White House Mulls Payments Up To $100,000 Per Greenlander To Join US

The Trump administration has mulled sending lump sum payments to Greenlanders of up to $100,000 in exchange for their vote to secede from Denmark and join the United States, Reuters reports, citing four sources familiar with the matter.

Nuuk, Greenland

The exact dollar figure and logistics of any payments are unclear, however US officials, including White House aides, have floated payments ranging from $10,000 to $100,000 per person to residents of the overseas territory of Denmark with a population of 57,000 people - despite Copenhagen's insistence that Greenland is not for sale. The move would cost at most $5.7 billion - about what the US sends Israel and Egypt on an annual basis. 

One of the sources familiar with White House deliberations said the internal discussions regarding lump sum payments were not necessarily new. However, that person said, they had gotten more serious in recent days, and aides were entertaining higher values, with a $100,000-per-person payment - which would result in a total payment of almost $6 billion - a real possibility.

Many details of any potential payments were unclear, such as when and how they would be doled out if the Trump administration pursued that route or what exactly would be expected of the Greenlanders in exchange. The White House has said military intervention is possible, though officials have also said the U.S. prefers buying the island or otherwise acquiring it through diplomatic means. -Reuters

The proposed payments are one of several plans under discussion by the White House for acquiring Greenland - including the use of the US military - to take control of the island whose own population has repeatedly debated its own independence and economic dependence on Denmark. 

"Enough is enough ... No more fantasies about annexation," said Greenland's PM Jens-Frederik Neilsen in a Sunday Facebook post after US President Donald Trump repeated his intention to acquire the island during interviews with reporters.

European leaders have responded to Trump's comments with disdain. On Tuesday, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Britain and Denmark issued a joint statement declaring that only Greenland and Denmark can decide what happens.

Trump has given several reasons for the need to acquire Greenland - including that it is rich in minerals needed for military applications, and that the Western Hemisphere needs to be under the geopolitical influence of Washington. 

"We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark isn't going to be able to do it," Trump told reporters on Air Force One on Sunday, adding "It's so strategic."

One Reuters source said that White House aides were eager to carry over the momentum from the Maduro operation - in which US forces captured the Venezuelan leader and his wife over the weekend.

Another option under discussion is trying to enter into a type of agreement with the island called a Compact of Free Association (COFA) - which have only ever been extended to small island nations including Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Palau - in which the US government will provide many essential services such as mail delivery and military protection in exchange for the ability to operate freely in COFA countries and trade with the US largely duty free. 

To do this, Greenland would likely need to separate from Denmark. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/09/2026 - 05:45

"Appalling": Debanking Explodes To Record High In Britain

An estimated 453,230 accounts were shut down in the United Kingdom in the last year, a stunning figure that has drawn outrage from the country’s leading conservative lawmaker.

Nigel Farage

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage called the shocking figure “appalling” and slammed European rules that he believes "makes it cheaper for banks to close accounts over unusual transactions.” Farage, who was elected to the British Parliament in 2024 and leads the conservative populist Reform Party, is no stranger to debanking, having had his accounts closed by Coutts in 2023.

So what’s the banks' excuse? “Financial crime reasons,” they said, according to documents obtained by The Telegraph under Freedom of Information rules.

The Telegraph reports:

It comes ahead of the introduction of new rules which will force lenders to give customers longer before they close accounts – at least 90 days’ notice – as well as offer clearer explanations of why they shut the accounts.

But the requirements will only apply to accounts opened after April 28 this year and will be subject to exemptions to allow banks to comply with financial crime rules.Financial institutions are allowed to close accounts for commercial reasons, and if they suspect criminal activity. There is no legal right to a bank account in the UK, unlike in countries such as France and Belgium.

Banks have faced criticism over their failure to explain to customers exactly why accounts have been closed. This is often blamed on anti-money laundering and other financial crime rules which lenders must follow.

Nonetheless, British officials defend closing the accounts, claiming they were shut down after a thorough review.

“Banks must comply with strict legal and regulatory requirements in terms of verifying customers and preventing financial crime. As a result, a small proportion of accounts are closed, but only after extensive review and investigation,” a UK government spokesperson told The Telegraph.

“Fighting financial crime is one of our priorities. Fraud makes up over 40 pc of crime in the UK, robbing people of their hard-earned money,” An FCA spokesman said in a separate statement.

“It’s important banks and building societies play their part, including closing accounts they have suspicions about. Only a tiny fraction of accounts are closed – and we expect firms to act proportionately and treat customers fairly.”

While British officials don't appear to see the problem with the surging number of closed bank accounts, critics across the pond in the United States see the escalating situation as a cautionary tale.

Adam Smith Institute’s Maxwell Marlow told The Telegraph: "The scourge of debanking continues to blight the British public and significantly impacts the Square Mile."“Our finance system thrives through freedom – it is why we were the centre of global capitalism for so long, and we became rich from it. If we choose to reject these principles by ignoring this issue, our liberties and prosperity will be punished collectively,” Marlow added.

Across the pond - in August, President Donald Trump took a series of actions to thwart "debanking,” which was pervasive during the Biden administration, signing an executive order aimed at preventing financial institutions from denying services based on customers' political or religious beliefs.

The order, titled "Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans," directs federal regulators to scrutinize banks for past or present policies that may have encouraged discriminatory practices and to impose remedies such as fines or consent decrees where violations are found.

The order also requires the removal of "reputational risk" considerations from supervisory guidance, which the administration argues have been used to pressure banks into restricting access for certain lawful industries or individuals.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/09/2026 - 04:15

Stolen Soil And Corporate Welfare: The Global Scam Of 'Feeding The World'

Authored by Colin Todhunter via Off-Guardian.org,

Supermarket shelves have never been fuller, yet diets have become poorer. Across the world, food systems praised for their productivity now deliver an abundance of calories alongside widespread micronutrient deficiency, ecological collapse and rural precarity.

This is the outcome of an agricultural model that equates food security with yield and mass production with nourishment. Sustained by billions in subsidies, industrial agriculture increasingly resembles a welfare state for agribusiness and retail giants whose profits depend on public money.

Nutritional decline

Corporate-driven industrial agriculture claims to feed the world but too often delivers empty calories while starving populations of nutrients. Consider that high-yield rice produces empty calories while becoming nutritionally impoverished. Since the 1960s, the concentration of zinc and iron in wheat and rice in India has fallen by 30 to 45%. In contrast, millets and pulses deliver far higher levels of protein, zinc and iron per square inch.

This is not unique to India: Rothamsted Research in the UK has evaluated the mineral concentration of archived wheat grain and soil samples from the Broadbalk Wheat Experiment. The experiment began in 1843, and their findings show significant decreasing trends in the concentrations of zinc, copper, iron and magnesium in wheat grain since the 1960s.

At the same time, nutritionally dense millet acreage in India has declined by 60% over the last seven decades. The decline is a result of structural shifts in Indian agriculture following the Green Revolution.

In the UK, the logic is similar, albeit expressed differently. Ultra-processed foods dominate, monocultures deplete soil and calories are abundant while nutrition is undermined. Obesity coexists with micronutrient deficiencies; grass-fed livestock and diverse rotations have largely been replaced by input-intensive systems, while supermarkets dictate production priorities and shape farming.

Industry PR frequently attempts to justify its role by implying the world would starve without its seeds and chemicals. The industry justifies this claim through the enduring myth of the Green Revolution; a narrative Prof. Glenn Stone and others have effectively debunked. The claim that industrial seeds ‘saved’ India from mass starvation, for instance, is less history than PR.

In reality, the Green Revolution represented a pivot towards input-intensive farming that displaced existing productivity gains in favour of a model that mandated dependency on proprietary seeds, chemical fertilisers and pesticides supplied by an increasingly concentrated global industry.

Displacement and precarity

When traditional farming is destabilised through state withdrawal, corporate inputs, global supply chains and monocultures, it becomes financially unviable for many farmers. Rural communities are removed from the soil. In India, this displacement is leveraged as part of a broader neoliberal strategy, clearing land for industrial-scale corporate agriculture.

In rural Britain, young people leave for cities as rural life becomes economically untenable and villages lose schools, healthcare and transport. Meanwhile, farmers rely heavily on subsidies, rural development grants and agri-environment schemes.

These payments mainly stabilise industrial supply chains and supermarket profits. In the UK, more than half of farm income comes from subsidies rather than market sales and larger farms disproportionately capture payments. In effect, subsidies sustain monocultures and high-volume production for supermarkets.

UK subsidies like the Basic Payment Scheme and its successors provide a non-market floor for farm income. They therefore function as an indirect subsidy for retail giants. By covering the farmer’s basic survival costs, the taxpayer effectively lowers the break-even point for producers, allowing supermarkets to use their purchasing power to negotiate farm-gate prices that are frequently below the actual cost of production.

So, the taxpayer pays to keep the farm viable, only for the supermarket to extract the resulting value through suppressed prices and high retail margins.

