Aluminum Supply Crisis Is About To Get Worse

Aluminum prices in London are up nearly 17% since the onset of the U.S.-Iran conflict, as a growing chorus of top commodity desks, including Mercuria, Goldman, JPMorgan, and others, warn that the market is facing a major supply shock.

That disruption, driven firstly by Middle East smelter outages and the Hormuz maritime chokepoint, is now colliding with new concerns that China may be forced to curtail output amid energy-use and emissions inspections, according to Bloomberg. 

More color from the report:

Chinese authorities are now moving to rein in that over- production as inventories swell. A smelter in Baise, Guangxi province, has already cut output of molten aluminum, Mysteel wrote, without providing estimates of volumes affected. The steel and oil refining industries will also be targeted, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology said in a statement on May 13.

Building on production cut risks in China, as it is the world's biggest producer, there is another report from Bloomberg that Guinea, the world's largest bauxite producer, is preparing to limit exports of the ore, threatening flows to China's aluminum industry.

Mines and Geology Minister Bouna Sylla told the outlet that the West African nation will dial back bauxite exports in June after a surge in exports sparked a price slump that the government wants to correct.

"Supply mustn't exceed demand," Sylla said. "We want to regulate the quantity to raise prices back to reasonable levels."

For context, most of Guinea's bauxite is loaded on bulk carriers and shipped to China, where it's first refined into alumina, then turned into the industrial metal aluminum. 

The complexity of the aluminum supply shock extends well beyond Gulf disruptions, as we outline in this note, which is why prices in London are trading around $3,673 a ton, the highest since March 2022.

JPMorgan analysts recently warned that the industry is descending into a black hole, or a "metaphorical point of no return," where the "global aluminum market will face a serious and prolonged supply outage," even if vessel flows through the Hormuz chokepoint resume in the near term.

Additional market warnings:

• Mercuria, Goldman, JPMorgan See Major Aluminum Market Shock

The great aluminum squeeze is underway. Prices are likely going higher.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 04:15

The Islamic Terrorist Conquest Of West Africa

Authored by Lawrence Franklin via The Gatestone Institute,

The widened scope and quickened pace of the Islamic State's military operations in the Sahel region -- just below North Africa, roughly from Senegal to Sudan -- threatens to alter the strategic orientation of the African continent. Efforts at countering terrorist operations in the Sahel, such as they were, have evidently failed. As all roads to Mali's capital of Bamoko are now blocked, that country might be the first state to "go under."

On April 25, during a coordinated attack on several Malian cities, Muslim terrorists killed the country's Minister of Defense. The terrorists then drove the Malian Army and its allied Russian mercenaries out of the country's north.

The military juntas ruling Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger have proven themselves as ineffective at combatting Islamic terrorist operations as the democracies that they overthrew. The increasing terrorist assaults across the Sahel and the jihadists's determined efforts to take over Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have eroded the sovereignty of these states.

The combat successes of the jihadists in the Sahel in March 2022 precipitated their elevation to the status of "Islamic State Sahel Province" within the hierarchy of the IS, and several other factors have facilitated the growth of the jihadist advance in the Sahel.

The cooling of the once global counterterrorist crusade — following an apparent shift in focus by the world's great power rivalries, as well as fewer resources directed against the terrorist problem — left a vacuum that was adroitly filled by jihadist groups, which has reduced the pressure on Islamic State and Al Qaeda regional affiliates.

Another situation that might have impacted negatively upon the Sahel's overall security is the monumental migratory flow of Africans from sub-Saharan countries who pass through the Sahel to the Mediterranean, and the consequent stress this puts on the Sahel economies.

A third force eroding state sovereignty of Sahel countries is warfare waged by Al Qaeda terrorist affiliates that are rivals of the Islamic State, such as the Jama'at Nusrat al-Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM). JNIM also coordinates attacks with the Malian anti-government militia known as the Azawad Liberation Front.

Jihadist violence has become ubiquitous in the Sahel, and recently expanded to include fighting between Islamic State and Al Qaeda. On April 2, a notable clash between these two rival terrorist networks occurred in western Niger.

The Sahel now appears to be the epicenter of global terrorist violence. Sahel's terrorist groups might also be acquiring confidence that they can achieve permanent and more ambitious goals in the near future.

Islamic State units have also been exploiting the deteriorating security situation in the Sahel and in Nigeria's northeastern states, which are already governed under Islamic sharia law. Islamic State probably feels buoyed by its easy success in recent battles with the Nigerian Army.

On April 25, Al Qaeda terrorists conducted simultaneous attacks against several Malian urban areas. Their success might well tempt jihadist fighters to move into major urban areas in northern Nigeria and elsewhere in the Sahel.

An additional worrisome trend indicates that terrorist violence is moving westward to Africa's Atlantic coast.

State control increasingly is being eroded in the Sahel region, despite multilateral efforts to sustain the sovereignty of several states in the Sahel, such as the Multi-National Joint Task Force (MNJTF) consisting of Chad, Nigeria, Benin, Cameroon, and, until last year, Niger. The MNJTF had made significant strides in halting the advance of the Al Qaeda-affiliated Boko Haram terrorist group, particularly in Chad, but recently the overall scorecard is less conclusive.

The MNJTF is sustained mostly by the continent-wide Organization of the African Union (OAU). While the MNJTF originally planned to field a 10,000-member OAU army, insufficient air cover, poor communications, and logistical problems have reduced the organization's effectiveness.

Another multinational group — the "G5 Sahel" of Mauritania, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, and Niger — proved ineffective after its 2014 launch. Beset by bureaucratic problems, military coups, and lack of adequate commitment by member states, it dissolved in December 2023.

France, the former colonial "mother country" of several Sahel states, has also made a valiant effort to contain the region's Islamist threat. Acting on behalf of a Malian request for military support, France in 2013 dispatched troops to northern Mali in "Operation Serval."

After substantial success, France, along with UN political support, launched "Operation Barkhane" in 2014 to combat Islamist terrorist activity in the Sahel region. The mission ended in 2022, however, when, following military coups, three Sahelian states asked the French to leave. Later, these same three states invited assistance from Russian mercenaries, which has not resulted in any permanent progress on the battlefield.

With the advance of Islamic terrorist control over ever wider swaths of the Sahel, in recent years, US Special Forces teams have been operating in Niger. On October 4, 2017, this deployment resulted in the killing of four US soldiers and a score of Nigerien soldiers in an ambush staged by "Islamic State in the Greater Sahara." More recently, US national security priorities elsewhere seem to have resulted in a diminution of American military involvement in the Sahel.

The steady advance of Islamic terrorist control over territory in the Sahel could soon threaten the sovereignty of West African states on the continent's Atlantic Coast -- just across the ocean from Latin America and the United States.

It is past time for the US to take action to protect not only the vast natural resources in the area, but also to stop even more of Africa from being swallowed up by this expanding jihadist takeover.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 03:30

Putin Authorizes Debt Relief To Lure New Ukraine War Recruits

On Monday President Vladimir Putin signed a law that effectively wipes clean up to 10 million rubles (approximately $140,000) in unpaid debt for new military recruits and their spouses, at a moment Russia needs more manpower to keep up its grinding 'special military operation' in Ukraine.

The debt exemption applies to any Russian citizen who signs a minimum one-year contract with the military to serve in Ukraine after May 1, 2026. The economic amnesty explicitly extends to an enlisted member's spouse as well - making it more attractive to struggling families.

via War on the Rocks

The bill smoothly cleared Russia's parliament earlier this month prior to going to Putin's desk for final authorization. It represents the newest addition to a series of economic incentives designed to keep boots on the ground without triggering a domestic political crisis.

While an official death toll has not been issued or publicly maintained by the Kremlin, estimates commonly suggest deaths in the hundreds of thousands, or else a conservative estimate of high tens of thousands - after well over four-years of the tragic war.

Similar figures are often offered on the Ukrainian side, which even more obviously suffers from a severe manpower crisis, leading to forcible recruitment often through officers nabbing eligible men off the streets.

This fresh Kremlin debt forgiveness policy represents a new, softer and more incentive-based approach to military recruitment inside Russia. Prior 'partial' mobilizations have been deeply unpopular.

Within the opening years of the war, there were reports that hundreds of thousands of draft-age Russian men fled across international borders in order to escape these mobilization waves.

The pro-NATO Atlantic Council has meanwhile highlighted that Russia's military also fills manpower through controversial foreign recruitment methods:

The Kremlin plans to recruit at least 18,500 foreigners to fight in the Russian army in 2026, Ukrainian military intelligence officials claimed in late April. This figure represents a sharp rise in the annual recruitment of foreign nationals as Moscow seeks to continue the invasion of Ukraine amid heavy battlefield losses and domestic mobilization concerns.

Russia’s efforts to enlist foreigners in the country’s military are not new. Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began more than four years ago, at least 27,000 foreign nationals from more than 130 countries have signed up for service in the Russian army, according to a new report prepared jointly by Truth Hounds, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), and regional partners.

The vast majority of these recruits have been drawn from economically deprived regions of the Global South.

In some instances, this happens through deceptive means, such as foreign nationals responding to a job posting in Russia, only to find themselves thrown into Russian boot camp once they sign papers for what they think is another, legitimate occupation or job training.

The conflict and front lines continue to be largely stalemated, with peace talks seemingly no where on the horizon, but Moscow's strategy seems to be based on consistently enduring and making slow gains in this 'war of attrition'.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 02:45

Europe's Deindustrialization vs America's Quiet Investment Boom

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz appears disoriented, whiny-apathetic, and remarkably weak in leadership these days. Perhaps the chancellor senses that the project of his political generation is entering its final phase. Is he aware that the construction of eco-socialism has failed? That both his reckless debt policies and Germany’s rapid deindustrialization are consequences of this ideological insanity? The fact that Friedrich Merz still found the audacity — despite the catastrophic domestic political and economic situation at home — to publicly accuse U.S. President Donald Trump of lacking strategy in the Iran conflict speaks to an almost immeasurable degree of stubborn arrogance and self-delusion.

