MoM exp) dragging the YoY up to +3.8% - the hottest read since May 2023

The impact of the war is evident in crude prices and the PCE's energy index, but arguably, this is as bad as it gets in terms of inflation...

Higher prices were met with higher spending (+0.5% MoM notional) but flat income growth (0.0% MoM)...

With the growth in spending versus de-growth in incomes more evident below...

Sending the savings rate plunging to its lowest since June 2022...

With the savings rate barely above record lows, it seems that Americans are digging into their savings to keep up with inflation. No wonder sentiment is so low...

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 08:41

"It Wasn't Copied": Ferrari CEO Defends First EV After Design Backlash

Ferrari shares trading in Milan have not recovered since plunging the most in nearly eight months after the company unveiled its first EV sports car earlier this week, breaking with eight decades of petrol-powered tradition. The debut drew immense criticism, with one Wall Street analyst calling the new EV a "mix between a Honda Accord EV and Tesla."

By Thursday, Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna was on damage-control duty at an event in Modena, where he defended the design of the battery-powered, four-door, five-seat Luce, which costs a staggering €550,000 ($638,660), according to Bloomberg.

"The Ferrari Luce has nothing to do with electric cars you have seen from other players," Vigna said earlier today. "You have to see it and drive it to understand that it wasn't copied — not the interiors, not the exterior, not the performance."

Pope Leo was shown Ferrari’s first fully $640,000 electric car in Rome on Tuesday. The pope sat inside the Ferrari Luce and was presented with the vehicle’s steering wheel by Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna. pic.twitter.com/mIxAniwULm

— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 27, 2026

Vigna said, "Look at the people writing to us, the people placing orders. Some are existing clients and others are new."

"Maybe some people understood that Ferrari was going only electric. We will continue to make all types of powertrains," he added.

Vigna noted, "The final answer comes from clients."

Customers have already shunned Ferrari hybrid models, as a recent report by Goldman analyst Christian Frenes noted that these hybrid sports cars are depreciating far faster than their petrol-powered counterparts, suggesting buyers still prefer V-8 and V-12 combustion engines.

Earlier this week, AIR Capital analyst Pierre-Olivier Essig said the Luce looks like a "mix between a Honda Accord EV and a Tesla."

Frenes noted today that Luce's negative reaction was "overblown" ...  

He explained:

We view the strong market reaction to the Luce reveal as overblown and of less investment significance than media commentary suggest. While the Luce is Ferrari's most controversial product launch of late, we see limited near-term risk to estimates given that both investor and management expectations were already conservative ahead of the event. On long-term product strategy concerns, we equally view recent public commentary as an overreaction: management has explicitly reaffirmed its commitment to powertrain flexibility and made clear that the Luce's design language does not define future models.

Ferrari Luce vs. EU Peers: Specification and Pricing Benchmarking

For a fraction of the cost and with better all-around performance, the Tesla Model S Plaid outperforms the Luce.

Ferrari has been benchmarking the Model S Plaid.

Still valid imo, since Ferrari has been benchmarking this car for a couple of years: https://t.co/Td5h6F1Xez

You’d think they would surpass it. pic.twitter.com/trLuWBWX3C

— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) May 27, 2026

If car enthusiasts don't care about performance but want a similar design to the Luce, there is the Nissan Leaf.

The Luce risks joining the Mondial in Ferrari's hall of shame.

Professional subscribers can read the full Ferrari note here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 08:20

My morning train WFH reads:

• Land Appreciates. Homes Depreciate. The structure (house) is a depreciating asset: without continuous investment and updates, its value declines over time, even after renovations. The land is the appreciating component: long-term price gains in real estate are primarily driven by rising land values, not by the building itself. Jonathan Miller’s clean reminder of the real-estate math nobody likes: the dirt accrues, the structure depreciates. Useful framing for anyone confused about why the renovation pencils. (Housing Notes)

• There’s Never Been a Better Time to Study Computer Science: The Atlantic pushing back on the “CS is dead” panic — the freshman entering today is graduating into a labor market that still pays for the rare combination of fluency and judgment. Less doom than your timeline thinks. (The Atlantic) see also Tech CEOs are apparently suffering from AI psychosis: TechCrunch on the tech CEO class working themselves into an AI-induced lather — Altman, Musk, Zuck, et al, sounding less like operators and more like a Hieronymus Bosch panel. Funny until you remember whose capital they’re burning. (TechCrunch)

• SpaceX-stasy: This IPO is a trainwreck: Once you arrive at the financials you start to realize what the language is overcompensating for: awful numbers. The company generated $4.7 billion in Q1 2026, up only 15% from the year before (very low for an “AI company”). It also lost $4.3 billion, up 700% from the year before. That means the company is spending roughly twice as much as it makes (and on pace to explode those losses even more), while growing its topline six times slower than Nvidia. The manic SpaceX listing — investor euphoria, narrative compression, and the precise moment “optionality” became the only thing being underwritten. (Prof G Media)

• How Barnes & Noble Became Private Equity’s Most Radical Retail Experiment: A Bloomberg feature on the surprise comeback of Barnes & Noble under Elliott — local manager autonomy, smaller stores, books actually displayed face-out. The rare PE story with a happy ending. (Bloomberg)

• A Century of Stock Market Winners—and Why Most Stocks Failed to Deliver: The compound buy-and-hold return to the entire U.S. stock market over more than 100 years was 1,504,057%. Yet the median individual stock lost money. (Wealth Management)

• ICE Raids Did Lasting Damage to American Businesses: In one corner of Charlotte, foot traffic and sales remain depressed six months after deportation raids. Bloomberg on the Charlotte data — what enforcement actions actually did to local payrolls, vacancies, and small-business closures. The macro story behind the cable news clips. (Businessweek)

• The One Big Reason YouTube Will Never Replace Stephen Colbert: On YouTube, a new generation of hosts is updating the talk show genre for the way we watch now: on our schedule, on our phones and in short clips. It starts with podcasting, which is now being increasingly consumed as a video product. It extends to, say, “The Adam Friedland Show,” whose host’s charm and neurosis would feel familiar to fans of Dick Cavett or a young Woody Allen. It also includes more experimental formats, such as “Subway Takes,” on which the host, Kareem Rahma, engages his guest in a series of quick-witted, subterranean agree/disagree, point/counterpoints, all shot on an active New York City subway train. (New York Times)

• 6 things a neurologist does to keep his brain healthy: Brain atrophy tends to begin in your 30s and 40s, but certain lifestyle changes can slow or even reverse shrinkage. WaPo service journalism — a neurologist’s six habits for keeping his own brain working. The list isn’t novel but the bylined credibility makes it stick. (Washington Post)

• As Trump Politicizes Justice Dept., Prosecutors Struggle With Grand Juries: The NYT on grand juries quietly refusing to return indictments in politically charged DOJ cases. The most important slow-motion check happening right now. (New York Times)

• The universe may be lopsided — new research: The Conversation walks through fresh data suggesting cosmic isotropy may not hold. If it survives replication, every cosmology textbook from the last fifty years needs a chapter rewrite. (The Conversation)

Video of the day: The Real Reason We Left the Gold Standard

Be sure to check out our special Masters in Business this week, Remembering Jonathan Clements with Bill Bernstein and Jason Zweig. The two recall Clements’ impact on the investor community; they discuss his posthumous book, “Money and Me.”

Global sales of combustion engine cars peaked in 2017

Source: Our World In Data

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Spare Me Another Pride Month!

Authored by Dave Summers via DailySceptic.org,

Are you aware? Really aware? Or are you like me, struggling to keep up with the blizzard of social and political awareness events that bring a rich texture to our lives?

Do you worry that you can’t recall if Black History Month – that time when I approach my BAME colleagues with even more reverence than usual – is in June or July? Are you confused as to whether Pride Month and LGBT History Month are the same or distinct entities? Have you kept pace with the latest incarnation of their life-affirming, multicoloured flag? Does your wife frown at you because Menstrual Hygiene Day has passed you by? Have you forgotten World Alzheimer’s Day again?

Then worry no more – help is finally at hand, in the shape of the Awareness Calendar, your one-stop source of those important dates that can be handily pinned to your fridge door.

The calendar, stuffed tighter than a drag queen’s corset, is a golden treasury of opportunities to remind yourself of those burning issues that might otherwise have easily slipped away in the busy working week.

Are you that loser who still carries your butty box around in a holed plaggy Co-op bag rather than one of the several ‘Bags For Life’ you have crammed into a kitchen cupboard? Plastic Bag Free Day on July 3rd has got you covered. Still hyperventilating about CFCs’ part in the destruction of the planet? Then the International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer on September 16th is your thing. Or perhaps you are racked with guilt by your mindless mowing down of a squirrel on your journey into work? If so, Animal Road Accident Awareness Day on 10th October ought to assuage (or heighten) your remorse. Perhaps you’re tormented by the knowledge that you once slurped through a single-use straw in 2015? World Refill Day on 16th June has you in its sights. Or maybe you’ve let yourself down again with incorrect pronoun etiquette? International Pronouns Day on 21st October is waiting to correct you.