Mugging the public

These national subsidy regimes are embedded within a transnational agricultural input economy dominated by a small number of food retail, agrochemical and seed corporations, including firms such as Bayer and Syngenta, which sell proprietary seeds and chemicals at prices the farmer could not otherwise afford.

In the UK, publicly supported farm incomes stabilise demand for proprietary seeds, pesticides and fertilisers integrated into supermarket-led supply chains, ensuring predictable markets for input suppliers even as farm-gate prices are driven down.

The farmer is squeezed by both sides (inputs and retail), and although the mechanisms might differ per country, the underlying logic is consistent: the state absorbs risk while private firms profit from farmer dependence on proprietary inputs and chemically intensive production systems. We see a globally integrated system of public risk management for agribusiness.

While India still (however precariously) attempts to buffer the producer (through mechanisms like the Minimum Support Price for crop assurance and the Public Distribution System to stabilise consumer costs), the UK system has been fully utilised to de-risk the balance sheets of private giants.

The British public is being ‘mugged’ twice: once at the tax office and again at the checkout. At the same time, the state is subsidising a third ‘mugging’: a taxpayer-funded public health collapse. By bankrolling volume over nutrition, the government pays corporations to manufacture a health crisis, then taxes the public to treat the fallout. The taxpayer funds the hollow calories, the supermarket margins and the resulting chronic diseases whose cost falls on the NHS.

Welfare scroungers

The media too often vilifies the poor (whether families in the UK or struggling farmers in India) for needing public support. However, the biggest ‘scroungers’ are not families supposedly ‘fiddling the system’ but the shareholders of retail and input corporations whose profit margins are underwritten by public money.

In the UK, the agricultural sector is ensnared in a subsidy trap that functions as a taxpayer-funded life-support system for corporate retail. While the annual farming budget has remained largely stagnant at £2.4 billion since 2007 (effectively a significant cut when adjusted for inflation) it remains the only thing standing between many British farmers and bankruptcy.

According to Defra’s 2024/25 statistics, these payments now account for 30% to 55% of farm business income. Without this public intervention, the majority of UK farms would operate at a net loss. This means that the current market price for food is a policy choice to protect the margins of retail giants such as Tesco, which recently reported an adjusted operating profit of £3.13 billion.

In India, every time a farmer scans their fingerprint to purchase a subsidised bag of fertiliser, they trigger a transfer of public funds to chemical manufacturers. According to policy analyst Devinder Sharma (in numerous articles in The Tribune newspaper), by fixing the retail price of urea while guaranteeing cost recovery, the government has created a low-risk environment for input-intensive agriculture.

The average Indian agricultural household earns just ₹10,218 ($113) per month, while chemical companies—buffered by ₹1.91 lakh crore ($23 billion) in public funds—remain highly profitable.

Whether through the stagnant grants of the UK or the biometric pipelines of India, the state has become the ultimate guarantor of a high-input, high-cost agricultural model that would otherwise be commercially unsustainable for producers.

Towards a new system

In the UK, breaking this model requires a structural dismantling of the ‘supermarket state’. A genuine transition would necessitate land reform that decouples land value from real estate speculation alongside a strengthened retail code that mandates a minimum producer share of the retail price, ensuring value is not siphoned off by shareholders before it leaves the farm gate.

The current predatory model is a conscious political choice. An alternative is required—one rooted in community resilience, ecological health and nutritional sufficiency rather than corporate extraction. This shift is already visible in fragments of resistance emerging in both India and the UK.

In India, the revival of millet cultivation in Odisha demonstrates how subsidies can be reclaimed for social justice. By linking minimum support prices (MSPs) to decentralised procurement and school meal programmes, the state has transformed millets from ‘forgotten foods’ into pillars of nutrition and soil health.

In the UK, community-supported agriculture, seed-saving networks and local co-operatives act as quiet secessions from the corporate supply chain. While inheritance tax and market consolidation threaten land access, these projects prioritise health per acre and local autonomy, ensuring that the value created by the soil remains within the community rather than being siphoned off to retail headquarters.

The path forward requires a fundamental decoupling of food from the logic of extraction. This means a transition from a state that subsidises shareholder dividends to one that invests in soil sovereignty, small-scale farming and the long-term health of its people.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/09/2026 - 03:30

German Prez Gets Schnitzel In A Twist, Says Trump Destroying World Order

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier is absolutely freaked out about Donald Trump, and says the 'world order' is at risk of disintegrating into a "den of robbers" where the unscrupulous simply take what they want. 

Wait, you mean: 

- Like Ukrainian oligarchs busted embezzling $100M IN US taxpayer money (for starters)?

- Like the Panama papers?

- Like the Siemens bribery scandal where German officials took $1.4 billion to secure contracts?

- Like the UK's BAE Systems arms scandal in which millions in bribes made their way to Saudi officials?

- How about the Danske Bank money laundering scandal? 

- Or the worldwide pandemic industrial fraud complex? 

We'll give you a minute to recover...

German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier delivers a speech at his Bellevue Palace residency in Berlin, Germany, November 9, 2025. Maryam Majd/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

Steinmeier's comments appeared to refer to actions such as Trump's ousting of Venezeula's dictator president Nicolas Maduro over the weekend - which the Sour Kraut (⌐■_■) said constituted an attack on global democracy 'like never before.' Because whatever you think of Maduro or Trump plucking him out of bed, he was definitely a poster child for democracy, right?

Next, Steinmeier turned his ire towards Russia's annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine as a watershed - with Trump's behavior representing a second historic 'rupture.'

"It is about preventing the world from turning into a den of robbers, where the most unscrupulous take whatever they want, where regions or entire countries are treated as the property of a few great powers," he said, adding that active intervention was needed in threatening situations - and that countries such as Brazil and India must be convinced to protect and maintain the world order. 

Hey Frank, why does Germany shut down public pools in the summer these days? Is it because you let a bunch of people in who "take whatever they want?"  

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/09/2026 - 02:45

Swedish Migration Board Employee Blows Whistle On Agency Run By Migrants Who Refuse To Integrate, And Serve Their Own

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

The Swedish Migration Board, the authority charged with deciding who may live in Sweden and under what conditions, has been described by internal sources as an organization largely staffed by personnel with a migration background who often speak their own languages and seek to prioritize those from their own country of origin to establish a greater cultural foothold in Sweden.

Swedish news outlet Samnytt spoke to long-serving employees of the organization who blew the whistle on its structural weaknesses and its inability to adhere to the agency’s requirement for neutrality on migration policy.

“Currently, the majority of the staff have a background other than Swedish. Many do not even have Swedish citizenship. And they speak their own language with their own group,” said one source who has worked within the authority for several decades and is still employed there.

They explained that the authority employs around 6,000 people and largely operates in open-plan offices, where employees are free to choose where they sit. In practice, this has led to, ironically, a distinct lack of integration.

“Kurds normally sit together with other Kurds, even if there are different clans among the Kurds, Somalis sit with other Somalis, and Syrians with other Syrians, and so on,” the source said.

“What affects us the most is that everyone speaks their own language, meaning you don’t understand what is said between groups and employees,” they added.

Earlier attempts to require Swedish as the working language within the authority have reportedly been abandoned. Instead, according to Samnytt’s source, parallel linguistic environments have become normalized within the very institution responsible for assessing integration, residency, and citizenship.

“This not only affects language, that people don’t understand each other or what is being said, but it also causes different groups to form within the authority, clans that are involved in bringing their own clan members or relatives from their home countries here. They have brought the Middle Eastern clan mentality into the authority,” the source said.

The Migration Board’s transformation is described as having accelerated during the 2015 migration crisis, when Sweden received more asylum seekers than its system was designed to handle. During that period, the authority’s role shifted from neutral administrator of the law to an increasingly politicized actor.

The source estimates that around 35 percent of employees at the Migration Board are Muslim and described a noticeable change following the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

“Many may have been more moderate Muslims, but after Oct. 7 you could see that more and more Muslim women started wearing the hijab,” the source said. “Songs about ‘from the river to the sea’ could also be heard from the coffee room inside the Migration Board,” the source said.

Employees who object to this culture or raise concerns internally are reportedly ostracized and accused of disloyalty. “What has become unpleasant is that we who feel that things are not going right at the authority, and it is usually Swedes, have to talk behind closed doors so that no one hears,” Samnytt was told.

“You are removed from your position, perhaps placed in the reception,” the source said when asked what happens if an employee speaks openly about their concerns. “It is difficult to fire someone here, since the union is quite strong, but you are simply removed from influence, and all opportunities for a career within the authority disappear.”

When asked what message should be sent to responsible politicians, the source was unequivocal. “Shut down the entire agency. It can’t be changed,” they said.

“If you change the name or transfer responsibility to other agencies, the same people will follow. It will be the same thing again. If you want to change this, you have to take a completely new approach, with new people.”

The allegations come amid previous controversies surrounding the Migration Board. In February 2024, a 30-year-old Iraqi man employed as an administrator at the authority was reported to police on suspicion of data breaches, misconduct, and accepting bribes. According to documents seen by Samnytt, the man may have earned millions of kronor by selling residence permits to other migrants.