There he was again: the German know-it-all. The type of politician who once lectured Europe’s neighbors over debt problems while failing to compare his own actions with the present condition of his own country.

Merz would have done well to take a look at the American economy and the U.S. labor market before stepping onto such embarrassingly thin rhetorical ice.

In April, the private sector in the United States created 115,000 new jobs. During the opening months of the previous year, another roughly 180,000 jobs had already been added. The U.S. economy has now delivered four strong months in a row, signaling that America is rapidly gaining momentum and — unlike the European economy — is not being derailed by the Iran crisis. These are phenomenal numbers at a time when the world is fighting over scarce capital, know-how, and access to cheap energy resources.

The contrast with Germany could hardly be greater. During the first year of the Merz government, the German public sector was bloated with another 205,000 more-or-less useless jobs, while Donald Trump’s administration cut 300,000 positions from the overstretched state apparatus. During the same period, the American private sector created a net total of more than 750,000 jobs since Trump returned to office, while the German economy eliminated roughly 200,000 positions.

Deregulation, tax cuts, and a fundamental trust in the power of private enterprise across the Atlantic stand in sharp contrast to the sluggish, apathetic-socialist policies of Germany and the European Union — and not in Europe’s favor.

How strongly the American economy is currently developing can be seen in an interesting media phenomenon.

April 29, 2026 - a Wednesday - may one day prove to have been an important turning point. On that day, outgoing Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell appeared before the press for the final time to announce the latest decision on U.S. interest rates. The fact that the Fed left rates unchanged within a range of 3.5 to 3.75 percent came as no surprise. What was striking, however, was the deafening silence inside financial newsrooms, which normally inflate Fed rate decisions into mega-events for the markets and American capitalism itself. This time, the waters remained perfectly calm.

Two developments lie behind the media’s sudden disenchantment with Fed meetings. First, there is the policy of U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who used legislation such as the Genius Act and the Clarity Act to establish the framework for U.S. dollar-based stablecoins, thereby shifting a significant portion of money creation back into the hands of the private banking sector — where it once resided before the creation of the Federal Reserve. Second, the higher policy rates compared to the Eurozone appear to indicate that the U.S. economy is far more robust than European politicians and media figures would like to admit. So the attitude has become: best not to talk about it too much. Otherwise, people might start noticing that the Eurozone economy itself is incapable of surviving positive real interest rates.

Donald Trump’s second presidency has so far delivered 15 months of determined deregulation and a noticeable liberation of the energy sector from the strangling regulatory activism of climate fanatics. Until Trump’s election victory, Washington had been ideologically subordinate to Europe. Back in 2009, the Europeans succeeded in pushing Barack Obama into effectively adopting Europe’s climate policies wholesale in the United States. But the hope that America’s collapse would somehow conceal Europe’s own decline has now evaporated. Behind the strength of the U.S. labor market stand massive forces of private-sector investment.

This is where the ideological divide between the United States and the European Union truly lies. While the EU — driven in large part by German political pressure — has constructed a green redistribution machine that functions as a state within the state, siphoning resources out of productive sectors into the political economy and green transformation bureaucracy, Americans understand something Europeans have forgotten: prosperity is created exclusively through investment in deregulated free markets supported by a functioning price mechanism that reflects relative scarcity.

The effect of Trump’s deregulation wave can only be estimated in rough numbers. In the first quarter of 2026, gross private investment in the United States rose 8.7 percent year-over-year. Investment in equipment and industrial structures increased by 10.4 percent during the same period. These are extraordinary figures at a time when nations are competing aggressively for know-how and resources.

Now compare that to Germany: after years of eco-socialist degrowth policies, overregulation, and energy-policy suicide, Germany’s net investment ratio has slipped into negative territory. In plain English, the German economy is consuming itself. Whatever industrial substance remains is being eaten away and financially leveraged by the state wherever possible. While German industry is tearing down its tents, the United States is writing a genuine reindustrialization story. If the American economy succeeds in maintaining technological leadership over China and secures dominant positions through massive investments by U.S. tech giants in artificial intelligence, robotics, medical technology, aerospace, and mobility, the geopolitical balance of power will shift accordingly.

More than 400 major industrial projects are currently being developed across the United States. These include new nuclear power plants, gigantic data centers, traditional automobile manufacturing facilities, and even aluminum smelters. They are being financed through investments from the Arab states, Japan, and other parts of the world that President Trump brought home from his numerous foreign trips. But domestic demand and America’s internal investment engine are also running at full speed. Something is brewing in the United States — perhaps even a small economic revolution.

From a European perspective, this makes the situation all the more dramatic because the entire ideological failure of globalist politics becomes far more obvious in contrast to the United States.

If ideological hardliners, committed statists, and central planners remain in power in Brussels, Berlin, and Paris, the old continent is likely to sink into a prolonged economic coma — tired, aging, and increasingly weak. Hope for the future, entrepreneurial innovation, and economic dynamism will only return once a younger generation of European free spirits awakens from this comatose winter.

I am convinced that one day a generation of Europeans will clear away the ideological mud of the past with a cold smile on their faces, astonished by the arrogance and ideological blindness of their predecessors. In the end, civilization and humanity’s desire to improve its living conditions will prevail.

* * *

About the author:  Thomas Kolbe, a German graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/27/2026 - 02:00

Space-Squatters Will Open The Final Frontier

Authored by Rainer Zitelmann via American Greatness,

When we talk about the future of mankind in space, we should learn from history.

Squatters played a crucial role in the settlement and economic development of the American West. Long before government institutions were firmly established, settlers moved onto unclaimed land, built homes, cultivated farms, and created entire communities without initially possessing formal legal title to the land they occupied.

In many cases, these settlers were the true pioneers of westward expansion. They established the foundations of economic life—farms, towns, trade networks, and local infrastructure—while the state often arrived only later. The expansion of the American frontier was driven less by central planning in Washington than by millions of individuals acting on their own initiative.

What made the squatters especially important was that they created facts before the law recognized them. They settled the land first and expected legalization afterward. Over time, American lawmakers accepted this reality and introduced legislation allowing settlers to obtain formal ownership of the land they had improved and cultivated.

The squatters embodied a distinctly American idea: that those who productively use land should have the right to own it. This belief stood in sharp contrast to the European tradition of aristocratic landownership and became deeply connected to the American ideal of the independent entrepreneur and pioneer.

Their activities transformed vast territories into economically productive regions. By cultivating land, building businesses, and creating communities, squatters helped turn the frontier into one of the most dynamic areas of economic growth in the nineteenth century.

Some economic historians view the squatters as an early example of how property rights emerge from below—through use, investment, and social recognition—before they are formally recognized by the state.

What we need in the future are space squatters. The crucial difference from the historical squatters of the American West is this: on other celestial bodies, there is currently no ownership at all. The land belongs to nobody. And unlike in the settlement of the American frontier, there is no indigenous population whose rights could be violated.

According to Article II of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, states are prohibited from appropriating celestial bodies or territory in outer space. Whether this prohibition also applies to private individuals and private companies remains controversial among space lawyers.

The treaty says nothing explicitly about whether private individuals are permitted or prohibited from owning celestial bodies or land on celestial bodies. At the time, nobody imagined that entrepreneurs such as Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos might one day finance private space exploration with their own fortunes.

Some legal scholars, therefore, argue that national sovereignty ends where outer space begins. In their view, the treaty prohibits national appropriation of the Moon, Mars, or asteroids—but not private ownership. Their interpretation relies on a classic legal principle: expressio unius est exclusio alterius. If a treaty explicitly prohibits one category of actors—namely, states—then other actors not mentioned may remain unrestricted.

So who should have the right to acquire property in space? My answer in my book New Space Capitalism is straightforward: Those who have the financial means to get there, develop, and use the land. For instance, if SpaceX succeeds in reaching Mars and starts to build permanent settlements on the Red Planet, then the ownership of land should go to SpaceX first. Not of the entire planet, of course, but of a practicable area, for example, the size of Singapore. The surface area of Mars is 200,000 times that of Singapore, so SpaceX would initially only own 0.0005 percent of Mars. That would be enough to develop multiple settlements, but not so many that others would no longer have a chance.

SpaceX could fund its flight and development costs by listing the land on Mars in a real estate investment trust (REIT). The price would then be determined by the market. Most people would buy shares not to live there themselves, but in the hope of value appreciation. Future colonists could also receive preferential access to shares or land rights as an incentive to settle and remain on Mars for several years. In this way, private ownership would become a mechanism for attracting pioneers willing to take extraordinary risks.

We need private property in space. Without it, the conquest, settlement, and economic development of the Moon, Mars, and asteroids will remain impossible. More than two thousand years ago, Aristotle observed, “Property that is common to the greatest number receives the least attention.” The history of the twentieth century confirmed his insight. Every socialist experiment that abolished private property ultimately failed. Why should a system that repeatedly failed on Earth suddenly succeed on Mars?

No—what humanity needs are pioneers of space, space squatters, just as America once needed squatters to settle the frontier. The difference is that this time, no one will be displaced, because the celestial bodies belong to no one at all.

Rainer Zitelmann is the author of the book New Space Capitalism, which will be published by Skyhorse in early June.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 23:25

US To Set Up Quarantine Facility In Kenya For Americans Exposed To Ebola

The Trump administration is expected to deploy US public health officers to Kenya to staff a quarantine facility there amid the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in a departure from procedure used during previous outbreaks of the virus, the WSJ reported. 