Schools, colleges and, I suspect, many large institutions love this endless parade of themed months, days and observances, each demanding veneration and performative allyship. Black History Month is huge in my school, with each department being tasked to create displays that look to “celebrate the achievements, history and contributions of Black people”. In my leafy shire, largely untouched by the ‘diversity’ of urban centres (unless you include the burgeoning numbers of Hong Kong Chinese), this is a task that feels entirely performative and strange. Consequently, English display boards are adorned with the stately Maya Angelou who gazes down imperiously on the bemused in every classroom. The occasional working-class writer might have more resonance to some of our kids, but good luck finding an image of a D.H. Lawrence or Shelagh Delaney.

The English department can, however, ace Pride Month – there’s never been a shortage of gay wordsmiths throughout history. But pity the poor maths students who will discover that a single omnipresent image of Alan Turing does an awful lot of heavy lifting in their discipline.

I console myself with the thought that all this virtuous bluster is altruistic in origin, shining a light on overlooked issues.

But in reality, it’s catnip for middle managers desperate for something – anything – to put on their annual appraisal under ‘Diversity and Inclusion’.

Consequently, in its smothering ubiquity, it ends up diluting anything good into mere background noise.

When every day is somebody’s awareness day, none stand out.

A quiz to finish: how many of the following awareness days are real and how many the product of my fevered imagination?

• Winnie the Pooh Day

• World Hand Hygiene Day

• Gypsy Roma and Traveller History Month

• International Kissing Day

• World Town Planning Day

• International Talk Like a Pirate Day

Answer: They’re all real. Haharrrr, me hearties!

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 02:00

FBI Arrests CIA Official With $40 Million in Gold Bars, $2 Million In Cash Stashed in His Home

In what may be the most bizarre story of the week, if not all of 2026, the NYTimes reports that a senior CIA official was arrested last week after investigators found hundreds of gold bars worth over $40 million stashed in his Virginia residence, a non-fiat fortune that he apparently brought home from work, according to court papers.

The CIA official, David Rush, is being held in jail while he awaits a detention hearing in the coming days on charges of stealing public money by filling out fraudulent time sheets. But, as the NYT admits, the charging documents filed in Alexandria, Va., still leave a lot unanswered about his recent conduct.

The only formal charge lodged against Rush is that he inflated his academic credentials and obtained military leave pay worth tens of thousands of dollars. The authorities say he falsely claimed to be a member of the Navy Reserve when he was discharged.

In a 2009 application for a government position for which he was subsequently hired, Rush allegedly lied about obtaining a bachelor's degree from Clemson University and a master's degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, according to the affidavit. The investigation revealed that Rush never attended or obtained a degree from either institution, according to the affidavit. 

The court papers describe Rush as a “former senior executive service-level employee at a United States government agency.” According to NYT sources, he until very recently held a senior position at the CIA.

In a joint statement, the CIA and FBI said the arrest occurred on May 19, after the agency alerted the bureau.

“After a C.I.A. internal investigation identified potential violations of the law, C.I.A. Director John Ratcliffe referred the information to the F.B.I. for a law enforcement investigation,” the statement said.

From last November to March, the court papers say, Rush asked for, and received, “a significant quantity of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for work-related expenses.”

When the CIA conducted a review of where the gold and currency were stashed, the agency was “unable to locate the gold bars or significant amounts of the foreign currency,” according to court papers.

On May 18, FBI agents searched Rush’s home and found “approximately 303 gold bars, each of which weighed approximately one kilogram,” according to an affidavit. Based on the price of gold, the affidavit said, the estimated value of the gold exceeded $40 million. Investigators also seized nearly three dozen luxury watches, many of them Rolexes.

The affidavit also claims that Rush lied about his military credentials while applying to enter the senior executive service level ranks and committed "timecard fraud" regarding military leave. He allegedly claimed 744 hours of military leave, resulting in $77,000 in compensation, since being honorably discharged from the Navy in 2015, according to the affidavit.

The biggest question of all remains unanswered: the court papers do not indicate why Rush appears to have kept so much gold, and $2 million in U.S. currency, not to mention 35 Rolexes in his home, or what work project would have required him to amass such wealth.

Below is the full charging affidavit from the criminal case (1:2026mj00177 USA vs Rush, Virginia Eastern Court).

David Rush Affidavit by Zerohedge

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 23:54

The Beautiful Multipolar New World Order

Authored by Iain Davis via Off-Guardian.org,

BRICS-based multipolarity will save us from The Technocratic Dark State by making the rollout of an oppressive global surveillance state much better.

This will be the result of “improving global governance.”

At least, that is according to the BRICS Outcome Document published by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs after the latest riveting meeting of BRICS foreign ministers.

Centralised global dictatorship will be a happier, fluffier kind of new world order tyranny under the BRICS’ multipolar model because it will be “more just, equitable, agile, effective, efficient, responsive, representative, legitimate, democratic and accountable.” Fantastic news, doubtless welcomed by those Hrvoje Morić refers to as the “Multipolaristas.”

Though the BRICS’ document reads like the worst kind of globalese dross imaginable, it is important to remember that the BRICS are offering us the promise of a “beautiful multi-polar world order defined by win-win cooperation.” Presumably, this is because humanity must have some sort of centralised, oligarch-led global dictatorship enslaving it for any of us to have a chance to “win.”

By all means, feel free to wade through the BRICS’ turgid propaganda (link above), but hopefully I’ve saved you the time.

The quotes I’m about to share really were collectively published by the BRICS foreign ministers—I haven’t made it up, though you may wish I had.

The BRICS are going to strengthen “multipolarity” by upholding the “Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations (UN) in their entirety.” The entire purpose the UN Charter is to centralise global political authority, primarily in the hands of the UN Security Council, over all nation states.

The brainchild of oligarchs, the UN is a public-private partnership where national governments are reduced to mere enabling partners whose task it is to enable multinational corporations to get whatever they want. Apparently, the imminent multipolar global dictatorship will be nicer when the BRICS “play a greater role” in telling everyone else what to do through the UN Security Council. Sounds enticing, I have to say.

The BRICS are fully committed to global technocracy—sorry, I mean sustainable development—but are a bit worried that “current global challenges are complex and interlinked” and that this globally interlinked complexity might “impede economic growth and sustainable development.”

The solution to this is, of course, to recognise the “contemporary realities of the multipolar world” and push ahead with more “equitable global governance.” This must be true because that’s exactly what the World Economic Forum wants, and who could argue with the WEF? Certainly not the BRICS’ foreign ministers, that’s for sure.

The BRICS ministers are also fretting about “peace and security.” Seeing as Iran is a BRICS member state that was just attacked by the US and Israeli governments for no immediately apparent reason, you might think that this war crime would be resoundingly condemned by our multipolar BRICS saviours. However, as recently reported by Edward Slavsquat, internal BRICS politics meant actually speaking out against warmongering tyrants was a bit tricky. So the BRICS delegates decided not to mention Iran by name to avoid any embarrassment.

Instead, the foreign ministers “expressed deep concern on the recent developments in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region” and noted the “differing views among some members.”

Though there was no specific mention of the attack on Iran—for diplomatic reasons you understand—Cuba, Syria, Sudan, and Lebanon all got honourable mentions. The BRICS foreign ministers emphasised the need for “peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue,” “UN peacekeeping missions,” and “post-conflict reconstruction and development”—like in Gaza, for example.

With regard to genocide in Gaza, collectively, the BRICS ministers expressed their “grave concern.” Though they stressed that some BRICS member states “had reservation” about Palestinian statehood.

Fiercely opposing genocide slightly, The BRICS politicians “called for the implementation of the relevant UNGA and UNSC Resolutions.” This, they observed, includes UNSC 2803 which welcomes and endorses both the 29th September 2025 “Comprehensive Plan” for peace in Gaza and the subsequent 13th October “Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity.” This is the UN resolutions the Trump administration is using to turn Gaza’s child graveyard into a deregulated Special Economic Zone playground for multinationals and billionaires.

Supporting the technocratic “post-conflict reconstruction” of Gaza, the BRICS foreign ministers ultimately settled on trotting out the same platitudes that every other government—other than Israeli government—trots out. BRICS ministers advocated a return to a “State of Palestine within the internationally recognized 1967 borders.” Well, kind of, at any rate.

Yeah! That’s sticking it to ‘em.

BRICS foreign ministers meeting 2026. Source: https://diplomacybeyond.com/brics-foreign-ministers-meeting-2026/

The UN’s dystopian “Pact for the Future,” including its “Global Digital Compact and the Declaration of Future Generations,” shouldn’t just ruin the lives of people living in developed nations.

No, no, according to the BRICS, populations in “Emerging Markets and Developing Countries (EMDCs), as well as Least Developed Countries (LDCs), especially from Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean” must also be walled up inside the digital Panopticon. What’s the point of global governance unless everyone is controlled by it?

This, of course, is why the transnational capitalist oligarch crowd invented multipolarity in the first place. But I digress.

Like the US, Israeli, and UK governments—and just like all the other EU, Five Eyes, and Commonwealth member states—the BRICS governments are equally agreed that “Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)” are the key drivers for “socio-economic growth.”

Therefore, the global “digital transformation” must surge ahead. Again, the WEF and its partners—such as the UN—must be cock-a-hoop that the BRICS enthusiastically endorse the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR).