The agency has also faced criticism for social media posts explaining how asylum seekers could go back on holiday to countries they claimed to have fled.

The full exposé can be read in full here.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/09/2026 - 02:00

Guyana: The Little Caribbean Country With A Big Role To Play In Trump's Regional Shift

Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times,

With the U.S. capture of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro in a bold Jan. 3 military raid and a large naval force still prowling the southern Caribbean to ensure that Maduro’s successors cooperate with the Trump administration, other subtle, but key, developments in the region can be overlooked.

Among under-the-wire events is a December 2025 agreement between the United States and Venezuela’s neighbor, Guyana. That agreement could have profound implications, not only in the immediate context of unfolding events in Venezuela, but also for the long-term execution of the Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, unveiled in November 2025 by U.S. President Donald Trump.

A U.S. delegation led by senior Pentagon adviser Patrick Weaver and Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of War Joseph Humire met with Guyanese President Irfaan Ali in the nation’s capital, Georgetown, on Dec. 9.

Ali told Guyanese media outlets that the nations had signed a statement of intent to “expand joint military cooperation,” a process that will be “evolving ... in the coming months.” He stated that there “will be greater discussions on more levels of cooperation and the integration of [the two countries’] work.”

The statement of intent is not a formal mutual defense treaty, he said, calling it a “reinforcement” of long-term training and collaboration between the United States and Guyana.

But such a pact could be on the table, Ali hinted, referring to the U.S. military effort dubbed Operation Southern Spear.

“The U.S. government now is launching what they call the Southern Spear of security,” he said. “They are now coming up with a strategy for the Western Hemisphere, and the U.S. government is to invest more and pay attention more to the [Caribbean] and Western Hemisphere.”

Southern Spear has been in the spotlight off Venezuela since September. The USS Gerald Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, and the USS Iwo Jima, an amphibious assault ship, are the most visible components of the campaign that destroyed drug-smuggling speedboats, imposed a selective blockade on sanctioned oil tankers, and led to the Jan. 3 U.S. military operation that captured Maduro.

Guyana has a “growing role” in implementing that strategy, State Department principal deputy spokesman Tommy Pigott said in a Jan. 6 statement.

The commitment to “deepening security cooperation with Guyana to address shared challenges” was affirmed during a Jan. 6 phone call between U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Ali, Pigott said.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio (R) and Guyanese President Irfaan Ali stand for a photo opportunity as they meet on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in New York City on Sept. 24, 2025. Stefan Jeremiah/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

Territorial Dispute

A former British colony, Idaho-sized Guyana is rich in minerals, has extensive offshore oil deposits, is perched on eastern Caribbean sea lanes, and is embroiled in an almost 200-year-old border dispute with Venezuela, used by the Maduro regime as an excuse to menace its sparsely populated neighbor with naval intrusions and troop buildups.

Venezuela has long claimed Guyana’s approximately 61,600-square-mile Essequibo region as its territory, despite a U.S.-mediated 1899 Paris ruling involving Spain, the UK, the Netherlands, and Venezuela, subsequently affirmed by the International Court of Justice.

Venezuela’s agitation over Essequibo, which spans two-thirds of Guyana, increased significantly after Exxon Mobil discovered oil in the Stabroek Block off its shores in 2008 and began drilling in 2015.

The Punta Playa deposit contains an estimated 11 billion barrels of oil, making it one of the 21st century’s largest petroleum finds. It produces 900,000 barrels daily as of November 2025, according to Exxon Mobil. Venezuela, by comparison, has an estimated 300 billion barrels of oil reserves but only produces 1 million barrels per day.

In 2013, the Venezuelan navy boarded and impounded a survey ship operated by Anadarko Petroleum, an Exxon Mobil contractor, before releasing it. In 2018, Venezuela approached and “intercepted” an Exxon Mobil survey ship, according to the Guyanese foreign ministry, forcing it to abandon explorations.

In November 2023, Maduro announced a “people’s vote” to “respond to the provocations of Exxon, the U.S. Southern Command, and the president of Guyana” with a Dec. 3, 2023, referendum asking Venezuelans to annex Essequibo.

Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro holds Simón Bolívar's sword as he speaks at a rally against a possible escalation of U.S. actions toward the country, at Fort Tiuna military base in Caracas, Venezuela, on Nov. 25, 2025. Leonardo Fernandez Viloria / Reuters

A map shows the Stabroek Block, an oil and gas reservoir off the coast of Guyana. Venezuela has long claimed Guyana’s 61,600-square-mile Essequibo region, despite a U.S.-mediated 1899 Paris ruling. Illustrated by The Epoch Times

Venezuelans approved the measure, paving the way for the province of “Guayana Esequiba.” The Maduro regime portrayed the outcome as a mandate by voters united by a decades-long, nationalistic, cross-party issue.

The brewing crisis spurred the UK to dispatch a warship, a U.S. Army delegation to visit Guyana, and the Pentagon’s Southern Command to begin joint flight operations with the Guyana Defence Force, actions that convinced Maduro to meet with Ali in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines to sign the Argyle Accords and agree to de-escalate tensions.

But the Maduro regime has never complied with the Argyle Accords, instead amassing troops and military equipment along its border with Guyana, according to a March report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. How Maduro’s deputy, Delcy Rodríguez, now sworn in as Venezuela’s acting president, will proceed in honoring the Argyle Accords is uncertain.

Increasing Provocations

In February 2024, less than two months after the Maduro–Ali pact, Venezuelan naval and air aggression forced Guyana to place a moratorium on oil exploration in the western reaches of the Stabroek Block.

In April 2024, Maduro signed a bill that formally established the Venezuelan state of “Guayana Esequiba” and began enlarging a base on Anakoko Island at the confluence of the Cuyuni and Wenamu rivers. Guyana claims that Venezuela has illegally occupied the island since 1966.

Vehicles drive past a sign indicating the entrance to Tumeremo, the Venezuelan-created administrative capital of Guayana Esequiba, on May 26, 2025. In April 2024, then-Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro signed a bill that formally established the Venezuelan state of “Guayana Esequiba” and began enlarging a base on Anakoko Island at the confluence of the Cuyuni and Wenamu rivers. Pedro Mattey/AFP via Getty Images

The provocations did not cease with Trump’s return to the White House in January 2025. The Venezuelan Ministry of Foreign Affairs openly mocked Ali as “the Zelensky of the Caribbean” in a March 1, 2025, statement posted to social media, referring to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. That same day, an armed Venezuelan Guaiquerí-class patrol ship entered Guyana’s waters and approached the Liza Destiny, an Exxon Mobil vessel, demanding that the crew produce documents.

In late March 2025, Rubio traveled to Guyana.

“In my meeting with [Ali], we strengthened the economic and security ties between our two nations,” he wrote on X. “The United States stands with Guyana in support of its territorial integrity against the Maduro regime.”

A month before, in February, six Guyanese soldiers had been wounded along the Cuyuni River after suspected Venezuelan gang members opened fire. Similar events occurred in the same border area in May and August.

On May 25, 2025, Venezuela held regional and gubernatorial elections, including for “Guayana Esequiba.” Neil Villamizar, an admiral in the Venezuelan navy, was named governor after what the U.S. State Department called the “latest sham election” organized by the Maduro regime.

That same day, while commemorating the 59th anniversary of Guyana’s independence from Great Britain, Ali said Guyana was ready to defend its territory against Venezuela.

“[The] abuse of our airspace and our waterways by all kinds of criminal elements, all kinds of illegitimate trade [will no longer be tolerated],” Ali said in December 2025.

“We have to do this in partnership if we are to have a region that is safe for our children 30, 40, 50 years from now,” he said.

That partnership includes a revitalized U.S. presence in Guyana that predates its independence but that has gained renewed relevance as the Trump administration refocuses the nation’s foreign policy on backyard backwaters neglected for decades. With Maduro awaiting trial in New York City, it is uncertain whether the Rodríguez administration will continue to press its territorial claims.

Aerial view of ships carrying machinery on the Demerara River in Georgetown, Guyana, on Aug. 29, 2025. The United States established two bases in the former British Guiana: a naval air station at Makouria, 20 miles from Georgetown, and an air base about 25 miles south of Georgetown along the Demerara River. Joaquin Sarmiento/AFP via Getty Images

Renewed US Presence

As part of the March 1941 Lend-Lease Act with the UK, the Soviet Union, France, China, and other Allied nations, the United States secured 99-year leases to ports and airfields across the Caribbean and elsewhere in exchange for food, oil, munitions, mothballed warships, and other assistance.

The United States established two bases in British Guiana: a naval air station at Makouria, 20 miles from Georgetown, to patrol for German U-boats menacing the Panama Canal, and an air base about 25 miles south of Georgetown along the Demerara River.