According to the report, the facility - which is pending signoff from the Kenyan government - will primarily be used for Americans who are exposed to, or at high risk of testing positive for the virus in the region, as well as Americans who test positive. 

While there are now no known Ebola cases in Kenya, the move comes as international and local health officials are racing to contain another deadly outbreak of a rare strain of Ebola in the Congo that is already the third largest in history just weeks after it likely began. 

Health workers transport a patient suspected of having Ebola to the isolation center at a hospital in Democratic Republic of the Congo

Unlike during previous Ebola outbreaks, which saw Americans exposed to the virus brought back to the U.S. for monitoring or treatment, the Trump administration has decided to route potentially exposed Americans to other countries. 

Sure enough, members of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, a uniformed branch of the federal government under the Department of Health and Human Services, received notices to deploy to Kenya.

While so far mostly contained, the latest outbreak has seen an American doctor, who contracted Ebola while working in the Congo, flown to Germany last week. The US also diverted a Detroit-bound Air France flight to Canada last week over fears of a passenger’s possible Ebola exposure.

Sign welcoming new visitors at Newark International.

While the CDC has said the risk of Ebola spreading to the American public remains low, the Trump administration has nonetheless cracked down on travel from countries affected by the outbreak. Last week, the U.S. said it was pausing visa issuance for any travelers, including lawful permanent residents, who have been in South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo or Uganda within 21 days of planned travel to the U.S.  

As of Tuesday, there are at least 930 suspected Ebola cases, including 223 suspected deaths, in Congo, and seven cases with one death in Uganda, according to the World Health Organization. Health authorities further think the virus might have infected far more people across a broader region after spreading undetected for weeks.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 23:16

Paxton Crushes Cornyn In Stunning Texas Senate Upset

In a brutal repudiation of the GOP old guard, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton crushed four-term incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the Republican Senate runoff Tuesday night, winning by a commanding margin of roughly 63% to 37%.

The victory marks one of the biggest primary upsets in modern Texas political history. Cornyn, a powerful Senate insider and former Majority Whip, was unceremoniously dumped by his own party’s voters after more than two decades in Washington.

Paxton, the hard-charging conservative known for his fierce battles with the Biden administration and loyalty to Donald Trump, declared victory and wasted no time thanking the base.

“Texas has spoken loud and clear,” Paxton said in his victory speech. “We’re done with business as usual.”

Ken Paxton just kicked off his victory speech after defeating John Cornyn with a monumental line that will be remembered for decades.

PAXTON: “Wow. To the people in this room, to the people watching at home and to the people of the great state of Texas, tonight we just made… pic.twitter.com/MgFevD3pe7

— Overton (@overton_news) May 27, 2026

The race turned decisively after Trump endorsed Paxton just days before early voting ended. That seal of approval from the former president mobilized the MAGA base and proved once again that Trump remains the undisputed kingmaker in Republican primaries.

How It All Unfolded

Cornyn led the initial March 3 primary with about 42% of the vote, but failed to clear 50%, forcing a runoff against Paxton, who took 41%. The contest quickly turned into a bloodbath, with both sides dumping tens of millions into attack ads.

Paxton hammered Cornyn as out-of-touch with Texas values and too cozy with the Washington establishment. Cornyn fired back, portraying Paxton as ethically compromised and a liability heading into the general election.

But in the end, Texas Republicans chose the fighter over the dealmaker.

Other Key Results

The Paxton-Cornyn showdown wasn’t the only fireworks in Texas Tuesday night.

In the race to replace Paxton as Attorney General, conservative state Sen. Mayes Middleton defeated U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, setting up a strong favorite to hold the powerful post in November.

Democrats also saw some action, with state Rep. James Talarico emerging as their Senate nominee. He’ll now face the daunting task of trying to flip deep-red Texas in November against the polarizing Paxton.

What It Means

Paxton’s win is the latest sign that the Republican Party continues its sharp rightward shift. Traditional, institutional conservatives like Cornyn are increasingly being shown the door in favor of Trump-aligned warriors willing to fight the culture wars and challenge the status quo.

For national Republicans, the result is a double-edged sword. While the seat remains heavily favored to stay red in November, Paxton’s baggage and combative style could force the party to spend serious cash defending what should have been a safe hold.

Democrats are already licking their chops, viewing Paxton as far more beatable than the polished Cornyn. But in a state that hasn’t elected a statewide Democrat in nearly 30 years, their path to victory remains steep.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 22:25

Texas Woman Arrested After Facebook Post Over Unsafe Brown Drinking Water: Report

A woman in Trinidad, Texas, was arrested after she posted on Facebook raising concerns about the safety of the city's discolored drinking water, according to Fox 4.

Jennifer Combs posted the message on April 6 to her citizen-watchdog group page, Southern Belle Watch, urging residents who had been sickened by the city's tap water to come forward.

"We have received reports that some citizens have been hospitalized due to bacteria in the water. This is a serious public health concern that deserves immediate attention," she wrote. "If your water looks discolored, contains sediment, has a strong odor, or you have experienced related health issues, please send us a message. We are gathering information and reporting findings to the state."

In what could be seen as a brazen move against free speech, Jennifer Combs was arrested on May 8.

Trinidad Police Chief Charles Gregory scrambled to defend the arrest, claiming the case was "cut and dry" and saying her claims about hospitalizations "are simply false and have only caused unnecessary fear and confusion in our community."

Trinidad law enforcement claimed Combs had written "false information that creates fear, panic, or unnecessary emergency response within a community."

However, on April 21, a few weeks after Combs' post, the city itself issued a notice urging residents to boil their water to "avoid harmful bacteria," according to the New York Post.

"It was probably one of the most humiliating things I've ever gone through in my entire life. It was very, very bad," Combs told Fox 4 of the arrest.

Combs has filed a federal lawsuit against the city, including Chief Gregory and another member of the local police force.

CJ Grisham, a lawyer who is representing Combs in her case against the cops, branded the arrest an "abuse of power," the Post reported.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 22:10

Taiwan Defense Chief Contradicts Trump On Enormous Arms Package Moving Forward

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Taiwanese Defense Minister Wellington Koo Li-hsiung said on Monday that he's "cautiously optimistic" that the US will advance a $14 billion arms package for Taiwan after the US Navy secretary said it was on hold due to the war with Iran.

Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao told Congress last week that the US was "doing a pause" on the massive weapons package to "make sure we have the munitions we need for Epic Fury," the code name for the US-Israeli war against Iran.

Taiwanese Defense Minister Wellington Koo Li-hsiung, via Taiwan Defense Ministry

Cao's comments appeared to contradict President Trump, who suggested the arms package could be used as a "negotiating chip" with China.

During his recent visit to Beijing, Chinese President Xi Jinping issued a stern warning regarding Taiwan, telling the US president that if the issue isn’t handled properly, it could lead to "clashes and conflicts" between the two superpowers.

In December, the Trump administration advanced an $11 billion weapons package for Taiwan, more than was approved for the island during the entire Biden administration.

In response, China launched major military drills around Taiwan that simulated a blockade, and Beijing is expected to do something similar if the $14 billion package moves forward.

Koo told reporters he was optimistic that the US would approve the arms sale because Taiwan had received "no notification" that its policy had changed. Cao also said that the US hadn’t discussed the issue with Taiwan.

"From the Defense Ministry’s standpoint, we continue to maintain communication with the US War Department," Koo said, according to The South China Morning Post.

"The reason we remain cautiously optimistic is because we believe that under unchanged US policy towards Taiwan, the core interest involved here is peace in the Taiwan Strait, and peace in the Taiwan Strait is a core interest of the United States."

Trump on Taiwan:

When you look at the odds, China is a very, very powerful, big country. That’s a very small island.

Think of it; it’s 59 miles away. We’re 9,500 miles away. That’s a little bit of a difficult problem.

If you look at the history, Taiwan was developed because we… pic.twitter.com/O9xAQjKyfa

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 15, 2026

Taiwan recently approved a $25 billion increase in military spending, intended exclusively for purchasing US weapons, though a US official said the Trump administration was "disappointed" that the amount wasn't higher.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 21:45

Oklo Lands DOE Plutonium Deal To Turn Surplus Material Into Bridge Fuel

Oklo just secured a direct path to turn Cold War-era plutonium into fuel for its advanced reactors.  

The Department of Energy selected Oklo for advanced negotiations under the Surplus Plutonium Utilization Program, one of five companies chosen to convert existing stockpiles into usable fuel under strict security and safeguards rules. The move gives Oklo a practical bridge while domestic enrichment capacity scales.  

Work with radioactive materials at a plutonium facility at the at Los Alamos National Laboratory in 1978.Credit

The Santa Clara company is partnering with European advanced reactor developer newcleo on the effort. Oklo would lead U.S. utilization of the surplus material while newcleo would supply fuel expertise and potential project capital, subject to final agreements and U.S. security approvals. 

The two firms already announced a strategic partnership last October that includes up to $2 billion in investment through a newcleo-affiliated vehicle for advanced fuel fabrication infrastructure in the United States. newcleo has since begun pre-application talks with the NRC for both a fuel facility and its lead-cooled fast reactor design.  

“Fuel supply constraints are a key throttle to advanced reactor development,” Oklo CEO Jacob DeWitte said in the announcement. The program converts material previously destined for disposal into electricity-generating fuel through fission.  

This development builds directly on our prior coverage of Oklo’s plutonium work, including the announcement on the Oklo, NVIDIA, and Los Alamos collaboration exploring plutonium-powered AI applications. It also aligns with our earlier coverage on legislation that's been proposed for expanding the ability for reactor developers to deploy their technology on federal land, which also included language for repurposing additional surplus plutonium for reactor fuel purposes. 

The selection will almost certainly draw opposition from Democrats and environmental groups who have long resisted any use of plutonium in civilian power generation.