The BRICS are offering beautiful multipolarity, not the awful authoritarian technological control grid currently being served up by ugly Western governments and their corporate sponsors. So the snappy Schwabian acronym “4IR” is not in the BRICS’ lexicon. The 4IR is called “Industry 4.0,” lest there be any confusion.

In BRICS globalese, the entirely separate and distinct “Industry 4.0” digital transformation necessitates establishing a vibrant technology company “start-up ecosystem.” This is also completely different from the Silicon Valley oligarchs’ Dark Enlightenment inspired accelerationism because reasons.

You can tell it’s not the same because “digital public infrastructure, leveraging emerging technologies” will “aim at accelerating innovation-led economic growth,” you see.

It’s important to understand that BRICS-led multipolarity has arrived to save us all from the insidious schemes of the transnational capitalist oligarchs. It is not simply the next logical and long-planned step on the path toward the envisaged “new world order.” And anyway, even if it is, many Multipolaristas say that the Rhodes/Milner “new world order” model doesn’t mean anything, other than serving as a general term for global governance. . . . Oh, and that global governance is necessary.

Multipolarity is regional not global.

The multipolar world order is about delivering fairness and healthy regional competition, promoting peace, and stimulating innovation and better international trade relations. Multipolarity is good, and anyone who says otherwise is merely shilling for “Western Empire” and is probably a conspiracy theorist who thinks they’re all in it together.

The BRICS governments say the “ICT environment” they are building will be “interoperable.” The multipolar Industry 4.0 digital transformation will be “more inclusive, accessible, sustainable and interoperable” than the 4IR digital gulag on offer from the Western Empire. This is because, say the BRICS foreign ministers, their digital Panopticon will be based upon “globally interoperable common rules and standards.”

Globally interoperable rules and standards? Interoperable with what?

IBM—reportedly the largest industrial research organisation in the world—stresses why “interoperability,” especially between ICT systems, matters:

Interoperability is made possible by using common standards that define how data is formatted and exchanged between systems. [. . .] Interoperability is important because it optimizes data sharing between separate information systems, which helps prevent data silos, [. . .] so disconnected datasets can be easily accessed to achieve a common objective.

“Globally interoperable” means global, not regional.

You can call it “multipolar” if you want, but exerting global governance over that unified, interoperable digital system, to achieve “common objectives,” is the centralised control of a global system. In a world where everything, from the information we share, to the management of global supply chains and the control of the international financial and monetary system is digital and interoperable, all “multipolarity” suggests is global dictatorship.

Multipolarity is a sales gimmick. The Multipolaristas have created a fake dialectic, seemingly on behalf of transnational capitalist oligarchs. They suggest that one model of global dictatorship is better than another. They’re inviting people the world over to embrace their own enslavement within a global, digital surveillance state. They are seriously arguing that multipolar dictatorship is preferable. But then, the Multipolaristas would say that I’m just a Western imperialist analysing everything from my western perspective, guilty of binary thinking and failing to see the potential beauty of multipolar win-win cooperation.

Highlighting where I have gone so awry, the BRICS foreign ministers add that “strengthening digital financial security” is essential for better multipolar global governance. This can be achieved by enhancing “cross-border cooperation among customs authorities, financial intelligence units, law enforcement agencies, tax authorities and supervisory bodies.” To this end, the BRICS governments are ready to step up and take “leadership of the IMF and the WB [World Bank].”

Luckily, the multipolar world order will “enhance the legitimacy of the World Bank Group, as a better, bigger, and more effective development finance institution.” So that’s an end to global debt trap diplomacy, apart from expanding it and centralising control over it even further.

The BRICS governments are particularly looking forward to deepening their “cooperation in global health initiatives, including within the World Health Organization (WHO).” The BRICS seem quite keen on the “WHO Pandemic Agreement” and hope the “BRICS R&D Vaccine Center” can contribute effectively to the next global public-private pandemic.

It comes as a relief, then, that all of this oppressive, global technocratic tyranny will “ensure the promotion and protection of democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.” This is because, unlike Western governments that peddle exactly the same propagandist crap, the multipolar BRICS-led new world order places “humanity and people at the centre.” This leaves humanity—notably led by the Multipolaristas at the moment—the freedom to big-up the multipolar new world order. Or, as the BRICS foreign ministers put it, “people to people contacts” can amplify “the voice for greater BRICS representation in global governance.”

There are a few people around the world who aren’t yet entirely convinced that the beautiful multipolar world order is that attractive. Indeed, some go so far as to publicly question why we need any kind of oligarch-led world order at all. Fear not! The BRICS governments can stamp that nonsense out.

Worried that “promoting BRICS cooperation” might face some opposition, the BRICS ministers say that “the challenges stemming from and within the digital realm” can be overcome. By adopting “a comprehensive, balanced, and objective approach” to information “security,” and by deploying “globally interoperable common rules and standards,” BRICS governments are confident they can tackle the scourge of whatever they determine to be “misinformation, hate-speech, [and] disinformation.”

Phew, better global censorship at last! Perhaps the beautiful multipolar new world order is alluring after all.

What do you reckon?

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 23:25

North Korea Achieves Its First AI-Guided Missiles In Test Overseen By Kim

In a development that South Korea, Japan and the United States are likely to find deeply alarming, North Korea launched AI-guided cruise missiles in a test that analysts have described as the first of its kind for the sanctioned country.

The launch and test was overseen by Kim Jong-un early this week, and it was presented as part of his new military modernization and preparedness initiative which has been greatly hyped by Pyongyang over the last several years.

KCNA/EPA/Shutterstock

North Korea's goal is "to build the most modern and powerful artillery force which no one can match," Kim said according to state Korea Central News Agency (KCNA).

The army, he warned, should possess enough "destructive power" to make survival "impossible" for any enemy it strikes, the KCNA report continued.

The tactical missile utilizes "AI terminal guidance function" - which allows artificial intelligence to guide the missile during its final stage, until it reaches its target.

Pyongyang has never before acknowledged using AI in its missile systems, which Monday's successful test marks a milestone. Kim further hailed that tests were a "clear signal of upgrading of our military force" and expressed "great satisfaction" at the exercises.

Additionally, "The tests in particular confirmed the combat readiness of cruise missiles that will be deployed at artillery units near the border with ​South Korea equipped with precision navigation and AI-guided control that can strike targets at 100 km (62 miles)," Kim ​said.

According to some analysis of the launch featured by Reuters:

"It's about using ​AI when recognising the ​target and guiding the ⁠missile," said Yang Uk, a military expert at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies. The North has previously said it had used AI technology in its drones.

Hong ​Min at the Korea Institute for National Unification said the North's claim likely ​involves an upgraded ⁠version of an existing digital guidance system combined with automatic target recognition technology, although the degree of its sophistication is impossible to verify from the report.

Pyongyang has also of late been touting modernization of the military's nuclear forces. It continues to expand its nuclear and missile capabilities, including plans to deploy new long-range artillery systems near the border with South Korea.

via The Telegraph

Meanwhile, South Korea's government has said it remains committed to its policy of peaceful coexistence on the Korean Peninsula and will review the implications of the changes. But it has frequently hosted US military drills, which the north naturally sees as a serious threat to its national security.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 23:00

One Man's Manifesto - In Defense Of 250

Authored by John Gallo,

In hindsight I should have known better, but sometimes a conversation that seems harmless at the time lingers long after it is over. Last November I was in San Sebastian in Northern Spain enjoying food and a beer at a local bar. As I was finishing my food, I overheard a young American woman a few feet from me speaking with her friend explaining, "You know he's going to run again. He's definitely running again." It was clear she was talking about Donald Trump, and for better or worse, my cerveza overtook my discretion, and I said to her, "I'm sorry, but he's not running again, he can't do it." She appeared stunned, and told me that Trump was going to change the Constitution and was absolutely running again. After some back and forth, she asked whether I wore a "red hat or a blue hat." She didn't like my answer, and then proceeded to tell me that I was a "horrible person with horrible values." I wasn't angry, but there was not much I could do; I simply finished my beer, said "muchisimas gracias," and left the bar. I was amused at the time, because from my perspective, the woman had been coopted by a distorted set of facts. But seven months out, that conversation is a perfect example of our current political divide, and forced me to ask how we arrived at this point.

I enjoyed the benefit of a first-rate education - a prep school in Brooklyn, a private college in Pennsylvania, and law school in our nation's capital. For the majority of my personal and professional life, I have walked hallways and corridors with liberals and progressives. Many of my friends - both growing up and into adulthood - were Democrats, and I have listened to their ideas and worldview most of my life. My first vote for president was in 1976, and I responded as many college students at that time and voted for Jimmy Carter. I was taken by what I perceived to be Carter's fundamental decency as a person, but looking back, I had little understanding of either conservatism or the ideological differences between the two parties. More importantly, I had no historical understanding of the failures of progressivism. And while I always intellectually understood the arguments from my Democratic friends, there was always a part of me that found liberalism difficult to embrace - too many ideas just didn't make sense. I stopped reading The New York Times more than 25 years ago, a talking point that causes great consternation among my remaining friends on the left to this day. Over the past ten years, I have been called a traitor to my class, confused, and God knows how many other things. I have been excommunicated from a golf foursome for my political views, removed from guest lists, and lost more than one friend along the way. But I am at peace with my worldview, and I offer no apology for being willing to express my thoughts and ideas.