The air base, Atkinson Air Force Base, was a key transit point for U.S. aircraft, troops, and supplies heading to Africa and Europe. It was also the pivot for the “Green Project,” which the War Department described as “one of the greatest airborne troop movements in history,” with thousands of GIs passing through on their way home at war’s end.

The United States unilaterally suspended the leases in 1949. Atkinson is now Cheddi Jagan International Airport, Guyana’s biggest commercial airport, adjacent to the Guyana Defence Force’s Camp Stephenson headquarters. Makouria Naval Air Station is now Guyana’s Jungle and Amphibious Training School.

An aerial view shows the Stabroek Market in Georgetown, Guyana, on Sept. 2, 2025. A U.S. delegation met with Guyanese President Irfaan Ali on Dec. 9, 2025, and returned to Washington with an agreement to expand military cooperation between the two countries. Joaquín Sarmiento/AFP via Getty Images

It is increasingly common to see U.S. military at both former U.S. installations and at Guyana’s air base near Eugene F. Correia International Airport on the Atlantic Coast; at Eteringbang on the Cuyuni River, where an all-weather 2,100-foot runway was recently built; and at Ramp Road Ruimveldt Naval Station in Georgetown, where a U.S. Southern Command-funded multimillion-dollar project financed numerous improvements.

In July 2023, Guyana hosted U.S. Southern Command’s Tradewinds joint exercises that included soldiers, airmen, and sailors from the United States, Mexico, Canada, the UK, France, and the 15 member states of the Caribbean Community alliance.

In late 2025, the Pentagon announced that components of the U.S. Army’s 800-man 1st Security Force Assistance Brigade would begin rotational deployments to Guyana “as demand for army advisors in the region continues to grow.”

In late January and early February 2024, 12th Air Force Maj. Gen. Evan Pettus, now deputy U.S. Southern Command commander, went to Georgetown to meet with Guyanese military commanders. In December 2024, Ali visited Southern Command headquarters near Miami.

In November 2025, in one of his tenure’s last overseas trips, Navy Adm. Alvin Holsey, former Southern Command commander, met in Georgetown with senior government leaders.

Guyanese army soldiers carrying Russian-made AK-47 7.62mm caliber rifles march as they participate in joint military exercises with U.S. Southern Command troops at Camp Stephenson in Timehri, Guyana, on July 26, 2023. Keno George/AFP via Getty Images

Military Bases

After Maduro’s December 2023 summit with Ali in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, a top Guyanese official who attended the meeting told The Associated Press that the Venezuelan leader was “convinced Guyana could host” a permanent U.S. military base, which would dissolve the Argyle Accords.

“We have not been approached by the United States to establish a military base in Guyana,” Guyanese Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo said after a January 2024 visit by then-U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Daniel Erikson.

Since April 2024, Maduro has claimed that the United States operates “secret military bases” in Essequibo, justifying Venezuela’s increased military presence along its borders.

“We have information proving that in the territory of Guayana Esequiba, temporarily administered by Guyana, secret military bases of the (U.S.) Southern Command ... a body of the CIA ... have been installed,” he said, accusing the United States of “aggression” designed “to prepare for an escalation against Venezuela.”

Jagdeo, in a Dec. 19, 2025, news conference, said a military confrontation between the United States and Venezuela appeared imminent. However, unlike the year before, he did not respond to questions about U.S. forces operating from Guyana or whether there was renewed talk about the United States establishing military bases there.

Now-Guyanese Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo delivers a speech during the last day of a summit in Brazzaville, Republic of Congo, on June 3, 2011. Jagdeo, in a Dec. 19, 2025, news conference, did not respond to questions about U.S. forces operating from Guyana or whether there was renewed talk about the United States establishing military bases there. Guy-Gervais Kitina/AFP via Getty Images

In the context of unfolding events, most analysts focus on Venezuela, Cuba, Mexico, and nations to the south when pondering how the Trump Corollary will be unfurled.

“The Guyana aspect is one of the hidden gems in this, as far as the U.S. is concerned, because the U.S. has the majority of the offshore energy reserves off Essequibo,” said Gregory Copley, president of the Washington-based International Strategic Studies Association and editor-in-chief of Defense & Foreign Affairs publications.

“I think the Guyanese would welcome increased cooperation with the United States,” he told The Epoch Times.

Anders Corr, publisher at Journal of Political Risk and principal at Corr Analytics in Pittsburgh, who is also a contributor to The Epoch Times, said, “It would certainly make sense for Guyana to request a U.S. military base because that would give Guyana’s oil resources, other energy resources, a protection it won’t get anywhere else.”

“Trump is very much over spending money to protect other countries without getting something for it,“ he told The Epoch Times. ”So he would probably ask for some kind of a concession on the part of Guyana for that sort of protection. And he might very well get it.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 23:30

Where People (Don't) Reach For Alcohol-Free Alternatives

2026 has arrived, and like every year, many around the world will be using this new beginning to take New Year's resolutions, often centered around health: exercising more, eating healthier, losing weight, or maybe drinking less.

Dry January, a month-long break from alcohol, was officially launched as a campaign in 2013 by Alcohol Change UK, a charity specialising in consultancy and training around alcohol harm.

According to Alcohol Change UK, 200,000 people officially signed up for the challenge last year, with millions estimated to have taken part globally.

While this yearly break from alcohol has grown in popularity in recent years, it seems the same may not be true of non-alcoholic alternatives to classic alcoholic beverages.

As Valentine Fourreau details below, results from a Consumer Insights survey conducted by Statista between October 2024 and September 2025 show that non-alcoholic wine isn't favoured by many.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Of the 31 countries included in the study, only four had 10 percent or more of their respondents cite non-alcoholic wine as a beverage they frequently consume: India (11 percent), Thailand (11 percent), China (10 percent) and Vietnam (10 percent).

Non-alcoholic beer appeared to be more popular: in Poland and Spain, for instance, almost one in five people surveyed (19 percent) said they consumed the beverage regularly. They were 14 percent in Germany, and 13 percent in Brazil and India.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 23:00

Monsanto Sues COVID-19 Vaccine Manufacturers, Alleging Copyright Infringement

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

Bayer and its Monsanto division are suing COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers, alleging they used technology Monsanto developed and patented in the 1980s in their vaccines.

Bayer said in lawsuits that Pfizer, its partner BioNTech, and Moderna wrongly used technology Monsanto developed and used to make plants resistant to insects.

Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna included the technology in their shots to enhance the stability of messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) “and thus the vaccines’ ability to confer immunity to the virus,” lawyers for Bayer and Monsanto said in the suits, which were filed on Jan. 6 with the U.S. court in Delaware.

Bayer was not involved in COVID-19 vaccine manufacturing or production.

Bayer said it was not seeking to interfere with the production of the COVID-19 vaccines, which are still being made and sold, but said the court should award it money, describing the defendants as having “profited handsomely from infringing vaccine sales worldwide.”

“Plaintiffs are entitled to damages as a result of Defendants’ infringement of the ... Patent in an amount yet to be determined and adequate to compensate Plaintiffs for Defendants’ infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the patented invention by Defendants, together with interest and costs as fixed by the Court,” with the exception of acts of infringement covered by one federal law, the filings state.

Pfizer, BioNTech, and Moderna earned billions of dollars from their vaccines against COVID-19 during the pandemic, according to company reports. Pfizer, for example, reported making $11.2 billion in 2023 from its shot.

“BioNTech is aware that Bayer and Monsanto have filed an action for infringement with respect to one patent against Pfizer and BioNTech,” a spokesperson for BioNTech told The Epoch Times in an email. The company declined further comment.

“Moderna is aware of the litigation and will defend ourselves against these claims,” a spokesman for Moderna told The Epoch Times via email.

Pfizer did not return an inquiry.

In a third lawsuit, lodged in federal court in New Jersey, Bayer said Johnson & Johnson also infringed on a patent with its COVID-19 vaccine, which did not utilize mRNA.

That complaint said Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine, which delivered DNA to a recipient’s cells to trigger protection, would not have been effective without the patented sequence and template that Bayer developed and patented.

Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine was withdrawn from the market in 2023. Johnson & Johnson did not respond to a request for comment.

The new complaints are the latest over the COVID-19 vaccines. Other suits have involved Pfizer and Moderna, including a suit brought by Moderna against Pfizer.

A court in England ruled in 2024 that Pfizer infringed on a Moderna patent.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 21:30

Pilot Who Landed Plane After Panel Blew Out Sues Boeing, Claims Company Unfairly Blamed Him

An Alaska Airlines pilot who was universally praised as a hero after safely landing a Boeing jet after a door plug panel flew off shortly after takeoff is suing the company because he says the plane maker wrongly tried to blame him and the rest of the crew.

The section of a Boeing 737 Max where a door plug fell while Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 was in flight on Jan. 7, 2024. NTSB via AP

Captainn Brandon Fisher received accolades from the heads of the National Transportation Safety Board and the FAA, along with some Boeing executives, when he safely landed flight 1282 in January 2024 with 177 people on board. 