The stance grows more absurd as the same politicians push aggressive decarbonization targets. Past resistance to recycled nuclear fuel programs and surplus plutonium disposition efforts has repeatedly prioritized symbolic concerns over engineering reality, even as the material already exists and must be secured regardless. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 21:20

The Demonization Of Men (And Everyone Else Too)

Authored by Thomas Harrington via The Brownstone Institute,

Imagine the following message in a public space:  Caution: Area of Frequent Attempts at Reputational Destruction by Females

I have never seen a sign bearing the above message in any public space, nor do I want to.

Similarly, I have never seen a sign near a heavily African American neighborhood that says, “Caution, entering an area in which your chances of being the victim of a violent crime are statistically proven to be much higher than in other places.” 

And again, I do not want to. 

My reasons for not wanting to ever read these things are, or should be, self-evident to any reasonably thoughtful person: it is never permissible in a society that purports to be democratic to have the state apparatus cast moral aspersions upon an entire subset of the culture on the basis of that subset’s immutable characteristics. 

And yet, in many municipalities in the US and Europe there is a trend toward posting signs in public transport that, in various levels of explicitness, point toward all men as being gropers and harassers in potencia. 

For example, on a recent ride on the transport system of the Catalan Government I was informed, via messages on the wall of the rail car, that public entity will have “Zero tolerance with male violence” in the public areas it administers.

As I write I can already hear the objections of some readers. “Are you saying groping and male harassment does not exist on public transportation?” “Or that you have no interest in stopping it?”

I am saying nothing of the sort. 

Of course, it exists and it should not be tolerated. 

The question is whether in the attempts to eradicate the problem it is morally and legally responsible to use public monies to single out 49% of the population as constituting a lurking threat to each and every member of the other 51% of the population, with all that such signaling produces in the realm of generating widespread social distrust within the population. 

“But Tom, are you suggesting that sexual violence, however defined is not predominantly male-on-female in nature?”

Of course, not. 

No more than I am denying—as I suggested with the deliberately provocative passages of this essay—that in today’s universities, with their ever more female-dominated administrations and HR departments, reputational destruction aimed at sidelining or destroying the professional trajectories of rivals for power and privilege within the system is an overwhelmingly female-on-male form of violence, or that one’s chances of being an object of violence are clearly statistically greater in predominantly black areas of the US than in predominantly white ones. 

But as I suggested earlier no one, quite rightly, would ever think of using public monies to alert others to the dangers they might face from these two genetically determined sub-categories of human beings in these circumstances. 

However, given the tomb-like silence on the matter in our public discussions, it seems most are just fine with having the government signal citizens with the genetic trait of being male as constituting a special threat to public comity. 

As I have often said, it is never a waste of time to try and intuit the goals and methods of the small class of fabulously rich people who seem obsessed with constantly increasing the enormous level of control they already exert over the lives of the great mass of the population. 

I also know that the fact that men have greater testosterone levels, and hence much greater tendency and ability to physically challenge the forces of order deployed to protect the elite-favoring status quo and their disposition toward muscular forms of rebellion is a constant matter of concern among the ultra-powerful.

And because these ultra-powerful people also understand that the course an open social conflict can take is always unpredictable, they will, whenever possible, seek to head off such clashes by preemptive means. As the saying goes, the best battle is the one you win without ever fighting. 

So, how might you gain a preemptive victory against increasing legions of often quite justly pissed-off males? 

Easy. Use the culture-planning tools at your disposal as a member of the ultra-elite to systematically denigrate the “toxic” nature of traditional male attributes. 

And there is no better way do this than to do this than to seize upon one of the more ugly manifestations of traditional male behavior—sexual violence—and use it as a cudgel to discredit male attributes in general, including positive ones like the setting of hard limits, physical bravery in the face of hardship and unjust governance, and the desire to protect valuable social norms and traditions against the erosive forces of planned or unplanned social entropy. 

And the benefits to the super-elites of implicitly characterizing all males as potential sexual predators in the eyes of young females and many others do not end there. 

For some time now, it has been clear to anyone who has taken the time to look, that our current super-elites have an enormous disdain toward the vast majority of the human beings with whom they share the planet, seeing them mostly as obstacles to the implementation of their plans for more “efficient” (read: more favorable to them) distribution of the world’s good and services. 

For example, Curtis Yarvin, a misanthrope whose high opinion of himself far outstrips the demonstrated fruits of his intelligence and his humanity, and who has perhaps for this reason achieved that status a of “big thinker” in Silicon Valley technocratic circles, has spoken openly about the coming “dire problem” of what to do with what he calls the “mindless mass,” which is to say the excess of useless human beings that will be produced by technologically-enabled economic efficiencies. 

His solution? To house and feed them but keep them enclosed in a virtual world, supported by high quality virtual reality where they can’t gum up the wonderful plans for the marshaling of the world’s resources generated by the small and far-seeing thinking class. 

But, of course, an even better approach than this one would be to ensure that most of these useless eaters never get born in the first place. 

And we have witnessed a number of them in recent years. 

One is to run campaigns designed to convince confused and/or mentally ill teenagers that mutilating their sex organs is a lasting solution to their current unhappiness. Another is to rhetorically elevate abortion from the status it has had in all virtually healthy cultures up until now—a regrettable but perhaps occasionally necessary evil—to that of an unmitigated cultural good. 

But perhaps the simplest one of all is to convince one or the other side of the male-female dynamic that their would-be partners in procreation generally cannot be trusted to safeguard their own well-being or that of their would-be children. 

Hence, the current effort on public transport and in other public spaces to cast doubt upon the ability of the men in those places to act in a civilized and dignity-supporting manner. 

And it is working. And if you don’t believe me, take the time to speak to the 16–35-year-old cohort of women in your life, especially if they attended a “prestigious” institute of higher learning. 

Just as sure as they “know” that in every generation previous to their own queer-beating was a widely accepted and widely enjoyed sport among most straight men, they are “sure” that a happy and respectful complementarity of function in relations between men and women rarely, if ever existed in the past, and that the reason for this was that most men simply could not control their inherent need to dominate women and prevent them from becoming happy and fully developed individuals. 

Is it any wonder that births are reaching historically low levels in most Western countries? 

Yes, economics has a good deal to do with this phenomenon. But blaming it all on that obviates the fact that people have tended to reproduce through thick and thin throughout history. 

Indeed, bringing new life to the world has often been seen and practiced precisely as a key means of fighting against difficulty and oppression for the simple reason—one that elitist materialists who want to play God like Curtis Yarvin would never understand—that every new life is a miracle that contains the promise, however faint it at times might seem, of our species becoming a little more creative, a little more humane, and yes, a little more free. 

During the Covid operation, the government, working in concert with its corporate and media allies, deployed a wide variety of culture-planning techniques designed to enhance its ability to control the behavior of the population. 

Among the more important if least commented upon of these was arrogating to itself the “right” to identify as morally defective and in need of punishing remediation those who happened to disagree with the then administration’s view of bodily sovereignty. This is what took place when the formaldehyde-drenched Joe Biden was told by his handlers to say that he was “losing patience” with the 100 million or so American citizens who refused to take medically useless and, in many cases, dangerous vaccines. 

This case of the US president calling out the supposed “enemy within” on a matter that—given the vaccines’ manifest inability to prevent infection or transmission—was purely a matter of personal bodily sovereignty, should have produced widespread protest and revulsion. 

But it did not. And the designers of the Covid experiment obviously took note of this non-reaction and reasoned if they could get away with it in that case, what was to prevent them from doing the same in regard to other groups, first among them being society’s stronger, more aggressive and thus more potentially authority-resisting male cohort? 

And so here we are, with government-financed signs in public places that subtly but clearly suggest that people born male should be viewed by women not as noble protectors or carriers of wisdom or the many other positive things they often are, but as lurking vectors of violence. 

Who wins with that message? It’s certainly not most men, nor for that matter most women. 

It does work, however, for those super-elites who for reasons related to their obsessive drive to control resources as well as the comportment of their fellow human beings would like to see more social atomization, weaker families and communities, and ultimately fewer useless eaters to contend with. 

While each of us are free to come up with and live by our own privately held theories regarding the actions taken by, or in the name of, Collective X or Collective Y, it is never right for the government to do so, especially when that collective is defined by its birth characteristics. 

And if and when they do engage in this practice, know that despite what they might say, they are not doing it because they care for you or want to protect you, but because they want to sow discord or foster suspicions about a group they see as potentially standing in the way of their quest for ever more power. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 20:55

Second Chinese 'Combat' Patrol Buzzes Taiwan Within Days, On Heels Of Xi-Trump Summit

In the wake of this month's Trump-Xi summit in Beijing, and as a 'paused' but still looming major US-approved weapons deal and transfer to Taipei is set to go forward, China is stepping up military patrols near and around the self-ruled island of Taiwan.

Taiwan's military is currently on high alert, having on Tuesday dispatched ships and fighter jets to monitor the second Chinese "joint combat readiness patrol" in a week near the island.

In a fresh post on X, Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense said its forces had responded to the situation after detecting 29 Chinese aircraft, including fighter jets, and seven warships operating around the island.

via Reuters

The ministry further alleged that two-dozen of the aerial sorties had crossed the median line, an unofficial maritime and aerial buffer zone dividing the Taiwan Strait, but which Beijing doesn't recognize as having any real legal bearing.

Joseph Wu, secretary-general of Taiwan’s National Security Council, issued some provocative remarks as the security situation unfolded, blasting China as being the sole source of instability in the Asia Pacific region.

"For the 2nd time in a week, shortly after the Beijing summit, the PLA conducted a 'joint combat readiness patrol' around Taiwan. We also spotted the Liaoning carrier group in the West Pacific. This is unprovoked. The PRC is the sole source of instability in the IndoPacific," he stated on X.