I have voted Republican for the majority of my adult life, never voted for Obama or Clinton, and voted for Trump in 2020 and 2024. I abstained from the presidential vote in 2016 because I believed that Trump's personality was too abrasive and stories about his past too disconcerting to think that he was an appropriate individual to occupy the White House. What happened in 2017 and beyond, however, was both alarming and eye-opening. I agreed with many of the policies that Trump tried to implement during his first term, and then watched as Democrats embraced a newfound craziness on an almost daily basis. It started with wearing pink hats and condoning violent protests on the streets of DC on Inauguration Day. Madonna shared her fantasy about burning down the White House, and Johnny Depp speculated about killing a president. Kathy Griffin displayed a severed head of a Donald Trump figure, and an actor dressed as Trump in a Central Park Shakespeare production was stabbed in the back. But that was just a preamble. What we have seen in the ensuing decade is the descent of Democrats from a political party that did not like Trump to a party that has sought to destroy all vestiges of conservatism - originally through protest and intimidation and now through violence as a political strategy. Bill Ayres would be proud. At first, we were exposed to behavior that most on the right thought was simply irrational. Progressives started to impose their agenda by removing names such as Abraham Lincoln and George Washington from schools, and removing statues of Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt from their rightful places in New York City. Conservatives of all stripes were being doxed, censored, and fired from their employment for not agreeing with leftist precepts. I was criticized routinely for questioning leftist ideology, but understood my universe well enough never to discuss politics in my workplace, save for a few exceptions. One was condemned if you dared to question BLM, or worse, critiqued Critical Race Theory or the anti-racist literature from Robin D'Angelo and Ibrahim X. Kendi. One thought carefully before saying systemic racism was an overhyped metaphor, and if you did not think Hamilton was the greatest play produced in the history of mankind, it was proof that you were an outright bigot. Under Biden, the left fully embraced the idea that "equity" was a fundamental principle to which everyone needed to conform. The new intellectuals discovered new pronouns, The 1619 Project was offered as legitimate history, and we were admonished that gender differences in athletics were simply an artificial construct. Intolerance became the order of the day.

What is happening now, and why this is such a compelling moment in our history, is that there are two convergent forces working together to rewrite our country's future. One force comes from traditional Democrats, and the second from far-left radicals and the Progressive/Socialist wing of the Democratic Party. They are unified in interest because they are jointly motivated by their hatred of Donald Trump - a hate that sadly has evolved into an unhinged pathology never witnessed in American history. That hatred has erupted into a universe of irrational fears and false assumptions by the left, and is now offered as rationalization for acts of retribution on conservatives throughout the country. The hatred of all things related to Trump has engulfed the thought processes of both traditional Democrats and their far-left allies, and both are committed to employing all means necessary to achieve their respective goals. Traditional Democrats want power, and their objective is to reshape our governing institutions so as to cement changes into our institutions that will be permanent. They have made clear that they want to end the Senate filibuster and add the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico as states. And to control the legislative process, the Democrats will seek to increase the number of justices on the Supreme Court to thirteen. Once that is accomplished, there may be a movement to abolish the Electoral College, although this would be a multi-year process requiring changes to the Constitution. Democrats rely on one strategic maneuver - if they can't win by traditional rules, they will just change the rules, while simultaneously making disingenuous protestations about the status quo as a threat to democracy. If successful, the Democrats will create a new power structure with one-party rule that they will never surrender.

The far-left, however, want more. They don't want political power as much as they want to replace capitalism with socialism, and they harbor no pretense. We see socialist mayors in Seattle and New York City, and complete ineptitude in mayor's offices in Chicago and Los Angeles. We have socialists in Congress, billionaires have become evil, and "tax the rich" has become a talking point among progressives throughout the country. Antisemitism under the label "Free Palestine" is now in vogue. Democrats are heading towards a full embrace of Mamdani's campaign theme of socialism under the guise of affordability, while ignoring the fact that billionaires contribute a greater percentage of revenue to state and local governments than their numbers suggest, and dismissing the fact that increasing taxes on the wealthy does not reduce the wealth gap. Neither the child-like Mr. Mamdani nor the historically illiterate Ms. Cortez have a serious understanding of economics, but they do understand the power of rhetoric and social media. In the process, they have convinced a generation of young Americans that the capitalist system is flawed and must be changed. Unfortunately, socialists are unfamiliar with the work of economist Thomas Sowell, who has described The Communist Manifesto as a masterpiece of propaganda with "absolutely no contact with actual economic reality."

What has changed, however, is that Democrats and their radical allies understand that they cannot obtain their objectives through traditional democratic means, so instead have chosen intimidation and violence as their new weapons of choice. Democrats for a decade have called Trump supporters and conservatives deplorable, fascists, and Nazis, and all too often have employed a Hitler analogy, which is both obscene on its face and ignorant of history. Politicians on the left have encouraged supporters to get in the face of Republicans, and the last president gave a speech in Philadelphia before the entire nation in which he essentially called half the country racist. Earlier this year, Susan Rice pledged retribution against Republicans who supported Trump if Democrats take back power, and asserted that all such individuals would be held accountable for their behavior. "It will not end well" for Republican-leaning corporations was one of her threats. In April, Hakeem Jeffries declared that "we are on a state of maximum war" when discussing the ongoing redistricting battles. James Carville assured followers that Democrats will launch investigations into President Trump and his family if the party retakes Congress in the midterms, warning that the political fallout will feel like getting "punched in the mouth by Mike Tyson." Senator Booker has expressed his desire to punch President Trump in the face, and Nancy Pelosi famously commented, "people are going to do what they're going to do" when questioned about violence during the George Floyd riots.

But to this day, the left ignores that when you dehumanize and threaten a group of individuals, you leave the offended group no option but to take note. Worse, by constantly invoking the Hitler analogy, you convince unstable individuals that it is rational to commit acts of violence upon those whom you are calling Hitler. Logic dictates that it is appropriate to use any means necessary to kill someone as bad as Hitler, but when you embrace that rationale as part of your political rhetoric, mentally unbalanced people feel justified in taking matters into their own hands. Charlie Kirk would be alive today but for this logic.

Far-left activists have become the modern-day equivalent of the Jacobins of the French Revolution. This is not hyperbole; the language of revolution resonates throughout history, and repeats itself today. From Robespierre and the French Revolution: "The revolutionary government owes to the good citizen all the protection of the nation; it owes nothing to the Enemies of the People but death." Mao Zedong viewed violence as a way to destroy the Nationalists and build a new socialist society, and noted as far back as 1927 that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Che Guevara embraced hatred as a core element of his power struggle, and argued that to vanquish a "brutal enemy," revolutionaries must transform into violent killing machines. And from today, we have the Democratic social media influencer Hasan Piker, who offers strikingly similar rhetoric. Piker recently wrote: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable." Piker, an Antifa supporter who has more influence today within the Democratic Party than John Fetterman, has also said that America "deserved 9/11." Most ominous perhaps is the warning from Elon Musk, speaking about Democrats in the aftermath of the most recent attempt on Donald Trump's life: "If they're willing to die to assassinate, imagine what they will do if they gain political power."

In the past few years, we have seen three efforts to assassinate President Trump, one assassination attempt on a Supreme Court justice, and the assassination of a conservative thought leader. Following the George Floyd riots, 25 people were killed and over two billion dollars in property damage incurred nationwide in the name of a better world. There were violent protests with no legitimate justification in Ferguson, Missouri, following the death of a young male who had tried to rob a liquor store, and protestors in New York on behalf of Black Lives Matter expressed their desire to "fry cops like bacon." During 2025, there were approximately 238 assaults on ICE officers in the country including 68 assaults committed by individuals driving vehicles. St. John's church near the White House was set on fire during the George Floyd riots, and Tesla dealerships were burned in 2025 as a way of protesting budgetary constraints proposed by Elon Musk. There has been violence from the right - witness the 2025 murders of two Minnesota state representatives and the chaos of January 6. But the overall picture is not one of equivalence, and those who insist that it is are either poorly informed or willfully ignorant. Journalists such as Nick Shirley, who did nothing more than expose financial corruption in Minnesota, have received multiple death threats. None of this comes from the conservative echo chamber - it is purely a Democratic playbook run amuck. And to top things off, we have seen an appalling uptick in overt antisemitism in the aftermath of the October 7 attacks in Israel - according to the Anti-Defamation League over 7,300 reported incidents of antisemitism in 2024 and more than 6,700 in 2025. And while there are certainly antisemites on the far right who would engage in antisemitic violence if they had the opportunity, the current iteration of the anti-Israeli movement appears to come largely from the far-left progressives and the Free Palestine movement born on college campuses. Consider that in 2024 the Democratic Party debated whether a Jewish governor from Pennsylvania could be its nominee for vice president, and that the Democratic Party of Maine has chosen as its candidate for U.S. Senate a man who wore a Nazi tattoo on his chest. As a parallel, consider that Republicans in Florida are in the process of electing a black male as governor. The far left embraces its ideology more than it loves history, and is unconcerned that earlier historical tragedies could repeat themselves. Recent polling data make clear that members of Gen Z see political violence as a rational means by which to achieve their political ends, which in a normal world, would cause great concern across the political spectrum.