According to Fisher's lawyers, however, Boeing's attempts to deflect liability in past lawsuits caused some passengers to sue the pilot, causing him great distress, AP reports. Four flight attendants previously sued Boeing over the incident last summer.

Fisher claims that Boeing suggested it wasn't responsible because the plane was 'improperly maintained or misused' by others.

"It was clear Boeing’s words were directed at Captain Fisher in attempt to paint him as the scapegoat for Boeing’s numerous failures," his lawyers, William Walsh and Richard Mummolo wrote in their lawsuit filed in an Oregon court.

Bolts Were Missing

An NTSB investigation of the incident revealed that four bolts securing what is known as the door plug panel were removed and never replaced during a repair on the Boeing 737 Max 9 aircraft while it was being assembled. Both Boeing and Spirit Aerosystems - which has since been acquired by Boeing, were both implicated. 

The bolts in question are hidden behind interior panels on the plane, so they aren't something that could have been easily checked in a preflight inspection by the pilot or anyone else from the airline (i.e. Boeing's assembly line was responsible). NTSB investigators concluded that the door plug was gradually moving upward over the plane's 154 flights prior to the incident before ultimately flying off.

"Boeing’s lie infuriated Captain Fisher as well, as he was being castigated for his actions as opposed to being lauded," wrote Fisher's attorneys. "Because he had flown Boeing aircraft for the entirety of his employment with Alaska Airlines, Boeing’s attempts to blame him felt like a deep, personal betrayal by a company that claimed to hold pilots in the highest regard."

The NTSB was unequivocal in its determination that this was a manufacturing issue, and the crew's actions were exemplary. 

The Blowout

The incident occurred minutes after the flight took off from Portland, Oregon - creating a significant air vacuum in the cabin. Seven passengers and a flight attendant sustained minor injuries, but Fisher was able to land the plane safely.

The blowout caused a 2x4 foot piece of fuselage covering an unused emergency exit behind the left wing to be ejected from the plane. 

During the investigation, Boeing factory workers told NTSB investigators that they felt pressured to work too fast, and were asked to perform duties they weren't properly trained for. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 19:20

Trump Seeks $6 Million Legal Fee Reimbursement For Dismissed Georgia Election Case

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump is asking the state of Georgia to reimburse $6.26 million in attorney fees and costs he incurred defending against his now-dismissed election interference case in the state.

(Left) Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis at the Atlanta Police headquarters in Atlanta on May 3, 2023. (Right) Former President Donald Trump prepares to deliver remarks in Las Vegas on July 8, 2023. Megan Varner; Mario Tama/Getty Images

In a motion filed Jan. 7 in Fulton County Superior Court, Trump’s legal team cited a 2025 Georgia law under which if a prosecutor is disqualified from a case because of improper conduct and the case is subsequently dismissed, defendants in that case are entitled to request “all reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred” in their defense.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis had indicted Trump over an alleged unlawful conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia, one of four criminal cases he faced while running for another term as president.

The Georgia Court of Appeals later disqualified Willis due to an “appearance of impropriety” stemming from her romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom she had hired to lead the case. The ruling was subsequently upheld by the Georgia Supreme Court.

The case formally ended in late November 2025, when the special prosecutor who took over chose not to move forward with any charges.

Trump’s motion seeks a total reimbursement of $6,261,613.08. The filing includes more than 200 pages of documentation to show how the money was spent, most of it on legal fees.

According to the filing, over $2.31 million went to the law firm of Jennifer Little, Trump’s longest-serving attorney on the case. Drew Findling, who represented Trump in the case for about a year, was paid $1.46 million to his firm. Steve Sadow, who replaced Findling as lead counsel in the Georgia case, received $1.52 million to his firm.

“In accordance with Georgia law, President Trump has moved the Court to award reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred in his defense of the politically motivated, and now rightfully dismissed, case brought by disqualified DA Fani Willis,” Sadow said in a statement.

The request will be decided by Superior Judge Scott McAfee. If he awards the fees and costs, the money would be paid from the budget of the Fulton County district attorney’s office.

Under the new state law, the judge is required to grant such a motion if he finds that the amount requested is “reasonable.”

Trump’s co-defendants could also seek reimbursement for their own legal bills. A total of 18 people were indicted alongside Trump in August 2023, including former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.

Most defendants, including Trump, pleaded not guilty. Four accepted plea deals, which remain in force.

The Fulton County district attorney’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

The Georgia case was the last remaining criminal prosecution against Trump. A pair of federal cases, one focused on his actions in the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol and another on his handling of classified documents, was dropped after he returned to the White House earlier in 2025.

The fourth case, in which Trump was accused of approving a scheme to falsify business records to conceal a hush-money payment to an adult film actress, concluded in January 2025, when a New York judge sentenced him to an “unconditional discharge.” The ruling spared him any penalty, including jail time or a fine, but did not vacate his criminal conviction.

Trump has maintained his innocence in the New York case, and his legal team is appealing to overturn the conviction.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 18:55

NBC News Analysis Of ICE Shooting Video Opens Door To Self-Defense

On Wednesday morning, during an immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis, 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good accelerated towards an ICE agent with her car, and he responded with lethal force. Good was shot and killed.

Democrats and media figures rushed to condemn the shooting as an unjustified murder. 

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey claimed to have watched the video and dismissed the federal government’s claims of self-defense as "bullshit.”

SHAMELESS!

Jacob Frey absolves the victim who tried to run over ICE agents of any responsibility and blames ICE for "killing people." pic.twitter.com/p6alPKJkJf

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) January 7, 2026

Gov. Tim Walz claimed to have watched the video and disputed the Department of Homeland Security’s assessment that the ICE officer acted in self-defense.

I’ve seen the video.

Don’t believe this propaganda machine.

The state will ensure there is a full, fair, and expeditious investigation to ensure accountability and justice. https://t.co/3faWW4bQvV

— Governor Tim Walz (@GovTimWalz) January 7, 2026

Others were even less subtle.

”The officer not only needs to be fired and suspended, but based on the video, he needs to be charged with murder," Rep.Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) claimed.

Dan Goldman dumps gas on the fire: “It was an outright m*rder."

“This officer...needs to be charged with m*rder."

Democrats doing their level best to ensure Minneapolis is in flames tonight.pic.twitter.com/io75RP6MrL

— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) January 7, 2026

All claimed to have watched the video of the incident, and many people in the legacy media and on social media rushed to condemn the ICE agent. However, NBC News chose to take an objective look at the video evidence and the facts and vindicated the ICE agent. 

NBC correspondents Tom Winter and Tom Llamas reviewed the footage on air, highlighting critical details that undercut the narrative being pushed by members of the Democratic Party. 

Based on the footage, Winter concluded that Renee Nicole Good had to have been aware that it was law enforcement officers who were confronting her. "We don't know what happened before this, but they're definitely gonna look at the fact this is an unmarked vehicle, but the lights are on, these are clearly members of law enforcement, so that's at least known to this driver," he explained.

"Those officers approach the vehicle, they try to open the door," Llamas added. 

"Whatever is said here, what these officers say, if the driver said anything or not, could really help them understand whether or not they thought there was some sort of an imminent threat. Was this person trying to listen to them? Were they scared?" Winter said.

Llamas then described the sequence that led to the shooting. "And then, of course, what the driver does next … trying to leave there. One of the officers felt like they were forced to fire, and they do," he said. 

The footage they reviewed showed the vehicle accelerating with an officer positioned directly in front of it. But the more telling footage came from a different angle, making the danger posed to the ICE agents even clearer.

 "Well, this appears to show an officer right in front of the vehicle. That, and between the way that the vehicle was moving and the timeline of that, how was the officer responding in that split second gonna be critical for investigators," Winter explained.

NBC Nightly News was the only legacy evening newscast to report that the woman shot by the ICE officer in Minneapolis was in fact obstructing ICE by blocking traffic pic.twitter.com/qQCjO5cShE

— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 8, 2026

NBC’s video analysis laid out the key facts in a surprisingly objective way. They saw was anyone could see just by watching: Agents confronted a vehicle blocking them. The driver knew law enforcement was present based on the emergency lights. An officer stood directly in front of the car before it accelerated. The agent made a split-second decision to fire as the vehicle moved forward. 

While there will obviously be an investigation, what we can say for sure at this point is that in all the videos circulating on social media showing the shooting from different angles, they all show the driver accelerating into the ICE agent before he fired his weapon.

In a separate segment, Winter also revealed what law enforcement sources told him about the optics versus the legality. 

"I think from a law enforcement perspective, what you've heard law enforcement say is that they don't - they don't like the way that this shooting looks,” he explained. “And in speaking with people from law enforcement, from that part of the country, they use a phrase that is sometimes heard in law enforcement circles: lawful but awful. They don't like the look of it, but from a legal perspective, it might be okay,"

NBC’s Tom Winters with an accurate reaction from the 4pm hour to the deadly ICE-involved shooting:

“I think from a law enforcement perspective, what you've heard law enforcement say is that they don't — they don't like the way that this shooting looks. And in speaking with… pic.twitter.com/kVvY5oR9Vo

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 8, 2026

Additionally, Amy Swearer, a senior legal fellow at conservative nonprofit Advancing American Freedom, told the Daily Mail that under the law, the use of deadly force is justified when an officer can reasonably perceive a threat of serious bodily harm or death.