Ratcheting tensions stretched back through the weekend, with Reuters reporting that "On ⁠Saturday, Wu said China had deployed more than 100 ships up and down the first island chain, an area that stretches from Japan down to Taiwan and into the Philippines."

Last week we reported that China has been actively holding up a proposed visit by Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's under-secretary of defense for policy. The move is a transparent effort to pressure President Trump over a looming $14 billion weapons package for Taiwan.

Sources familiar with the talks told the Financial Times that Beijing signaled it "cannot approve a visit until Trump decides how he will proceed with the arms package."

Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao has since revealed that the US is indeed pausing the $14BN arms sale in question, though he framed the move as due to the Trump administration's war with Iran.

He said this was to make sure there's plenty of missile supply and interceptors to execute the war, especially in the scenario that a full aerial bombing operation is renewed. 

China’s Foreign Ministry:

There is but one China in the world.

Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory.

We urge the German side to uphold the one-China principle, stop sending wrong signals to Taiwan independence separatist forces. pic.twitter.com/AGbHBjNpVN

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 25, 2026

Given the ongoing Iran crisis and Hormuz Strait standoff, and with a US military build-up in the Middle East region, if China did want to move on Taiwan there's probably nothing that Washington could do about it. However, Beijing has long maintained its stance that it wants reunification through political means.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 20:30

'Giant Turd': Progressive Dems Continue To Rage At DNC 2024 Autopsy

Authored by Corbin Trent via Common Dreams

This past week the DNC released its autopsy of the 2024 election. DNC chair Ken Martin sat on it for months, assured us there was no smoking gun, promised he’d already been sharing the lessons, and then finally dropped the 48,000 words on a Thursday with a note on the front saying the findings don’t reflect the views of the DNC. He released the autopsy and disowned it simultaneously.

I get why he'd disown it. It's a big turd. But the whole time he buried it, Martin kept saying the lessons from this report were already being put to work. Lessons. We’re keeping the focus on the lessons, he’d say. We’ve been releasing the lessons. I read it, most of it. It’s not that there are no recommendations. There are plenty. Go heavier on digital and connected TV, lighter on broadcast. Organize earlier. Rebuild the state parties. Those are the lessons. If they’ve taken any of them, they’ve taken the wrong ones, and there’s a reason for that.

Every question in the report is a variation on the same question. How do we campaign better with what we’ve got? How do we market this thing more effectively to the people we’re trying to sell it to? Never once do they stop and ask whether the thing they’re selling is bullshit. Whether the product is any good. Whether a single promise in it would fix a single person’s life.

Every problem this autopsy was built to diagnose is still here in 2026, we've yet to solve a damn one of them.

Getty Images

It was never about governing. It was about winning for the sake of winning, with no theory of what to do with the power once they have it. The DNC still isn’t looking for a mission of its own. It tells the campaigns to build their own contrast and definition and leaves the meaning to everyone else. The party is a machine with no idea what it's for.

To the contrary, it's pretty pleased with itself. The report never once treats the Biden record as a failure. Its gripe about Bidenomics isn’t that it failed people, it’s that the message leaned on big macro statistics instead of the daily reality people were actually living. When the party lost down the ballot, the report decided strong local candidates just needed to define themselves better. They’re certain Democrats are doing a great job, and that it’s just their inability to explain how awesome they are that keeps them out of power.

What I see in this report is the Biden administration in miniature. Biden was sold to us, by the press and by his own people, as proof of what Democrats could do if they got back to their FDR roots. We got the CHIPS Act. We got the IRA. We got the bipartisan infrastructure law. We were told it was the most historic spending in generations. But the rubber never hits the road. Lives weren’t transformed. Why? Because these people refuse to admit that the systems they are funding are no longer productive.

They refuse to look at the difference between an input and an output. Effort and results. You can pour trillions into a financialized housing market and a six-trillion-dollar healthcare industry, but if you never touch the monopolies and the middlemen and the rot underneath, nothing useful comes out the other side. It’s worse than that. Pour more money into an out-of-control healthcare industry and all you’ve built is a stronger monopoly, a more powerful opponent.

It was never about governing. It was about winning for the sake of winning, with no theory of what to do with the power once they have it.

The net result of all that historic spending is a Democratic Party that seventy percent of voters can’t stand and that can’t get above water with its own base. A lot of money. A lot of effort. Nothing delivered. Same as the report.

If you doubt where the party’s head is, count the words. The report runs 48,000 of them. “Spend” shows up 350 times. “Data,” 226. “Organizing,” 211. “Fundraising,” 150. “Monopoly,” zero. “Cost of living,” zero. “Affordability,” four. “Healthcare,” twice. That’s not an analysis of a country in pain. That’s a sales team studying its own pipeline.

Then there’s the New York Times, coming to the rescue with much-needed polling and data. The paper of record put out a poll a few days ago, I assume in an effort to find out how Americans actually feel and what they want from their politics and government. Among people who plan to vote for Democrats, socialism runs favorable by twenty-seven points, 49 to 22. Those same people turn around and say, 52 to 25, that the party should move to the center to win. The Times wants you to read that as confused voters. They aren’t confused. The question is garbage. This is the paper that fancies itself the one asking the hard questions and uncovering the real America, and the hard question it managed to come up with was whether the party should move left, right, or not at all on healthcare.

What does that mean? What’s the policy? What changes in your life? They don’t say. You decide. They never asked whether you want a zero-copay, zero-cost national health plan. They never asked whether we should go back to a country where the states and the cities and the government own some of the hospitals and the clinics and the research labs. They asked left or right, defined nothing, and then acted stunned when people handed them a tangle.

They asked exactly one real policy question in the whole poll. Whether you’d rather have a candidate who lowers prices by going after corporate monopolies and price gougers, or one who lowers prices by deregulating and building more. Better than two to one, people said go after the ones with the power. The reason was sitting right there. The good sense was sitting right there. They just wouldn’t go looking for it anywhere else.

The good sense was sitting right there. They just wouldn’t go looking for it anywhere else.

They keep us trapped in left and right because it’s the frame they know how to sell. But the world isn’t left and right, and I’m not sure it ever was. It’s something they lay over the top of us, the same way they sort us into black, white, Latino, Jew, Gentile, Muslim, Quaker, the way a zoologist sorts fish into types. It might be a fine theory for eking out a marginal election here and there. It’s a useless theory for fixing a broken system. And there’s overwhelming agreement out there that the system is broken.

Every problem this autopsy was built to diagnose is still here in 2026, we’ve yet to solve a damn one of them. The NYT poll proves it. Same disgust, same broken trust, same party underwater with its own people. Nothing got fixed because nothing got understood. And they’re going to win anyway. Not because they earned it. Because the other side is handing it to them.

So they’ll win in November, call it proof the model works, and walk right back into the same wall in 2028 having learned nothing. Winning is the very thing that lets them skip getting better.

We’re in a deeply unpopular war in the Middle East. Gas is climbing. The president is corrupt as hell and everyone can see it. The headwind is so strong that, as Pelosi once put it, you could run a glass of water with a D next to its name and win in half these districts. So they’ll win in November, call it proof the model works, and walk right back into the same wall in 2028 having learned nothing. Winning is the very thing that lets them skip getting better.

So no, I don’t think we live in a left-right world anymore. We live in a world of capacity, of competency, of outcomes. That’s the whole game now, and it’s exactly where the government and the corporations have failed us, over and over, while the political class argues about a spectrum that means nothing to a family trying to buy groceries. It is not baked in. I’ve spent ten years trying to build something that takes that seriously, and I’m going again, harder, with my latest political project: A Fight Worth Having. How we do it, and why I think the people telling us to keep our hands clean have it exactly backwards, is next.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 20:05

Condo Prices Already Dropped By Up To 33% In 24 Bigger Markets

Authored by Wolf Richter via Wolf Street,

The price drops are getting relentlessly steeper: In 24 bigger markets, prices of mid-tier condos through April have dropped by 15% to 33% from their respective peaks between 2021 and 2024.

Each of the markets is shown in a chart below: 24 mindboggling charts, depicting breath-taking price explosions, especially from mid-2020 to mid-2022, exceeding 50%, 60%, or even 70% in just two years in some cities. In the 10 years to the peak, prices had soared by 180% to 350% in these markets. And these bubbles have started to deflate.

In 2 of the cities, prices of mid-tier condos dropped by over 30%. In five other markets, prices dropped by 20% to 28%. In another 3 cities, prices dropped by 19%. These are starting to be substantial declines over a multiyear period.

In several of these markets, condo prices have now dropped below their peaks of Housing Bubble 1 in 2006/2007 and are back where they'd been 20 years ago. In a few other markets, prices have dropped close to their peaks of Housing Bubble 1. Those charts are marked with a red line.

There are also many smaller markets where condo prices have dropped just as much or more, but that are not included here because they're too small.

Most of the markets here are "cities." But the line-up also includes three counties where the cities, though household names, are too small to be included individually. And it includes one metropolitan statistical area, the Lakeland-Winter Haven MSA in Florida, for the same reason.

In some densely populated cities, condos and co-ops make up a big part or the majority of home sales. In most other markets, condos are a much smaller portion of home sales.