As we embrace our nation's 250th birthday, we need to remember that we are a good country, not a perfect one. We were born of a revolution, and protest is baked into our national DNA; protest is both legitimate and consistent with our history. However, what is happening now is not normal - what we are witnessing is a violence born of an irrational hatred of one individual that in some ways rivals the socialist uprisings of the early twentieth century or tracks the divisions that led to the Civil War. Donald Trump may have many personality traits that have stretched the bounds of presidential behavior, but none of what the left has done has either healed the nation or enhanced the cause of traditional Democrats. The traditional Democrats have remained silent in the face of the ongoing violence, and have formed a toxic relationship with the lunatic wing of their party that neither side is willing to break.

Perhaps the woman in San Sebastian was correct, and I am a horrible person with horrible values. I will let others decide that, but I am at peace with my beliefs. I have exhausted my attempts to convince people to change their minds, but I cannot unsee threats that to me are all too apparent. I cannot unsee individuals who openly mocked the death of Charlie Kirk, nor can I unsee individuals who expressed remorse that the Trump assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was not successful. That is too much to ask. I have believed for more than a decade that the far left is more dangerous than the far right. I know that we as conservatives have issues to address, but I am convinced that the behavior from the far left unchecked will lead to continued dissolution of our national fabric and further Balkanization of our nation. But this is exactly what the far left wants, and we as a constructive opposition must stand up against those who would dissolve our national identity. We have two legitimate weapons at our disposal - our voices and the ballot box. We must use both, and we cannot surrender our country to the untender mercies of the Jacobins. They are at the gate, or as Ronald Reagan once noted, "if fascism comes to America, it will be in the name of liberalism." We have been warned.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 22:35

Israeli Army Seizing 'Strategic Positions' Deep Into Lebanon, North Of Litani River

Within a day after unleashing a devastating flurry of Monday airstrikes on Lebanon, Israeli ground forces have aggressively expanded the theater of operations inside Lebanon, violating a status quo by sending IDF ground troops across the "Yellow Line" which was established at the inception of the ceasefire.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Tuesday that Israel is "intensifying operations" in Lebanon by taking strategic positions deeper into the country with a wave of offensives north of the Litani River.

IDF has systematically destroyed bridges across south Lebanon, via Reuters.

Officially, Tel Aviv is justifying the deep territorial grab as a "defensive" counter-measure against persistent Hezbollah drone strikes on occupation forces as well as communities in northern Israel.

"We are intensifying our operations in Lebanon. The IDF is operating with significant forces on the ground and taking control of strategically dominant positions. We are reinforcing the security buffer zone in order to protect the communities of northern Israel," Netanyahu has said in a fresh video released by his office.

"At the same time, we are carrying out a major national effort to advance creative and innovative solutions against explosive drones," he added, following a meeting with Defense Minister Israel Katz and IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir in Tel Aviv.

The ground offensive comes as hawkish Israeli cabinet members openly lobby for a substantial escalation of the war and permanent occupations deeper into sovereign Lebanese territory.

The high-ranking command structure apparently operates under the assumption that it can successfully force a 12 km buffer zone between Hezbollah and the Blue Line border (the 75-mile demarcation line established by the United Nations in June 2000).

Local Israeli media outlets are already questioning the strategic utility of the entire operation, pointing out that Hezbollah’s tactical drone fleet is widely believed to possess an operational range in excess of 30 km.

Hezbollah has been having success especially with fiber-optic cable drones which are not to susceptible to jamming, hacking, or other electronic warfare interception measures.

All of these developments mean that the Washington-mediated ceasefire is effectively dead, and as Hezbollah's asymmetric warfare is likely to ramp up in response.

via Bicom

The last couple days have also seen whole communities in Shia strongholds of south Beirut flee suburbs which are likely to be targeted in new IDF airstrikes - as has been the pattern of the last several years.

These developments could negatively impact US-Iran efforts to hammer out a final peace deal, which has been grinding on slowly, though it appears that potential return to full-scale regional war is unlikely, for now.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 22:10

Federal Government Floats NDAs For Employees In Leak Crackdown

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump's administration on May 26 floated a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for federal employees who have access to what the government described as sensitive information.

The logo of the Office of Personnel Management in Washington on Feb. 13, 2025. Tierney L. Cross/Reuters

The proposed NDA says that employees may access "non-public, confidential, or proprietary information," such as personal health information and details relating to agency operations.

It states that employees understand they are required to follow laws and regulations governing confidential information and that they agree to "take all reasonable precautions to safeguard and protect Confidential Government Information from unauthorized disclosure."

Violating the agreement could lead to repercussions, including termination and civil or criminal penalties, according to the draft.

The Office of Personnel Management developed the NDA form in the wake of leaks, including the leak of information about the U.S. raid on Venezuela prior to American forces carrying it out, the office said in a notice set to be published on May 27.

"Federal employees do not have discretion to disclose Confidential Government Information outside of narrow circumstances prescribed by relevant authorities and implemented by procedures which may differ by agency," the notice states. "Unauthorized disclosures of Confidential Government Information disrupt agency operations and erode public trust."

In recent months, there have also been disclosures of personal information of about 4,500 employees of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, one of the agencies charged with enforcing immigration law, as well as leaks of planned immigration enforcement operations.

"In much of the private sector, employees handling sensitive business or customer information are routinely required to sign confidentiality agreements, and the federal government should not be held to a lower standard," Scott Kupor, director of the Office of Personnel Management, said in a statement.

"Americans should be able to trust that their personal data and sensitive government information are being handled responsibly. This proposal reinforces accountability across the federal workforce while helping agencies better protect against unauthorized disclosures."

The draft says that nothing in the agreement prohibits or restricts an employee from becoming a whistleblower or from making public details about possible wrongdoing.

If a disclosure violates the law, the employing agency may report the breach to law enforcement officials, per the draft.

It states that the agency "shall be entitled to seek equitable relief ... from any court of competent jurisdiction" and that the employee "assigns to the United States all royalties, remunerations, and emoluments that have resulted, will result, or may result from any disclosure, publication, or revelation of Government Information in violation of the terms of this Agreement."

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 21:45

Federal Agents Seize 500 Pounds Of Cocaine From Oil Tanker

U.S. authorities say they stopped a major cocaine shipment allegedly tied to a Mexican cartel after an oil tanker traveling from Ecuador was intercepted near Southern California, according to KTLA5. 

Roughly 227 kilograms — about 500 pounds — of cocaine were discovered aboard the Aquatravesia, a Liberian-flagged tanker owned by a Greek company, according to federal prosecutors. Investigators believe the drugs were meant to be transferred to cartel operatives waiting off the Mexican coast.

KTLA writes that the vessel had sailed from Ecuador earlier this month and was en route to the United States when investigators received intelligence that cocaine was being smuggled onboard.

Federal prosecutors charged Ceasar Tubay Gelacio Jr., a 43-year-old crew member from the Philippines, with importing a controlled substance. Authorities allege he obtained the narcotics in Ecuador and intended to move them during the ship’s voyage north.

According to court records, crew members eventually found hidden packages in the tanker’s garbage compartment. After questioning workers aboard the ship, the captain allegedly concluded Gelacio was connected to the drugs and secured the packages in another locked area.

Investigators say the captain was warned that armed boats linked to a Mexican cartel would attempt to meet the tanker roughly 80 nautical miles off Mexico during the night of May 14 and the following morning. Authorities also said backup crews were expected to intercept the vessel in Mexican waters if the original transfer failed.

The captain later reported hearing radio communications he believed came from cartel members trying to reach the ship before a potential boarding attempt.

U.S. officials directed the tanker to continue toward the Los Angeles-Long Beach port area, where federal agents boarded the vessel after it anchored offshore and seized the cocaine.

Gelacio was arrested Thursday and appeared in federal court the following day. Prosecutors said he faces at least 10 years in prison if convicted, with a possible maximum sentence of life.

Officials emphasized the case remains an allegation, and Gelacio is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 21:20

Texas AG Sues Discord For Deceiving Parents, Endangering Children

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit against communications app Discord, alleging that the platform allows child predators to exploit children while falsely claiming child safety to parents.

“Discord presents itself to the world as a platform built on community, connection, and safety. It is not,” the lawsuit, filed on May 22 in the District Court of Collin County, Texas, said.

“Behind the safety pages and transparency pages, Discord built and maintains one of the internet’s most efficient hunting grounds for manipulation, grooming, and predatory behavior towards children. Discord did so knowingly, deliberately, and profitably.”

The design choices implemented on the communications platform make it easy for bad actors to locate vulnerable users, build trust quickly, and operate away from public view, the complaint said.

According to a Discord webpage, safety is at the “core of everything” the company does.

In another post, the company claims safety considerations are “fully integrated into our design process.” Discord also says that it has a “zero-tolerance policy” against individuals who engage in sexual grooming or exploitation of minors.