There has been much speculation online over the direction of the wheels as Good appears to be turning down the road away from the officers.

Others have questioned why Ross was standing in front of the car.

Swearer explained that both points are irrelevant to the law.

"He explicitly does not have a duty to retreat in the way that a civilian would under these circumstances," she told the Mail.

"It doesn't matter whether that driver subjectively was not trying to hit the officer,' Swearer added.

"It matters what the officer can reasonably perceive. He can't read her mind. He just knows that you have someone who's ignoring lawful commands, who is moving the car toward him. That is deadly force."

She compared it to a cop being confronted by a suspect who is reaching for a gun in his waistband while being asked to keep his hands up.

"They don't have to wait until they're actually being shot or actually being run over to respond," she said.

While Democrats are hungry to politicize the shooting, the level-headed analysis from NBC News and Amy Shearer clearly opens the door wide for a self-defense argument by the ICE agent.

The FBI now handles the investigation. The footage will determine whether the shooting was justified under the law. But the detailed NBC breakdown already reveals what Democrats and local officials either missed or, perhaps more likely, chose to ignore in their rush to judgment.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 18:30

US Online Holiday Shopping Hits Record $257.8 Billion: Adobe

Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

U.S. online holiday shopping was a record in 2025, fueled by a strong Cyber Week, according to new data released on Jan. 7 by Adobe.

Shoppers on Black Friday at a mall in Bethesda, Md., on Nov. 28, 2025. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

Consumers spent $257.8 billion from Nov. 1 to Dec. 31, representing a 6.8 percent year-over-year increase and a new record for online shopping.

This beat Adobe’s forecast of $253.4 billion.

Adobe calculates its estimates using direct online transactions and data from more than 1 trillion U.S. retail site visits.

The solid performance was driven by the five-day holiday—Thanksgiving Day to Cyber Monday—which generated more than $44 billion in overall online transactions. Within this period, Cyber Monday was the biggest e-commerce day of the season, accounting for $14.25 billion of sales.

Cost-conscious consumers were on the hunt for strong discounts, and they found savings, particularly in electronics, toys, apparel, and appliances. Discounts off the listed prices were higher than in the previous year, enabling shoppers to trade up and purchase higher-ticket items.

Three trends were also prevalent across the two-month Christmas shopping season, according to Adobe: mobile shopping; buy now, pay later programs; and use of generative artificial intelligence (AI).

“This 2025 holiday season, consumers embraced generative AI more than ever as a shopping assistant in their purchasing decisions,” Vivek Pandya, lead analyst at Adobe Digital Insights, said in a statement to The Epoch Times.

“Competitive discounts and flexible payment options like Buy Now Pay Later also contributed to driving record spend of $257.8 billion throughout this holiday season.”

Mobile shopping reached a new milestone, accounting for more than half (56.4 percent) of online transactions.

Buy now, pay later—a flexible payment method that allows consumers to pay for a purchase at a later date—climbed to an all-time high and contributed $20 billion in online spending. This was up nearly 10 percent from the same time a year ago.

Cyber Monday was the biggest day on record for buy now, pay later schemes, topping $1 billion.

An Adobe survey conducted in November found that consumers planned to use the program for apparel, electronics, furniture, and toys.

Meanwhile, generative AI-powered chat services were a crucial tool for shoppers to locate deals and research products throughout the holidays—and it paid off for retailers.

In total, traffic to retail sites driven by generative AI platforms jumped more than 693 percent year over year. On Cyber Monday alone, AI‑referred visits to U.S. retail websites surged by 670 percent.

“While the base of users remains modest, the uptick shows the value AI can deliver as a shopping assistant,” the report stated.

Shoppers on Black Friday at a mall in Bethesda, Md., on Nov. 28, 2025. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

Consumers relied most heavily on these AI services for appliances, electronics, personal care products, toys, and video games.

Every year, retailers brace for a wave of post-Christmas returns—and 2025 was no different.

While overall holiday season returns were down 1.2 percent from a year ago, they climbed 4.7 percent year over year in the five days following Christmas Day.

In 2024, one out of every eight returns occurred between Dec. 26 and Dec. 31. This year, Adobe reported, it was one out of seven.

Most Wonderful Time of the Year

Overall, it was a terrific year for retailers as U.S. holiday spending rose at a non-inflation-adjusted pace of 4.2 percent, according to the annual Retail Spend Monitor report from Visa Consulting & Analytics.

Comparable to Adobe’s findings, artificial intelligence played a role, says Wayne Best, chief economist at Visa.

“This season also marked a turning point, with artificial intelligence shaping how people discover products, compare prices, and interact with offers. This led to a more informed, more intentional consumer, ensuring they could stretch their discretionary spending,” Wayne said in a news release.

Mastercard, meanwhile, reported that U.S. holiday in-store and online retail sales jumped by almost 4 percent from Nov. 1 to Dec. 21.

The credit card giant noted that consumers shopped early, took advantage of store promotions, and blended brick-and-mortar shopping with the online experience.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 17:15

Tulsi Gabbard Reportedly Kept In Dark On Venezuela Operation As Nation's Intelligence Chief

Longtime Tulsi Gabbard supporters have wondered why she has seemed to be missing in action in terms of weighing in on Trump's militarily invading Venezuela to oust longtime socialist leader Nicolás Maduro, given that as a prior member of Congress before taking up the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) position, she had been quite vocal against any move on Venezuela. 

While the DNI position - which is the top intelligence post in the US government (overseeing all the agencies and coordinating intelligence at the NSC and for the White House) - is not fundamentally an office weighing in on the policy side of things, many have still wondered just where her 'non-interventionist' voice has been - at least behind the scenes in internal administration deliberations.

The Wall Street Journal reports she was intentionally sidelined from any and all planning for the mission to oust Maduro. "White House officials excluded the top U.S. intelligence officer, Tulsi Gabbard, from Venezuela planning since last summer, according to people with knowledge of the matter," WSJ writes Thursday.

Trump has "gone to bat for Tulsi" in appointing her and keeping her as DNI, but it seems some considered her a 'risk' in terms of being let in on the covert Venezuelan Maduro kidnap raid. via NBC

"As President Trump’s national-security team huddled last week to make final preparations for the operation to snatch Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Gabbard was posting social-media photos of herself on a beach in Hawaii, where she grew up, ignorant of the operation’s details," according to more details.

So she was not only sidelined as intelligence director from being let in on the single biggest foreign military and intelligence mission of the Trump administration thus far, but she was literally thousands of miles away from decision-making centers when it went down.

One anonymous US official did say that her office was involved in providing "intelligence analysis that assisted in the overall mission from the analytical side" - but clearly she was nowhere near the situation room, and essentially blocked from any foreknowledge.

"Trump isn’t particularly close with Gabbard, a senior administration official said, and wanted to limit the number of people who knew about the Venezuela mission. She didn’t need to know about it, the official said," according to more details.

This means that intel would have been primarily handled by the Central Intelligence Agency, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe - who is seen as increasingly having Trump's ear.

However, the WSJ report has also noted there are contradictory sources, including one very significant voice which weighed in as follows:

"That’s completely false," Vice President JD Vance said when asked about Gabbard’s exclusion from the Venezuela planning during a Thursday White House briefing. "We kept it very tight to the senior cabinet-level officials and related officials in our government."

But Vance seems to be suggesting that Gabbard may have been among those top IC (intelligence community) officials who actually 'didn't need to know' - though this is a bit strange and unexpected.

An example of her strident position against regime change in Venezuela and other places (like Iran)...

This is what Tulsi Gabbard said when she announced her presidential campaign in February 2019 -- denouncing Trump's pursuit of "regime change" in Venezuela and Iran. There is simply no way for her to wriggle out of this and retain bare-minimum credibility pic.twitter.com/42eNeEo28j

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) January 8, 2026

Prior reporting in the aftermath of the Friday night into early morning raid in Caracas underscored that even top Pentagon officials were kept in the dark as to the timeline and details of the operation, until the very last moments of execution, overseen by a tight crew of Trump admin officials, generals, and without doubt CIA Director Ratcliffe.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 16:50

How Dare You Fight Back Against Communists!

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

When we examine the historic nature of communist revolution, we have to look beyond our disgust for their motives and consider their strategies and the reasons why they tend to succeed. Because it is simply a fact that the western experiment of individual liberty and self determination is being systematically eroded by a storm of socialist movements that will inevitably lead to a global communist regime if we do not take drastic actions in the near future.

The goals of communism and socialism are essentially the same; the core difference is that socialism seeks collectivist control of populations and resources through an incremental and “peaceful” (subversive) takeover of governments. Communism seeks collectivist control over populations and resources through direct and violent overthrow.