Rank Market Since Peak Year Of Peak 1 Cape Coral, FL -33% 2022 2 Oakland, CA -31% 2022 3 St. Petersburg, FL -28% 2022 4 Austin, TX -27% 2022 5 Fort Myers, FL -26% 2023 6 Sarasota County, FL -24% 2022 7 Tampa, FL -20% 2022 8 Garland, TX -19% 2022 9 Jacksonville, FL -19% 2022 10 Detroit, MI -19% 2021 11 Collier County (Naples), FL -18% 2022 12 Denver, CO -17% 2022 13 Arlington, TX -17% 2024 14 Lakeland-Winter Haven MSA, FL -17% 2024 15 Aurora, CO -17% 2022 16 Orlando, FL -16% 2024 17 Raleigh, NC -16% 2022 18 Port Saint Lucie, FL -16% 2024 19 Hayward, CA -15% 2022 20 San Mateo County (Silicon Valley), CA -15% 2022 21 Seattle, WA -15% 2022 22 Reno, NV -15% 2022 23 Mesa, AZ -15% 2024 24 Plano, TX -15% 2022 Those That Didn't Make The 15% Cutoff

In many cities, condo prices have dropped by 14% or less, and they didn't make the 15% cutoff here. Below is a sample list of 41 bigger cities where prices have dropped by 7% to 14% from their respective peaks.

Rank Market Since Peak Year Of Peak 1 Fremont, CA -14% 2022 2 Portland, OR -14% 2022 3 Boise, ID -14% 2022 4 Clarksville, TN -14% 2022 5 Chandler, AZ -14% 2022 6 Phoenix, AZ -14% 2022 7 San Antonio, TX -13% 2024 8 Houston, TX -13% 2024 9 Scottsdale, AZ -13% 2022 10 Glendale, AZ -13% 2022 11 Huntsville, AL -13% 2022 12 Irving, TX -12% 2023 13 Sacramento, CA -12% 2022 14 Fort Lauderdale, FL -12% 2022 15 Dallas, TX -12% 2023 16 Tempe, AZ -12% 2022 17 Corpus Christi, TX -12% 2023 18 Stockton, CA -12% 2022 19 Colorado Springs, CO -12% 2022 20 San Francisco, CA -11% 2022 21 Henderson, NV -11% 2022 22 Las Vegas -11% 2022 23 New Orleans, LA -11% 2022 24 Spokane, WA -10% 2022 25 Atlanta, GA -9% 2023 26 New York City -9% 2022 27 Washington, DC -9% 2022 28 Nashville, TN -9% 2022 29 Salt Lake City, UT -9% 2022 30 Elk Grove, CA -9% 2022 31 San Jose, CA -8% 2022 32 Memphis, TN -8% 2022 33 Gilbert, AZ -8% 2022 34 Miami, FL -8% 2023 35 San Diego, CA -8% 2024 36 Marietta, GA -8% 2024 37 Oklahoma City, OK -7% 2023 38 Tucson, AZ -7% 2023 39 St. Louis, MO -8% 2023 40 Long Beach, CA -7% 2023 41 Minneapolis, MN -7% 2021

Methodology and data: These prices here are seasonally adjusted three-month averages of "mid-tier" condos and co-ops from the Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI), which is based on millions of data points in Zillow's "Database of All Homes," including from public records (tax data), MLS, brokerages, local Realtor Associations, real-estate agents, and households across the US. It includes pricing data for off-market deals and for-sale-by-owner deals. These are not median prices.

The Condo Bust By Market In 24 Charts

The tables for each market below show from left to right: price decline from the peak, change from prior month (MoM), change year-over-year (YoY), and remaining increase since January 2000.

Market From Peak MoM YoY Since 2000 Cape Coral, FL -33% -0.4% -14.2% 130% Oakland, CA -31% -0.7% -12.6% 140% St. Petersburg, FL -28% -0.5% -12.4% 181% Austin, TX -27% -0.8% -5.9% 107% Fort Myers, FL -26% -0.5% -14% 121% Sarasota County, FL -24% -0.3% -12.0% 134% Tampa, FL -20% -0.6% -10.1% 250% Garland, TX -19% -1.0% -13.1% 209% Jacksonville, FL -19% -0.6% -8.8% 144% Detroit, MI -19% -0.5% -7.2% 245% Collier County (Naples), FL -18% -0.4% -7.0% 158% Denver, CO -17% -1.0% -6.5% 130% Arlington, TX -17% -0.3% -5.8% 228% Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL -17% -0.4% -8.5% 125% Aurora, CO -16% -0.8% -7.5% 196% Orlando, FL -16% -0.7% -9.2% 150.4% Raleigh, NC -16% -0.6% -8.1% 134.0% Port Saint Lucie, FL -16% -0.1% -8.3% 229% Hayward, CA -15% -0.9% -8.9% 178% San Mateo County (Silicon Valley), CA -15% -0.4% -5.6% 194% Seattle, WA -15% -0.9% -5.2% 133% Reno, NV -15% 0.0% -4.1% 241% Mesa, AZ -15% -0.6% -4.4% 200% Plano, TX -15% -0.9% -8.6% 126%

Prices in Oakland are back to where they'd first been in mid-2005, and that was 21 years ago. Prices are down a lot, but are still very high.

Prices in Fort Myers are back where they'd first been in April 2006, exactly 20 years ago.

Prices in Sarasota County are back where they'd first been in early 2006, exactly 20 years ago.

The county forms the northern portion of Silicon Valley.

Condos As Home, Rental Property, Or Speculative Bet

Some people buy condos as a home to live in an urban center or along the shore, to enjoy the big views, nice amenities, or central location. They value the worry-free living, such as not having to mess with maintenance, repairs, and yardwork; or having staff at a desk by the front door. Some value not having to climb stairs, etc.

Others buy condos as rental properties as a way to get into the multifamily rental business, or they try their hand at short-term vacation rentals. Or they buy them as vacation homes. Others, especially nonresident foreign investors, buy condos to park some cash in the US and watch the price spiral higher from a distance. It's these investors and speculators that make condos particularly speculative.

A Reminder Of The Special Issues That Condos Confront

• Over the long term, land appreciates, most buildings depreciate to zero and are eventually torn down. The land that big condo buildings sit on can be very valuable, but each condo owner only owns a tiny slice of it. The rest of their investment is in the building. A single-family house may sit on less valuable land, but the homeowner gets 100% of any appreciation of the land.
• Prices that exploded over the past few years ended up being way too high, once the mania settled down.
• Hefty special assessments, or the fear of them, for long-neglected major repairs dog some older condo buildings.
• Big increases in HOA fees at many properties, partly driven by spiking insurance costs in natural disaster zones, add substantially to the monthly costs of condos.
• If a condo building is on Fannie Mae's Blacklist, financing a unit in that building gets very difficult, and sales may be limited to cash buyers who'll exact their pound of flesh.
• The Free Money has ended, and mortgage rates are roughly back to a normal range. Buyers of single-family homes face the same issue.
• Foreign-based owners who've had it with the US and want to sell. And there are fewer foreign-based buyers.
• Investors in condos as rental properties are facing stiff competition from a wave of newly completed higher-end apartment buildings that developers are trying to find tenants for.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 19:15

Hezbollah Chief Naim Qassem Targeted Twice In Recent Israeli Assassination Ops

The single biggest, and most historic development out of Lebanon in recent years was the Israeli assassination of longtime Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah on September 27, 2024, via massive bunker-busting airstrikes on his underground location in south Beirut.

Since then, Hezbollah's leadership has been greatly degraded, also given the widescale pager explosion attacks. To fill the leadership vacuum, a co-founder of Hezbollah, and its first deputy secretary-general who had long assisted Nasrallah, Naim Qassem, stepped in as new Secretary-General.

via the Long War Journal

But now, Israel is once again trying to accomplish a 'decapitation strike' - reportedly having targeted Qassem in at least two recent operations thus far.

Jerusalem Post writes Tuesday that "Israel has attempted to target Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem at least twice in recent weeks, Saudi outlet Al Hadath reported on Monday, citing an anonymous Israeli source."

"The report came shortly after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement that he had instructed the IDF to intensify attacks against the terrorist organization," JPost continues.

Crowds have especially fleeing Beirut's Dahiya district following the announcement of the escalation. Since Gaza war began, this district has been hit many times. It seems that Israel suspects he's in this area, and historic Hezbollah stronghold. 

Monday saw expanded attacks across Lebanon, including Tyre, and Bekaa Valley, and the pace of airstrikes is expected to ramp up.

Al Jazeera earlier cited the Israeli army, which indicated that: More than 70 Hezbollah infrastructure sites across the country were hit Monday, some 10 headquarters and weapons depots in the Tyre area were struck, and an unspecified number of Hezbollah fighters on motorcycles were killed or wounded in the south. And now...

NETANYAHU SAYS ISRAELI MILITARY OPERATING WITH 'LARGE FORCES ON GROUND' IN SOUTHERN LEBANON AND TAKING CONTROL OF 'STRATEGIC AREAS'

While no new Beirut strikes were immediately forthcoming Monday into much of Tuesday, the IDF has issued evacuation orders for some southern suburbs, and people are fleeing, given past experiences of massive bombing raids:

Fearing that the IDF will expand the attacks: Mass movement of Lebanese leaving the Dahiya in Beirut : pic.twitter.com/TAnbdS1QGo

— Iris (@streetwize) May 25, 2026

Gong back to early March, over 3,180 Lebanese have been killed, with more than 9,000 wounded - according to Lebanese health officials. The figures do not distinguish between armed combatants or civilians.

Critics of Israel have warned that Netanyahu is trying to sabotage Trump's efforts to find a final peace deal with Iran. The Israelis have long worried that Washington could in the end settle for a 'bad deal' - or one that doesn't ensure the complete destruction of Iran's nuclear program and highly enriched uranium.

* * *

Much further south, in Gaza, the IDF has reportedly taken out the leader of Hamas' Qassam Brigades...

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 18:50

Does Demand Create Supply?

Authored by Frank Shostak via Mises Institute,

By popular thinking, increases in demand cause economic growth. According to such thought, whenever the economy falls into a recession what is required is to strengthen demand. Since government is seen as an important part of total demand, what is then required is to increase government outlays, thereby lifting overall demand and hence increasing economic growth.