Such promises made to consumers, parents, and regulators were false, the lawsuit alleges.

Discord makes safety an “opt-in rather than default,” the complaint states.

“It chose to leave private servers invisible. It chose to staff its most critical safety function with unpaid volunteers. It chose to expire violations after 90 days. It chose to bury the block button. Discord chose profits and growth over the safety of children,” it states.

A 45-year-old can create a Discord account as a 13-year-old, and the platform has no reliable mechanism to detect or prevent such actions, according to the lawsuit.

While Discord allows channels to be age-restricted if a moderator wishes, this protection depends entirely on the self-reported birthdate entered when a user creates an account. The platform basically created an age-verification system “that a child can defeat in seconds,” the complaint said.

The lawsuit highlights multiple cases of minors being harmed by predators on Discord, including a 13-year-old boy who committed suicide in 2022 after being targeted by the 764 extremist network on the platform.

In another case, a 15-year-old boy committed suicide after he was groomed by a predator on Discord and Roblox to send sexually explicit images and videos, according to the lawsuit.

The complaint noted that Discord has made it into the “Dirty Dozen” list set up by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation for five straight years.

“Sexual abusers return to Discord again and again, thanks to this company’s reputation for lax rule enforcement and dangerous design,” the center said. “Even registered sex offenders have been charged for targeting kids on Discord.”

The lawsuit asks the court to declare Discord’s actions as “unlawful, deceptive, misleading, and unfair” and order the company to implement age verification requirements.

In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, a Discord spokesperson said the lawsuit’s “characterization of Discord does not reflect the platform we have built or the investments we have made in user safety.”

According to the spokesperson, unlike social media platforms, Discord does not have any algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, or public “likes” that push content to mass audiences.

“Our safety systems combine advanced technology and human-led investigations, alongside user reports to help identify accounts or spaces engaged in harmful activity, including sharing exploitative and child sexual abuse materials,” the spokesperson said.

“We provide teen users and their parents and guardians with important privacy and safety tools, including Teen Safety Assist and our Family Center. We look forward to collaborating with policymakers in working toward a safer online experience for all users on Discord and across the internet.”

Age Assurance Rollout

On Feb. 9, Discord announced it planned to roll out teen safety features globally to ensure a “safer and more inclusive experience” for users aged 13 and older.

This involves an “age assurance process” in which users must submit identification or agree to use facial age estimation technology. However, only in a minority of cases will age assurance be required, according to Discord.

As part of the update, users will have “teen-appropriate experience, with updated communication settings, restricted access to age-gated spaces, and content filtering that preserves the privacy and meaningful connections that define Discord,” the company said.

The updates were scheduled to take effect in March. But on Feb. 24, Discord said that the rollout had been extended to the second half of this year.

Meanwhile, Discord was one of the companies targeted by a recent letter from Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson, who asked the platform to comply with the Take It Down Act by May 19.

The Act requires platforms to set up a process that enables individuals, including children, to request the removal of intimate photos or videos shared without their consent. Platforms must make it easy for victims to submit such removal requests.

The FTC warned that it would “vigorously” enforce the Act, with each violation potentially resulting in civil penalties of $53,088.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 20:55

Hamas Confirms Death Of Its Top Military Commander In IDF Gaza Strike

Israel's military has just taken out a high-value target, with the confirmed death of the commander of Hamas's military wing, Mohammed Odeh.

He was targeted in a a strike on the Gaza Strip Tuesday, in an operation which injured dozens more bystanders, given a residential building in a very busy market area of Gaza City was obliterated.

via MSN

However, the IDF and Shin Bet security service sought to explain that Odeh used the civilian residential buildings as a hideout, but that his movements starting months ago were being tracked to that location.

By Wednesday, Hamas belatedly confirmed Odeh's death, along with his wife and two of his children.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a joint statement with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the "commander of the armed wing of the Hamas terrorist organization in Gaza was eliminated yesterday and sent to meet his associates in the depths of hell."

"In the Prime Minister's name and in my own, congratulations to the IDF and the Shin Bet on the brilliant execution," Katz said.

"We committed ourselves to eliminating everyone who led the October 7 massacre, and that is what we will do: They are all marked for death, wherever they may be," the defense chief added.

According to more emerging details of the strike:

Tuesday's strike hit the upper three floors of the al-Kayali building in the center of Gaza City, where streets were busy with shoppers ahead of the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha.

Rescue teams rushed to the scene of the strikes but struggled to reach the upper floors because of the scale of the damage and congestion in the area.

Despite a Gaza ceasefire technically having long been in place, sporadic Israeli strikes and interventions in Gaza have continued for the last many months.

This past weekend saw IDF military actions in the enclave ramp up. For example on Sunday Reuters had confirmed new significant strikes on Gaza just as Washington unveiled that a tentative peace deal with Iran has been "largely negotiated" and is at the goal line:

Israeli strikes killed at least ‌three Palestinians in Gaza on Sunday, including two members of the Hamas-run police force, health officials said, in violence that underscored the fragility of a U.S.-brokered ceasefire.

Medics said an Israeli airstrike killed one person and wounded two others in the ​Maghazi refugee camp in central Gaza.

This Gaza escalation has been met with accusations that Israel could be trying to sabotage what it may see as a 'bad deal' with Tehran. 

Israeli strike a building in western Gaza City in an assassination targeting a Mohammed Odeh, described as Hamas’ new military wing leader. He also served as the fifth Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip. pic.twitter.com/qNyL8j0YJx

— Eretz Israel (@EretzIsrael) May 27, 2026

Iran has long been trying to link a final peace framework to end to the war to the conflicts in Lebanon and Gaza - but Israel and Washington have consistently rejected this.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 20:30

Viruses For Dummies

Authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via The Epoch Times,

Over this past week, we've been subjected to a flurry of pandemic warnings. It's like the disease of the day: Bird flu, novavirus, m-pox, hantavirus, slap rash (did you miss that one?), and Ebola. A former director of the CDC just warned that this Ebola outbreak could become a pandemic.

Members of the Congo Scouts movement carry an Ebola awareness banner along a street during a public sensitisation campaign amid the Ebola outbreak in Bunia, Congo, on May 23, 2026. AP Photo/Moses Sawasawa

It sounds scary but that is literally impossible for reasons I will explain. My hope is that this article will allow you to know this too. My point is to rescue basic knowledge of infectious disease that every person knew in my grandmother's generation. The postwar period put huge emphasis on this in schooling. It was called public health in those days.

They knew much more than certified experts today.

To be sure, my training is in economics, not virology, not immunology, and not epidemiology. That makes me the ideal teller of the way to understand pathogens. Why? Because this is a subject about which I knew little six years ago but COVID caused me to dive deep into the literature and speed learn.

Shockingly, I now find that I know more than many supposed experts. Why would that be the case? Every profession these days, whether economics or epidemiology, is subject to epistemic capture. They have all created bubbles for themselves that are shaped by industrial forces. To really understand the topic in question often requires a complete outsider.

I'm going to break it down to three principles. If you stick with me, you will carry away a decoder ring to see through every media frenzy about infectious disease.

One, a milder exposure to a pathogen generates broad and lasting immunity against a stronger exposure. This of course is the principle behind vaccination but, as even Fauci once explained, there is no better immunity than that obtained by natural exposure. This principle has been known for thousands of years, documented even in Thucydides's History of the Peloponnesian War.

I learned it as a kid when I was exposed to chicken pox and gained lifetime immunity. Before the shot came along, exposure of the young kids gave a booster to adults to protect them against shingles.

This is why George Washington did not accept a smallpox variolation (earlier form of vaccination) even as the army under him often did: he had it as a young man. This is the reason the legendary milkmaids of centuries past had clear skin: exposure to cowpox insulated against smallpox. It's why workers in chicken factories are more immune to Bird flu. It's why kids should not be cocooned in germ-free environments, contrary to the fashion these days.

It's why there was so much death in the 1918 flu pandemic. Vast numbers of people due to war and travels were unexposed to the pathogen in question. Several flu seasons prior had gone by with low virulence and exposure. Returning soldiers confronted an immunologically naive population.

It's always dangerous to disturb natural exposure patterns within the social order. After a year of lockdowns, it's not a surprise that the population was more vulnerable to sickness than ever before. Hiding from widespread and mutating pathogens only makes one more vulnerable later. No population cell is more sickly than one that has been isolated from exposure, as centuries of experience show.

Two, with most pathogens, there is a negative correlation (an inverse relationship) between severity and prevalence. When one is up, the other is down. Severity refers to its virulence, its tendency to render cases, hospitalization, and death. It is measured by the case fatality rate or CFR. A pathogen does not arrive with a built-in CFR, like some computer algorithm. It depends on the level of population immunity (see above).

The CFR is different from the infection fatality rate (IFR), which indicates prevalence; that is, how much and how far a pathogenic infection spreads. Infections can be mild. They can even be without symptoms. The IFR is typically lower than the CFR. A high IFR means that the pathogen has a high probability of killing its host upon infection. A high CFR often indicates severe, obvious disease that leads to confirmed diagnosis - but it does not necessarily mean the pathogen is not spreading.