Either strategy can bleed into the other and there is no rule that says communists can’t exploit various shades of violence and sabotage while hiding behind a facade of peace and democracy. At bottom, leftists operate like guerrillas when they are not in government power, and they operate like dictators when they are in government power.

We have seen this dynamic on display when it comes to the highly organized activist sabotage networks that stalk and impede lawful deportations of illegal aliens. This week, one female activist was shot and killed while allegedly trying to block ICE agents with her vehicle, and then trying to run one of them over when they approached her.

I’ve looked at all the available video evidence from multiple angles and in my opinion she did in fact try to hit the officer with her car. Frankly, she got exactly what she deserved and I would argue that more of these NGO paid activists need to face similar consequences if we are ever going to stop the engineered communist monkey wrenching in our midst.

If we can’t shut the NGOs down, then the people they pay and train need to be pummeled until they realize the money simply isn’t worth it.

Leftists function on the assumption that they can skirt the law while using it as a shield against reprisal. They do it over and over and usually they get away with it. They whittle us down by stabbing at us from behind a curtain of gray legality. I’m tired of it, and I think many millions of other Americans are also tired of it. We’re done playing nice.

In my studies on various communist insurgencies over the past century there is a clear pattern, a specific strategy that is almost always used. For lack of a better description, today we would call it the strategy of the “Cry Bully.”

Here is basically how Cry Bully communists operate:

1) They work with the very same oligarchs, corporatists and globalists they claim to despise. They happily take the money of wealthy institutions and NGOs and do the bidding of their elitist masters as long as they get to tear down their enemies.

2) They employ elicit funding to pay for a the mobilization of an astroturf army of provocateurs and agitators (useful idiots will naturally gravitate to this army over time because they wrongly assume it’s grassroots).

3) They use propaganda to justify the activist sabotage and disruption of the target society by falsely claiming that they represent the will of the populace and the rights of the “disenfranchised.”

4) They wrap themselves in the identity of the “victim”; they are the poor, downtrodden masses. They are the poverty stricken underclass. They are the abused and mistreated majority suffering under a minority of overlords (anyone more successful than they are or anyone who opposes their beliefs). Therefore, everything they do no matter how vicious, deceitful and destructive is morally exonerated.

5) The insurgents then agitate and provoke and poke and prod the society until it reacts to defend itself. When they finally get hit back, leftists then cry the tears of the wounded underdog.

6) They then attempt to abuse the laws and principles of the existing system in order to punish anyone who defends themselves against communist provocations. If they can get the law on their side, through corrupt judges and politicians, then they can cripple their opposition by making people afraid to fight back for fear of imprisonment.

7) When leftists can’t control the law they wail and rage over it’s rightful application. They act as if the enforcement of basic law and order is the same as government tyranny. How dare you fight back! How dare you subject them to the punishments they deserve!

8) A great and fabricated drama unfolds. Leftists play the role of martyrs who “only want to be free”, who only want “equity” and the same prosperity enjoyed by their betters. They only want to protect the rights of the vulnerable. In reality, they are militants trying to burn down your freedom and prosperity and pillage what they can in the process.

They don’t want to be equal to you, they want to plunder what you have so they can feel superior to you. They want to steal your wealth, your accomplishments and the life which you worked so hard to build. They are parasites, not people.

If any of this is sounding familiar it’s because we are experiencing this very process of communist revolution right now in America. And, I think it’s time to admit that our republic and our constitution (as we currently interpret it) are ill equipped to defeat an insurgency made up of millions of the same citizens that the republic was originally built to protect.

If the Founding Fathers were alive today, they would have already crushed this insurgency to dust and they would not be concerned about any constitutional conundrums. They understood that the liberties of the republic only apply to people who want to keep the republic alive. They do not apply to people who desire its death.

How do we fight this enemy from within? Well, first we have to accept that the greatest enemy conservatives have is ourselves. There is no shortage of conservatives and centrists these days who refuse to take proper action. Our greatest enemy is those people within our own ranks who have no balls.

In the face of rampant racketeering and migrant driven fraud in Minnesota (and other blue states) we repeatedly discover that the system is being manipulated to serve the interests of miscreants who want to steal from us and subjugate us. It’s not just the migrants, it’s the leftist politicians enabling the migrants. The entire structure of law is being subverted and mocked.

Tim Walz is just one example of a political poison pill that likely participated in fraud and he’ll probably never face prison time for it. Look at all the leftist judges protecting the Somali fraudsters. Look at all the politicians in congress protecting them. And it’s not just Democrats, there are some Republicans and libertarian politicians who are constantly interfering with any meaningful response.

Meanwhile, blackpillers scream over Trump “not doing anything.”

It’s clear that our welfare systems are being pirated, that our country has been invaded and that at least one half of our government is in on the scheme. Yet, I see a number of conservative and libertarian voices who would rather blither on about small government theory rather than actually confront the culprits.

It doesn’t seem to occur to them that the government’s massive expansion is a symptom of our inaction on the “smaller” issues. If we can’t even deal with a bunch of low IQ pirates from Somalia and the garbage Democrats supporting them, then we’re never going to be able to deal with the “bigger” issues of federal waste, the central bank or the globalists.

There’s a good reason why public approval for congress is constantly sitting near record lows (currently hovering around 15%). All they do is maintain the status quo and impede every effort that might lead to a modicum of reform. Communists love these kinds of circumstances. They love legal purists and constitutional sticklers, because the purists make communist revolution possible.

This is not to say that I believe the federal government is the answer to everything, or most things. But at some point conservatives decided that government is not allowed to do ANYTHING. That it is supposed to sit idle while the country is overrun by barbarians and morally relative demons. That we aren’t ever supposed to retaliate and strike fear into the hearts of our adversaries.

I’m sorry, but we are at war and there is no place for such idealism any longer. Retaliation is the only thing that is going to save us now.

When I ponder this problem I’m often reminded of a book called The Trial by Franz Kafka. In that book there is a short story called “Before The Law” which describes a man who travels from the country to the city to a place where he can “access the law.” The doorway to the law is protected by a guard, who tells him he “can’t admit the man at the moment”, but if he waits he might eventually gain entry.

Over years of waiting the man grows old and feeble, fixating on the guard and desperate for admittance. Finally, he begins to die. He asks the guard why no one else has sought entry in all that time. The guard replies: “No one else could ever be admitted here, since this gate was made only for you. And now, I am going to shut it.”

The law seemed to be open to him, but it was a facade. If he wanted justice he would have to grab it himself, but the man never attempted to force his way in. He never took action. Instead, he wasted his life and youth hoping for the system to treat him fairly.

And this is how I look at the conservative liberty movement or MAGA movement and the various groups that orbit it. It’s not only about the system interfering with Trump’s efforts, it’s about conservative being hobbled and tied down by false promises of law and justice while communists are given free rein to do as they please.

Conservative are constantly told that waiting is the answer. It’s a grand lie designed to keep us passive and apathetic. In fact, I would argue that extensive wealth and energy has been expended over the years by the powers-that-be to do one thing: To simply keep conservatives from taking matters into their own hands.

Like crabs in a bucket, there always seems to be naysayers, blackpillers and purists who grab hold of anyone taking action and pulling them back into the water. And, when government does do something right, as we have see with Trump on more than a few occasions, these same people are often a more incessant obstacle than the very leftist insurgents attacking our nation from within.

Their argument of course is that if we fight back then the result might be much worse than what we have today. What if we become the monsters we’re trying to defeat? I say that’s a risk we’re going to have to take. Better to do something than wait at the gate, aging and rotting away slowly, watching our republic die from a thousand cuts when we could have saved it while we are still capable.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 16:25

India Is Set To Be The G20 Growth Leader In 2026

The latest OECD Economic Outlook (December 2025) revealed that the global economy has proved resilient last year, even though fragilities remain, with a range of risks including "elevated policy uncertainty and rising barriers to trade".

According to the organization's forecasts, global GDP growth is projected to slow down from 3.2 percent in 2025 to 2.9 percent in 2026.

As Tristan Gaudiat shows in the infographic below, among G20 economies (together accounting for around 80 percent of global GDP), some countries are expected to continue growing at a pace well above the average.

You will find more infographics at Statista

India tops the list, with a real GDP growth expected to exceed 6 percent again this year (6.7 in 2025; 6.2 in 2026), driven by robust domestic demand, digital transformation and manufacturing growth.

Indonesia follows at 5.0 percent (rate in 2025 and 2026), leveraging its young workforce and commodity exports.

China, though facing structural slowdowns, remains a key player with 4.4 percent economic growth projected this year (after 5.0 percent in 2025).

Saudi Arabia follows closely at 4.0 percent, buoyed by oil revenues and ambitious economic diversification efforts under the "Vision 2030" national plan.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 15:45

Texas Issues Warning About Unsolicited Seed Packages From China

Authored by Dorothy Li via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Texas has warned residents not to plant what it calls “mysterious seeds” that arrived in unsolicited packages from China, as authorities investigate thousands of such reports across the state.