According to the popular view, it is also possible to strengthen overall demand through the inflationary increases in money supply. With more money in their possession, and for given prices, the so-called real balances will increase and this, in turn, will strengthen individuals' expenditure on goods and services. This allegedly will strengthen the economy's overall demand and will strengthen economic growth. A decline in the prices for a given money supply will also boost the real balances and thus the economic growth. But does it make sense that demand is the key driver of the economy?

In the free market economy, wealth-generators do not produce everything for their own consumption. Part of their production is used to exchange for the products of other producers. Hence, in the free market economy, production precedes consumption. This means that something is exchanged for something else. This also means that an increase in the production of goods and services sets in motion an increase in the demand for goods and services. According to David Ricardo,

No man produces but with a view to consume or sell, and he never sells but with an intention to purchase some other commodity, which may be immediately useful to him, or which may contribute to future production. By producing, then, he necessarily becomes either the consumer of his own goods, or the purchaser and consumer of the goods of some other person.

An individual's demand is constrained by his ability to produce goods demanded by others. The more goods that an individual can produce, the more goods he can demand.

Expanding Private Savings: Key To Economic Growth

Without the expansion and the enhancement of the production structure, it is difficult to increase the supply of goods and services. The expansion and enhancement of the production structure hinges on the expansion of production, private saving, and capital investment. Saving supports individuals in the various stages of production. It supports individuals that are employed in the enhancement and the expansion of the production structure. Hence, what matters for economic growth is not just tools, machinery, and labor, but saving and investment in capital goods.

Government Is Not A Wealth-Generator

Contrary to popular thinking, the government does not produce any wealth. Increases in government spending cannot grow the economy. By nature, the government must take from the private, productive economy to facilitate any of its actions. By doing this, the government weakens the wealth-generating process and undermines prospects for economic recovery during a downturn. According to Rothbard,

Since genuine demand only comes from the supply of products, and since the government is not productive, it follows that government spending cannot truly increase demand.

Likewise, an increase in money supply only sets in motion an exchange of nothing for something. This means a weakening in the process of wealth formation and leads to economic impoverishment.

An important factor that makes the fiscal and monetary stimulus appear to "work" is if the amount of private savings is large enough to support non-wealth generating activities while still permitting a growth rate in the activities of wealth generators. It also gives the appearance of wealth as new sectors are stimulated. Additionally, if funded by inflation, the benefits of inflation appear early and are only realized later.

If, however, voluntary saving is declining, then, regardless of any increase in government spending and inflation by the central bank, overall economic activity cannot be revived. In this case, the more the government spends, and the more the central bank inflates, the more will be taken from wealth-generators, thereby weakening any prospect for a recovery. Additionally, these measures will further distort the economy.

As one can see, not only does the increase in the expansionary fiscal and monetary policies not raise overall output, but, on the contrary, it leads to a weakening in the process of wealth generation in general. According to Say,

...the only real consumers are those who produce on their part, because they alone can buy the produce of others, [while]...barren consumers can buy nothing except by the means of value created by producers.

Conclusion

By popular thinking, increases in government spending and central bank inflation strengthens the economy's overall demand. This, in turn, sets in motion increases in the production of goods and services. What we have here is a claim that "demand creates supply." However, to be able to exchange something for goods and services, individuals must first have something that others want. This means that, in order to demand goods and services, individuals must produce something useful first. Hence, supply drives demand and not the other way around. Governments, by nature, must take from the private, productive sector in order to fund their activities. Increases in government spending and the money supply growth rate results in the diversion of savings from the wealth-generators to non-wealth-generators, thus undermining the wealth generating process.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 18:25

Homeowners Face Eminent Domain Bulldozers As Data Centers Demand Ever More Power

Georgia Power isn’t negotiating anymore. The Southern Company subsidiary is seizing dozens of homes and hundreds of easements across Coweta and Fayette counties to ram through a 35-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line that will feed at least four massive AI data centers. Project Wansley is just the latest flashpoint in a backlash that has been building for months.

QTS Data Center in Fayetteville, Georgia

At least 20 to 30 homes face outright demolition. Another 300-plus properties will get permanent easements for towers planted in backyards and next to pools.

But residents like Ansley Brown are fighting back. Her mother bought their family home in 2003 through a USDA rural development loan for single mothers. Now the utility wants the property for the corridor. Brown’s viral TikTok exposing the lowball offers (she says $70,000 to $100,000 below market) has racked up millions of views and drawn state lawmakers into the fight. 

Ansley Brown, 27, whose mother purchased the family's childhood home in 2003 through a federal USDA loan for single mothers, became the face of the resistance after a TikTok video she posted drew more than 6 million views and caught the attention of state legislators.

Georgia Power says the line is essential.

The company is racing to add roughly 10 gigawatts of new generating capacity over the next five years, with executives openly stating that  about 80% of that power will go to data centers. Meanwhile, transmission has become the bottleneck, and utilities are turning to eminent domain to clear the path.

This isn’t happening in isolation. We’ve been pounding the table on data center resistance, from Northern Virginia counties rejecting new substations to Texas communities suing over water drawdowns and power rate spikes. The pattern is the same: hyperscale demand collides with local infrastructure limits, and the costs get socialized while the profits stay private.

Electricity prices are already feeling the pressure. Utilities across the Southeast and Midwest have warned of double-digit residential rate hikes tied directly to data center load growth. Georgia Power’s own filings show residential customers absorbing a growing share of the bill for transmission and generation built primarily for big tech. 

The same dynamic is playing out with Meta’s Georgia facilities, where local reporting has highlighted water quality complaints, including muddy runoff affecting nearby residents, alongside the power demands.

We’ve seen this movie before with pipelines and wind farms. The difference now is the sheer scale of the load and the speed at which it’s arriving. Data centers don’t just want power; they want it yesterday, and they’re willing to let utilities use the state’s hammer to get it. The pushback in Georgia is a warning shot as more communities draw the same line.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 18:00

Iraq's Oil Collapse Sparks Race For New Export Routes

Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice.com,

• Iraq's oil production has collapsed to just 1.39 million bpd after the Strait of Hormuz blockade stranded exports.

• Baghdad is urgently trying to revive northern export routes through Turkey, including the Kirkuk-Ceyhan system and a new Kirkuk-Nineveh pipeline.

• China is re-emerging as a major strategic player in Iraq's energy infrastructure, with Chinese firms heavily involved in Baghdad's new north-south pipeline expansion.

April was indeed the cruellest month for decades for Iraq's crude oil production, with an average of 1.389 million barrels per day (bpd) over the period. This compares to a monthly average of 3.47 million bpd from January 2002 to the end of March this year, and an average of over 4.1 million bpd in the three months leading up to the onset of the U.S./Israel-Iran War on 28 February. The last time oil production fell to the current level in the country was in the early 2000s, during and immediately following the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. Even for a diversified economy, this would spell bad news, but for Iraq, it is existential, with over 90% of its annual budget historically coming from oil and around 95% of that black gold having to pass through the still-blockaded Strait of Hormuz before it is monetised. The effective closure of that key export route meant that Iraq's domestic oil storage tanks quickly filled to maximum capacity, and because it has extremely limited options to transport its crude elsewhere, it has been forced to shut down production wells entirely. As disastrous as it is now, even worse may be to come soon, as these shutdowns can cause permanent damage to wells through a loss of reservoir pressure, water infiltration, and corrosion, among other factors. In Iraq's case, many of its biggest mature southern fields are highly susceptible to these problems. This is why the race has been on in Baghdad to secure other export options, most notably now, pipeline options in the north, but these bring their own sets of problems with them.

Historically, moving oil from the southern part of Iraq administered by the Federal Government of Iraq (FGI) in Baghdad was a largely redundant exercise, with little demand for it from Europe that was not already being filled by oil coming from the country's semi-autonomous northern region, presided over by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). Instead, the onus of the FGI's export drive was to the East, especially to China - a route involving the Strait of Hormuz. This was also a pivotal means by which sanctioned Iranian crude oil could be surreptitiously transported to the same destination, rebranded as non-sanctioned Iraqi oil, with all elements involved in this mechanism analysed in full in my latest book on the new global oil market order. Aside from the ongoing conflicts with Washington that this continued practice brought with it for Baghdad, it also meant that the Federal Government could focus on measures aimed at stopping the KRG's oil exports to Europe via a pipeline running into the Turkish port of Ceyhan, thus pressuring its ability to generate financing independent of Baghdad. This was central to Baghdad's long-term objective to destroy the economic infrastructure of the Kurdistan region before rolling it into the remainder of a unified Iraq as just a regular administrative region. The idea was in line with the geopolitical ambitions of Baghdad's superpower sponsors, China and Russia, as also detailed thoroughly in my latest book. These objectives were outlined some time ago by a very senior member of the Russian administration to a senior source who works closely with Iran's Petroleum Ministry, and then exclusively relayed to OilPrice.com: "By keeping the West out of energy deals in Iraq, the end of Western hegemony in the Middle East will become the decisive chapter in the West's final demise." On the other hand, the U.S. and its allies wanted to bolster the independence of the Kurdistan region to act as leverage to extend their influence in the rest of Iraq to the south. Their objective was to have the Kurdistan region expel all Chinese, Russian, and Iranian companies from the region, and then to gradually push for the same to happen in the rest of Iraq.

The key lever Baghdad used to effect this plan to subsume the northern Kurdistan region was a deal struck in 2014, in which the FGI pledged to send the KRG money each month from Iraq's central government budget (17% at the time the deal was made) in exchange for the KRG pledging to send oil produced in its region (around 550,000 bpd at the time of the initial deal) to the FGI. The deal has never worked properly, with either Baghdad accusing Erbil of underdelivering oil (and selling it separately outside the terms of the agreement) or Erbil accusing Baghdad of underpaying from the budget - or both simultaneously. This, though, has caused a big problem for Baghdad since the outbreak of U.S./Israel-Iran War, in that the KRG had the only workable pipeline solution that would enable Baghdad to move its oil anywhere for monetisation through exports. Moreover, the supply/demand dynamics shifted so that European refiners grew desperate to secure any replacement barrels to compensate for those that had come through the Strait. To capitalise on this - but with no fully working pipeline itself, and disagreements with the KRG still simmering away - Baghdad has resorted in recent weeks to transporting oil to Turkey as and when it can through trucks overland.