Already I knew something was fishy in the COVID-19 period when mass media conflated cases, infections, and exposures. All the charts we saw on "cases" were not really that; they were positive tests using a technology designed only to capture the presence of the virus, not its medical significance. It was all wildly misleading.

COVID-19 had a very low IFR but a medium-level severity. That is because it was and is an intelligent pathogen. Viruses with unimpressive performance kill their host quickly and thereby do not spread.

Ebola is the classic case. Killing one's host is not the most desirable outcome for a virus. "In ecological terms," writes Sunetra Gupta, "it constitutes a form of habitat destruction. When they kill their hosts, pathogens also kill themselves, and this is a disaster unless their progeny have already spread to another host."

Clever viruses like COVID minimize severity and so they can spread more broadly through the population - the common cold would be a good example. "By being less destructive, a bug may also enhance its chances of transmission," she explains.

Three, the tradeoff between severity and prevalence is subject to a condition called latency. This is the period of time in which the infected person experiences no symptoms and can thus spread the disease. With a typical cold or flu, that period is a few days during which you are infectious and do not know it. Your symptoms will last a few days beyond which you can infect others.

There are viruses that have long periods of latency, among them the one said to cause AIDS. That is why it was so deadly among the vulnerable population. Other peculiar viruses like the hantavirus spread from rats, but typically not between people, and have a long period of latency. It can take eight weeks for symptoms to manifest. It also tends to be true that the longer the latency, the more difficult it is for a virus to spread with casual contact.

When COVID-19 hit, it was the theory of Deborah Birx that SARS-CoV-2 had a two-week latency, which is why she claimed there was silent spread. As it turns out, she was wrong: the latency period is that which is more typical among coronaviruses, a few days.

Nearly all movies about pandemics have to game this point for dramatic purposes. There is invariably some deadly pathogen circulating that suddenly seizes a person who drops dead. Then others with whom that person had casual contact over the prior month start dropping dead. Then dead people are everywhere.

This is all fiction. So far as we have records, there has never been a pathogen that is very severe, very widespread, mutates fast, and carries an extended latency period of months. This is not an accident. It is a biological necessity. It is how we as human beings co-evolved with the microbial kingdom of which we are part.

We have survived because we have adapted alongside and as part of the microbial kingdom. It is not the enemy but essential to our survival. Every movie that posits some other scenario is making stuff up.

And by the way, this is even true of lab-created viruses like that which created COVID-19. It can be nasty, uncomfortable, frustrating, even scary. But even lab-created viruses adapt to the natural world, as we have seen. Alpha became Delta which became Omicron and eventually merged into being part of the seasonable landscape of our lives. This is why every pandemic burns itself out. It's a consequence of immunity born of exposure combined with mutations.

The best way to understand mutations and variants is by analogy to wardrobes of clothing and disguises. Some pathogens come with a vast collection. Malaria is an example. It is always mutating and changing, and so it becomes extremely difficult to chase down and finally to destroy with a vaccine. For many decades scientists assumed that they could get it under control but it was not to be.

It is also true for flu viruses, which have a different garb for every season. This is why the flu shot is not particularly effective and sometimes negative in its efficacy. An example of a virus with an unimpressive wardrobe is measles. It has only one uniform so it was possible to identify and finally to manage to near perfection with a vaccine. That is not to say that the vaccine is superior to natural infection - one infection creates lifetime immunity - because every pharmaceutical has downsides, often unanticipated ones.

As for the others with wide adaptability, there is no way against which they can be vaccinated, even in theory. Many people have tried for countless decades. It is simply not possible for very specific epidemiological reasons. Anyone who says otherwise is a charlatan, now and always. Period. Learn that lesson and spare yourself grief.

How likely is it that we will experience a deadly pathogen that wipes out large swaths of humanity through uncontrolled spread in a manner in which our bodies are unable to withstand? The chances are near zero.

Let's game this out with these observations:

• Measles: severity low, prevalence high, latency short, mutability low
• Flu: severity low, prevalence high, latency short, mutability high
• Ebola: severity high, prevalence low, latency short, mutability medium-high
• Hantavirus: severity high, prevalence low, latency long, mutability low
• COVID: severity medium-low, prevalence high, latency short, mutability high
• Rabies: severity extremely high, prevalence extremely low, latency short, mutability low
• Norovirus: severity very low, prevalence high, latency short, mutability high
• Malaria: severity high, prevalence high, latency short, mutability high

Notice among all those listed, only one seems to evade the mathematical logic of viruses; that is malaria. It is a wicked killer, beyond 600,000 people a year but also not really a virus. It is a parasite with a particular vector of invasion via mosquitos, which is why it is not a pandemic risk but rather a regional risk. For that reason, it does not belong on the list.

See how there is a logic to all this?

Why is it important that everyone - I mean everyone - have a basic understanding of the above? To bring not panic about pathogens but rather a calming wisdom. We evolved alongside pathogens. We understand them better than ever before. Our life experiences have granted us remarkable resilience. We should not be endlessly buffeted by the media winds of frenzy designed to elicit likes and clicks.

Why in the 21st century so many people have chosen to forget what we learned over the course of the 20th century is a true mystery. I hope this article helps trigger some knowledge gain.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 20:05

Kentucky Gym Exposes Female Entitlement Culture With New "Modesty Code"

It says a lot about modern women when a private business imposes standards of general modesty and they feel personally attacked.  So much so, that they run to social media and their local news station to cry victim.  It's not an isolated incident, it is an example of a more pervasive culture of female entitlement that is plaguing the western world.  

A Northern Kentucky gym called TAC Fitness is facing backlash after women say a new dress code policy is a violation of their right to "not be judged".  An email sent to TAC Fitness members said the gym is enforcing dress guidelines to ensure people of all ages feel comfortable and free from “inappropriate or revealing attire.”

The "modesty guidelines" are based in the gym's core philosophy:  Pursuit of excellence without vanity.  Strength without arrogance.  Influence without temptation by exposure. 

Guidelines include:  

Clothing must provide adequate coverage of the chest, back, shoulders, and thighs. Genitals, buttocks, breasts, chest, and nipples must be fully covered with opaque fabric at all times. (For skin-tight leggings: Glutes to be covered by a long tank top, t-shirt, or fabric tied around the waist.)

Shirts must fully cover the torso and chest, including cleavage.

Bottoms must fully cover the buttocks during all movements. Acceptable bottoms: Athletic shorts, pants, leggings, or sweatpants.

Tank tops and sleeveless shirts are permitted but must not be excessively low-cut.

It's unfortunate that common sense rules need to be listed for grown adults.  They do not only apply to women, but it's revealing that only women are complaining. 

The TAC gym's reaction is symbolic of a growing movement to "check" the problem of female privilege in a society that tells them they can do whatever they want wherever they want without accountability or consequences.  The notion that women should have total bodily autonomy (meaning total freedom without boundaries) is a feminist fabrication.  It's designed to exploit western values of personal liberty and push them to the extreme, while pretending as if women are "victims" if anyone tells them "No".  

In other words, if they are "free" to dress how they want, then they think they should be free to "dress how they want everywhere".  While some people (men) were not particularly bothered by this development for many decades, all that changed when feminists started accusing men of "assault" for simply looking at the goods that women were hanging out there. 

For the past decade, it's been common for female influencers to wear clothing that rides directly up their ass, and any man who is caught looking is put on blast across the internet.  Meanwhile, the same women post the content on OnlyFans for $10 per subscription.  Society has allowed this grifting to progress out of fear of being accused of "oppression", but maybe a little oppression is necessary? 

The rules were put in place by the Christian-owned business in response to some customers showing up in highly revealing clothing, bordering on nudity, and they wanted a better environment for families.  This is completely within their rights.  As the owners noted in a response to the backlash:  

"What sets TAC Fitness apart from many other gyms is our commitment to creating an environment that prioritizes safety, professionalism, and mutual respect. TAC has always been God-centered. We have never hidden that, and we will continue to carry that as our foundation. We are proud to offer an atmosphere where people of all ages and backgrounds feel welcome and comfortable. 

We believe it is possible to balance individual expression with shared community standards, and our policy reflects that commitment..."

Feminism is the vehicle which is used to enable female entitlement culture but the greater trend is largely fueled by the average woman's insatiable addiction to endless attention and validation.  At bottom, private gyms and most public spaces do not exist as venues to feed female narcissism.  A little bit of self control and modesty is not such a bad thing, and imposing such rules in most places would help to re-balance western society's spiral into radical self obsession.     

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 19:40

Inside The FDA's "Cover-Up" Of Child Deaths Linked To Covid Vaccines

Authored by Maryanne Demasi via Brownstone Institute,

In September 2025, then-US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr Marty Makary publicly acknowledged that the agency was investigating reports of child deaths following Covid-19 vaccination.

"We do know at the FDA...that there had been children who have died from the COVID vaccine," Makary said during a CNN interview.

By that stage, however, a fierce internal dispute had already emerged inside the FDA over what investigators believed the evidence showed - and whether the public should ever see the full findings.

"It really did feel like there was some sort of cover-up going on about the Covid-19 vaccines," said one individual familiar with the discussions.