Something is better than nothing, of course, but these volumes pale into insignificance when compared to those that could be achieved through a working pipeline, and it is this that Baghdad is aiming to get up and running as soon as possible. Not that long ago, the FGI had an oil pipeline that ran from the disputed, federally-controlled Kirkuk province adjacent to Iraq's Kurdistan region to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. It ran northwest from the Kirkuk K1 field through federal territory (the Salahaddin and Nineveh provinces, near Mosul) up to the border town of Fishkhabur. This "original" Kirkuk-Ceyhan Pipeline or Iraq-Turkey Pipeline (ITP) consisted of two pipes, which theoretically had a nameplate capacity of 1.6 million bpd combined and was split into 1.1 million bpd for the 46-inch (1,168-mm) diameter pipe and 500,000 bpd for the 40-inch (1,016-mm) line. This FGI-controlled pipeline's export capacity reached between 250,000 and 400,000 bpd when running normally, but even before the Islamic State entered the picture in 2014, the pipeline was subject to repeated and ongoing attacks by various Sunni militant groups operating in the region. Given its unreliability as an export option, the KRG constructed its own single side-track pipeline, from the Taq Taq field through Khurmala, which joins the Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline in the border town of Fishkhabur. This had a nameplate capacity of 700,000 bpd, which was then increased to 1 million bpd, although it has so far reached only 900,000 bpd.

With or without a peace deal between Iran and the U.S./Israel alliance, Baghdad is now pushing ahead with the Kirkuk-Nineveh pipeline as part of the Iraq-Turkey crude oil pipeline extending to Ceyhan Port on the Mediterranean Sea, which is independent of the KRG. The Kirkuk-to-Nineveh line is not a standalone project, but rather is the vital northern leg of the rehabilitated federal network, proving the physical pipe required to carry oil around the KRG's territory and deliver it directly to the Fishkhabur border terminal. The 350,000-bpd design capacity of this Kirkuk-to-Nineveh segment reflects the Oil Ministry's cautious, phased approach, as they cannot safely test the entire 1.6 million bpd nameplate capacity of the old system at once. Opening this 350,000-bpd pipeline allows Baghdad to easily handle the initial trial target of 150,000 to 250,000 bpd of Kirkuk crude next month. Moreover, once the southern Basra-to-Haditha corridor is built, it will plug into this newly opened Kirkuk-Nineveh-Fishkhabur line, creating a seamless, high-volume flow from the Persian Gulf to Turkey - at least, that is the idea.

However, just when the West thought that Iraq might be moving back into its own sphere of influence and away from China's, Beijing's hand has appeared again in this grand pipeline project. To obviate any future problems that might come in transporting oil from its massive southern fields out into the world, Baghdad is working to connect these directly to the northern network, and to achieve this, it has agreed to partner heavily with Chinese engineering firms. This will be part of the US$1.5 billion emergency infrastructure budget approved by former Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammad Shia al-Sudani that ties into the 2019 "Oil-for-Projects" agreement between Baghdad and Beijing, fully analysed in my latest book on the new global oil market order. Suffice it to say here that under this framework, Iraq sets aside 150,000 barrels of oil per day in an escrow account to serve as collateral for such work undertaken by Chinese entities. Indeed, Baghdad bypassed traditional open public bidding to directly invite specialised Chinese state companies to fast-track construction of the US$5 billion Basra-to-Haditha pipeline - the 700-kilometre mega-corridor designed to pump 2.5 million bpd from the south up toward the northern networks.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 17:00

Reuters Peddles Fake News After Defense Contractor Misuses Civilian Starlink Terminals

Reuters dropped another misleading article today - this time attempting to manufacture drama between the Pentagon and SpaceX over Starlink usage during the Iran conflict.

The story framed routine commercial contract discussions and terms-of-service enforcement as major "tensions" and growing Pentagon reliance giving Elon Musk undue leverage.

Reuters' version of events was that SpaceX used wartime urgency to raise the price of Starlink connections on U.S. drones from roughly $5,000 to $25,000 per terminal, forcing the Pentagon to pay up while exposing how dependent the military has become on Musk-controlled infrastructure.

The reality, according to Musk, is that the dispute centered on a more basic issue: a drone manufacturer or contractor allegedly used civilian Starlink terminals on military weapon systems, including drones, in violation of Starlink's commercial terms of service, when the proper government and defense product is Starshield. In other words, Reuters framed the episode as a price-gouging and leverage story, while SpaceX and the Pentagon framed it as a contract-compliance story involving the misuse of civilian satellite service for weapons applications.

Reuters article is false. They made improper use of the Starlink civilian system for military purposes. Direct violation of terms of service.

- Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 26, 2026

Musk was clear in multiple posts that this is a longstanding policy. Commercial Starlink is not authorized for weapons applications and is shut down when discovered.

It is a violation of commercial Starlink terms of service to use the terminal for weapon systems. This applies to all users and is shut down when discovered.

There is a separate network called Starshield, which is operated by the US government. This is not under SpaceX control.

- Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 1, 2026

The Pentagon also pushed back on the story.

The Fake News media has the story wrong, again. @SpaceX remains a strong and valued partner to the Department of War.

The claims in this article are simply not based in reality and do not reflect the close, effective collaboration between our teams. https://t.co/872Maa5FX2

- Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellASW) May 26, 2026

Pentagon officials have emphasized the strong partnership with SpaceX, which provides critical capabilities through its Starshield military variant. Starshield terminals are designed for secure government and defense use, connecting to both commercial and dedicated secure constellations.

The Reuters piece, of course, relied on anonymous sources and selectively presented pricing discussions while ignoring the core issue of contract compliance. Musk has consistently maintained that commercial Starlink terms prohibit weaponization, a point he has reiterated across multiple conflicts.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 16:40

Defending The Fourth Amendment To Protect Gun Owners

Authored by John Velleco via Gun Owners of America,

All gun owners fully understand the vital importance of preserving the Second Amendment. But right behind that Constitutional Amendment in importance is the need to uphold the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

After all, without robust Fourth Amendment rights, we will never have much of a Second Amendment right. For that reason, both Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation have regularly filed amicus briefs to guard against erosion of Fourth Amendment rights. We recently filed such an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the High Court to ensure that law enforcement not abuse the investigative technique known as “knock and talk.”

As more and more states seek to ban more and more classes of previously legal firearms, gun confiscation has become an ever-greater threat. Historically, the Fourth Amendment’s protections have been greatest when applied to the home, which also happens to be where most guns are kept. The Supreme Court has discussed the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion.

However, the courts have recognized that police have the right to “knock” on the door of your home, and “talk” to you - if you agree to speak. In Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1 (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that all visitors - including the police - have an “implicit license” to “[i] approach the home by the front path, [ii] knock promptly, [iii] wait briefly to be received, and then (absent invitation to linger longer) [iv] leave.” That rule seems entirely reasonable - but it is astonishing how police have come to abuse that “implicit license.”

In a recently decided case from North Carolina, State v. Reel, 297 N.C. App. 205 (N.C. Ct. App. 2024), the police broke every one of the rules, but the search was upheld. The officers suspected drug dealing was going on at a house, so they parked on a side street and crossed the defendant’s side yard - not the front yard. They followed a visitor to the front door, and when the defendant opened the door for the visitor, tried to force their way in behind her. The police never actually knocked. And, they never actually talked - except to demand the door be opened so they could rush in, claiming to have smelled marijuana. When the defendant refused and shut the door, another officer kicked in the door, searching for and seizing drugs. Thus, “knock and talk” was used as a pretext to conduct a warrantless search and seizure in a home. Nevertheless, North Carolina’s two highest courts approved.

GOA’s amicus brief urged the U.S. Supreme Court to impose a “bright-line” rule for law enforcement, so officers would know their limits, and judges would have a clear rule to enforce. We argue that since the “implied license” was based on the fact that any visitor - such as trick-or-treaters or girl scouts - to a house could “knock and talk,” the police could do the same. So we took that justification and suggested it be made the rule – a clear limitation on what the police could do. We proposed the rule to be:

The right of a police officer to conduct a “knock-and-talk” is no greater than a Girl Scout has to approach a house to sell cookies.

Since a Girl Scout cannot walk around your house to the back yard to the back door, neither can the police. Since a Girl Scout cannot come to your house in the middle of the night, neither can uninvited police. No peering through windows. No forcible entry. No hanging around without invitation from the occupant. No repeated trips back to harass the occupant. No surveillance devices. And, the occupant must have the right to refuse to talk, and to revoke the “implied license” for the police to remain and talk whenever he chooses.

The police have a tough enough job. Fuzzy rules of procedure not only jeopardizes the peoples’ liberties, but also law enforcement safety.

Gun owners must be especially vigilant where Fourth Amendment rights are concerned, because the threat of warrantless police sweeps to take guns from law-abiding citizens is not merely theoretical. Not long ago, Texas politician Beto O’Rourke boldly claimed: “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47, and we’re not going to allow it to be used against your fellow Americans anymore.” And the anti-gunners seem to get far more militant every year. Thus, any weakening of the Fourth Amendment jeopardizes the Second Amendment.

GOA will always lead the fight to defend the “right to keep and bear arms,” as well as those other constitutional rights essential to protect guns, and that most definitely includes the Fourth Amendment.

John Velleco is the Executive Vice President of Gun Owners of America.

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/26/2026 - 16:20