MD Reports spoke with several current/former agency officials, advisers, and individuals briefed on the discussions, all of whom requested anonymity because they were not authorised to publicly discuss internal FDA deliberations.

At the centre of the controversy was an internal FDA review led by Dr Tracy Beth Høeg, a physician-scientist who was working as a senior scientist inside the FDA's vaccine division at the time.

FDA officials examined roughly 96 paediatric death reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the government database used to detect potential vaccine-related adverse events.

The review included medical records, autopsy reports, pathology findings, and follow-up investigations conducted by agency staff.

About 25 deaths following Covid vaccination were ultimately considered serious enough for high-level internal discussion inside the agency.

The findings were expected to be presented at a September 2025 meeting of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices (ACIP), the federal panel that shapes US vaccine recommendations.

But before that could happen, details of the review leaked to the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Høeg quickly became the focus of intense media scrutiny and criticism from vaccine advocates and unnamed FDA officials who argued she was relying too heavily on VAERS reports and overstating preliminary findings.

People familiar with the fallout said some FDA staff strongly objected to Høeg's methods and conclusions and allegedly sought to undermine her credibility by leaking details of the review.

The leak effectively ended plans for a public ACIP discussion and deepened divisions within the FDA over how the findings should be handled.

Some officials believed the findings warranted stronger warnings and greater transparency. Others feared public acknowledgement of vaccine-linked child deaths would damage confidence in the Covid vaccines.

"We know that there are these deaths that are due to the vaccine," said one source, referring to myocarditis cases and published reports from countries including Korea and Israel.

The controversy intensified after then-FDA vaccine chief Dr Vinay Prasad ordered additional investigation into the deaths identified in Høeg's review.

Months later, another leak brought the issue back into public view.

In November 2025, an internal memo circulated by Prasad became public. In it, Prasad acknowledged that "at least 10" children had died "after and because of receiving Covid-19 vaccination."

He described the findings as "a profound revelation."

"COVID-19 vaccines did result in the death of children," Prasad wrote. "Dr. Hoeg was correct in her assessment."

The memo triggered another round of backlash from media outlets and vaccine advocates, many of whom accused Prasad of overstating the evidence before the agency's analysis had been finalised.

Inside Medicine reported on a Dec 5 memo about a subsequent FDA analysis using a World Health Organization causality framework, which classified zero deaths as "certain," two as "probable/likely," and five as "possible."

But individuals involved in the discussions said pressure steadily mounted inside the agency to "downgrade" the findings with each successive review.

"It seemed like there was a lot of pressure to keep decreasing the number of deaths," said one source.

"It does seem like they tortured the data to get something that was more palatable."

At the same time, tensions were also growing around another unresolved issue inside the FDA - residual DNA contamination in Covid mRNA vaccines.

The issue surfaced repeatedly during ACIP discussions throughout 2025, with some advisory group members seeking additional information from the FDA about DNA levels and biodistribution studies involving lipid nanoparticles.

According to individuals familiar with the discussions, those requests were repeatedly delayed.

One individual identified Dr David C. Kaslow, director of the FDA's Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR), as the official responsible for liaising with ACIP on the issue.

Another person involved in the discussions described Kaslow as the person "stonewalling" the issue of DNA contamination.

The controversy has since drawn Congressional scrutiny.

In May 2026, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) wrote to Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. referencing an FDA memorandum examining paediatric deaths following Covid vaccination.

Johnson said the documents raised concerns about a potential "cover-up" of vaccine safety risks.

The letter confirmed that FDA officials reviewed 96 paediatric deaths following vaccination and ultimately classified seven cases as either "possibly" or "probably" related to Covid vaccination.

It also acknowledged that fatal myocarditis cases represented "new safety information" and documented discussions about revised vaccine warning labels.

By then, the internal dispute at the FDA had expanded beyond the deaths themselves and into a broader fight over vaccine safety warnings.

Høeg later delivered an internal presentation arguing that Covid mRNA vaccines warranted a black box warning - the FDA's strongest warning reserved for products associated with serious injury or death.

The proposed warning would have explicitly acknowledged the risk of death in children.

"If a vaccine has potential to cause death to children, I think it should be on the label," said one source familiar with the discussions.

Høeg's proposal was ultimately rejected by the agency.

In December 2025, Makary publicly confirmed that the FDA had declined an internal recommendation for a black box warning on Covid mRNA vaccines.

Makary argued that earlier safety concerns emerged during the initial multi-dose rollout and might not apply to annual vaccination schedules.

According to individuals familiar with the discussions, Høeg's persistent probing of Covid vaccine safety issues increasingly isolated her inside the agency.

Her eventual transfer out of the vaccine division and into the FDA's drug division, CDER, effectively ended her involvement in those investigations.

Only last week, Høeg was fired from the agency after refusing to resign from her position.

To this day, the FDA has never publicly released the full paediatric death review examining 96 VAERS reports of child deaths following Covid vaccination, nor the multiple revised versions of the agency's subsequent analyses.

"Why do we collect these VAERS reports if we're not going to explain to the public what we find?" said one source.

Now, months after the internal disputes first erupted, the FDA continues to face questions about what officials knew, when they knew it, and why the agency failed to promptly release its investigations into paediatric deaths following Covid vaccination.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 19:15

US, India Sign Critical Minerals And Rare Earths Mining Pact

Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

The United States and India signed a key agreement on May 26 to secure critical minerals and rare earth mining, processing, and supplies, further loosening China's grip on the global market, during Secretary of State Marco Rubio's four-day visit.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio (L) walks with India's Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar before their talks in New Delhi, India, on May 24, 2026. Julia Demaree Nikhinson, Pool/AP Photo

"We are two countries who have a strategic interest in ensuring reliable long-term access to critical minerals and supply chains that are important for our innovation economy," Rubio said during the signing. "This is a very important step."

Rubio was in India for a four-day diplomatic visit May 23-26 to shore up the United States' partnership with what he called "one of our most important strategic partners in the world."

He said the talks included a scope of issues that the United States works together on with India.

In a similar statement about the agreement, India's External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar said the framework will strengthen resilient and diversified supply chains, help both nations collaborate on financing, and also help with the effective management of critical minerals and rare earths.

"I think it's a very important initiative," Jaishankar said during the signing. "It's one more sign of how close our cooperation is and how important it is today in a world where there are so many challenges but also so many opportunities."

The framework for the agreement first began to take shape in February when India signed onto Pax Silica, a U.S.-led strategic initiative and coalition aimed at securing a global supply chain for artificial intelligence (AI) progress and economic security. India was one of 14 countries to sign the agreement.

India has one of the world's largest rare earth elements reserves, and existing processing capabilities that can be developed, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a bipartisan think tank organization. The country has rich sand deposits containing monazite, which includes thorium and other minerals. Thorium is a nuclear fuel.

China accounts for about 60 percent of global rare earth elements production and about 90 percent of processing.

On May 26, Rubio also announced signing a partnership charter and agreement on critical minerals with Armenia.

Rubio held a ceremony with Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan signing the bilateral framework agreement on the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity. They also signed a Strategic Partnership Charter and agreement on critical minerals.

Armenia mainly mines iron, copper, molybdenum, lead, zinc, gold, silver, antimony, and aluminum. The country also has valuable reserves of rare metals, including gold-polymetallic, copper-molybdenum, and copper pyrite deposits, according to the U.S. International Trade Administration.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio (L) walks to shake hands with India's Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar after addressing a joint press conference following their talks in New Delhi, India, on May 24, 2026. Manish Swarup/AP Photo Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 18:25

Seattle Residents Forced To Barricade Their Streets To Protect From Gun Violence

Fed up with years of gun violence and repeated shootings near Aurora Avenue, some residents in North Seattle have started installing their own street barricades in an effort to protect their neighborhoods, KOMO News writes. 

Neighbors living near North 97th, 98th, and 102nd streets recently placed large planter boxes, piles of dirt, and gravel across parts of residential roads that connect to Aurora Avenue North. The goal, residents say, is to make it harder for shooters to speed through side streets during violent incidents linked to ongoing prostitution and human trafficking activity in the area.

Tensions escalated again over the weekend after another shooting near Aurora Avenue N and N 98th Street. Seattle police said officers found around 40 shell casings at the scene after multiple people exchanged gunfire. Security footage reportedly captured several seconds of rapid shooting, with bullets hitting nearby apartments, homes, and parked cars. In one recent case, a stray bullet entered a family’s home and came to rest near the bassinet of a 6-week-old baby.

The KOMO report says that many residents say the violence has become unbearable and accuse city leaders of failing to respond effectively despite years of complaints and calls for stronger enforcement. In response to the latest incidents, Seattle police said they are increasing overnight patrols along Aurora Avenue and assigning additional resources from the department’s Gun Violence Reduction Unit.

The homemade barriers, however, have sparked disagreement within the community. Some residents worry blocked streets could slow firefighters, ambulances, or police responding to emergencies. Others point out that Seattle requires permits for any structures placed in public roadways, meaning the barricades could eventually be removed by the city.

Still, supporters argue the measures are necessary to keep residents safe, especially children and families living near the repeated violence. They say enough routes remain open for emergency vehicles and believe the immediate threat from ongoing shootings outweighs concerns about the temporary roadblocks.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 18:00