Packages containing unknown seeds from China. Texas Department of Agriculture

State authorities first became aware of this issue in February last year, when a resident in Clute reported that a package from an unknown sender in China contained “unidentified seeds and a liquid container,” according to the Texas Department of Agriculture.

Since then, officials have collected 1,101 packs of unsolicited seeds delivered to 109 locations across the state, the agency said in a Jan. 5 statement. The most recent packet was collected on Dec. 29.

“At a glance, this might seem like a small problem, but this is serious business,” Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said in the statement.

“The possible introduction of an invasive species to the state via these seeds poses real risks to Texas families and the agriculture industry.”

The issue was not limited to Texas. Officials in Ohio, New Mexico, and Alabama issued similar advisories last year after families reported receiving unsolicited packages of unknown seeds at their doorsteps.

The Alabama Department of Agriculture and Industries, in a March statement, said that the seeds sent to Alabamians were identified as tomato and onion varieties. While no harmful compounds were detected in them, state officials cautioned that such practices could still be illegal or violate regulations without proper authorization.

“We urge all residents to be on the lookout for similar packages,” Alabama Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries Rick Pate said in the statement. “These seeds may be invasive to Alabama plants or be harmful to livestock.”

This wasn’t the first time U.S. households received packages of unidentified seeds they hadn’t ordered. In 2020, officials from all 50 states issued warnings about such unsolicited seeds. Many of these packages were processed by China Post, the Chinese communist regime’s official postal service.

At the time, U.S. state officials warned residents that seeds arriving by mail could introduce invasive species into local ecosystems, while some Americans expressed concern that they could carry diseases amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Individuals in European Union member states, the UK, Canada, and some in the Indo-Pacific, including Australia and Taiwan, also reported receiving similar unsolicited packets of seeds at the time, many of them from China.

An investigation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture determined that these seeds were likely part of a global “brushing scam.” By sending unsolicited, low-value items to residential addresses, sellers could post false-positive reviews under the name of a “verified” owner, thereby boosting sales, according to investigators.

As new reports continued to emerge, officials in Texas said they’re collaborating with the federal authorities to collect, test, and dispose of these seed packs safely.

Residents who received unsolicited packages are urged to contact their local agriculture departments immediately and are advised not to open the package, plant the unidentified seeds, or discard them in regular trash.

“Whether it’s part of an ongoing scam or something more sinister, we are determined to protect Texans,” Miller said in the Jan. 5 statement.

“Unsolicited seeds coming into our country are a risk to American agriculture, our environment, and public safety. Texas isn’t going to take chances when it comes to protecting our people and our food supply.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 15:25

Black Harvard Dean Fired After Anti-White, Anti-Police Social Media Posts Resurface

A Harvard University dean has been removed after a student-run news outlet, the Yard Report, dug up old social media posts slamming whiteness, the cops, and advocating for looting and rioting. 

eh...

Gregory Davis, the former Dunster House Allston Burr resident dean, wrote the posts in question between 2019 and 2024 - mostly on X. He became dean of the dormitory in 2024.

"It’s almost like Whiteness is a self-destructive ideology that annihilates everyone around it. By design," he said in 2019.

Meanwhile in 2020 amid the George Floyd riots, Davis slammed the police, posting "You should ask your cop friends to resign since they’re racist and evil," he said on X. 

Davis then defended the 'mostly peaceful' riots that ensued, writing "Something to keep in mind: rioting and looting are parts of democracy just like voting and marching," adding "The people WILL be heard."

And when President Trump got COVID, Davis wrote "If he dies, he dies."

When confronted about the posts, Davis wrote to Dunster House residents - saying: 

"Recently, some media organizations have inquired regarding comments that I made on my personal social media accounts prior to my start in the Resident Dean role," adding "These posts do not reflect my current thinking or beliefs. I deeply appreciate the responsibility inherent in the Resident Dean role and I value the trust that individuals have placed in me. I regret if my statements have any negative impact on the Dunster community."

"Since becoming the Allston Burr Resident Dean, I have worked hard to ensure that Dunster House is a welcoming, warm and supportive space for all of its member," the message continued. "That continues to be the guiding force of my work today. As events outside of Harvard have affected our House and me personally, my commitment to each of you, our students, has not wavered. In my role, I have enjoyed the opportunity to work collaboratively with members of HUPD and other colleagues across campus. I respect the work they do to support our community."

How are we feeling about this? Discuss... 

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 15:05

Lebanese Army Says Plan To Limit Weapons To State Forces At Advanced Stage

Authored by Evgenia Filimianova via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Lebanese armed forces said on Jan. 8 that their plan to restrict weapons to official security agencies had entered an “advanced stage,” after expanding their presence across southern Lebanon.

Members of the Lebanese army secure the area near the site of an Israeli strike, after Israeli military said that it struck a militant from the Hezbollah terrorist group, in Beirut's southern suburbs of Lebanon on Nov. 23, 2025. Mohamed Azakir/Reuters

The army said that it has secured vital areas and extended control over territories under its authority in the South Litani sector, excluding areas that remain under Israeli occupation.

The announcement follows the Lebanese government’s August 2025 decision to authorize the army to prepare a plan to limit all weapons in the country to six recognized security agencies by the end of 2025. That decision came after a visit by U.S. envoy Tom Barrack, who pressed Lebanese officials to consolidate state authority over all armed entities.

Military activity between Israel and Lebanon has persisted despite a cease-fire agreement reached in 2024 and mediated by the United States and France.

Under that agreement, Lebanon committed to expanding its army’s control over southern areas and restricting the operations of the terrorist group Hezbollah near the border with Israel.

Israel continues to hold positions in southern Lebanon and has carried out repeated airstrikes that it says are aimed at preventing Hezbollah from rearming and planning new attacks.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a statement on Jan. 8 that the U.S.-brokered cease-fire agreement “states clearly, Hezbollah must be fully disarmed.”

The statement added that this was “imperative for Israel’s security and Lebanon’s future.”

While welcoming Lebanese efforts, Netanyahu’s office described them as “an encouraging beginning, but they are far from sufficient,” citing what it described as Hezbollah’s attempts to rebuild its “terror infrastructure with Iranian support.”

Lebanese Leadership Backs Army

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, who met Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on Jan. 8 just before convening a Cabinet session at Baabda Palace in Beirut, publicly endorsed the army’s statement.

“I also emphasize that the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces south of the Litani River falls under a comprehensive national decision grounded in the Constitution, state resolutions, and relevant international commitments,” Aoun said in a statement issued by the presidency on Jan. 8.

He said the move was aimed at “consolidating the exclusivity of arms in the hands of the state.”

Aoun, Salam, and Lebanese army commander General Joseph Haykal met with U.N. Undersecretary-General for Peace Operations Jean-Pierre Lacroix on Jan. 7.

The talks focused on the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon’s (UNIFIL’s) support for Lebanese authorities in sustaining the cessation of hostilities and advancing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which bars armed groups from operating near the border with Israel.

The Lebanese army said on Jan. 8 that it continues to coordinate closely with UNIFIL and the U.S.-backed cease-fire monitoring mechanism. It thanked the U.S. and French teams involved in monitoring the truce, as well as the countries contributing troops to the mission.

Ongoing Operations and Israeli Strikes

Operations in the South Litani sector remain ongoing until unexploded ordnance and tunnels are cleared, the Lebanese army also said in its statement. These steps, it added, were necessary to consolidate control and prevent armed groups from rebuilding their capabilities.

Lebanese armed forces condemned continued Israeli attacks on Lebanese territory, saying they negatively impact their ability to complete the restoration of control over southern areas.

Israel carried out airstrikes on multiple targets in Lebanon on Jan. 5 that it said were linked to Hezbollah and Hamas, according to the Israeli military.

On Jan. 6, the Israel Defense Forces said it struck weapons storage facilities and military structures used by Hezbollah in attacks against Israeli troops and territory. The military also said it hit Hamas weapons production sites in southern Lebanon that it described as critical to the group’s military buildup.

Aoun condemned the strikes on Jan. 6, saying they had hit towns in the Bekaa Valley and southern Lebanon, reaching as far north as Sidon.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 14:45

Did Dr. Spock's Parenting Advice Kill 60,000 Babies?

Authored by Ross Pomeroy via RealClearScience,

Dr. Benjamin Spock is remembered as one of the foremost authorities on raising children. His influential and prolific books, first published in the mid-1940s, advised parents to be more affectionate and flexible with their young kids, countering what was then the entrenched norm of being rigid and aloof.

Though most parents today are probably more familiar with a different, pointy-eared Spock, in his heyday during the 1950s and 60s, Dr. Spock was one of the most recognizable and respected public figures in the world. When he spoke or wrote, people – and particularly parents – listened intently.

Unfortunately, much of Spock's guidance wasn't grounded in scientific research, but rather his extensive clinical experience. While this generally produced helpful, or at least harmless, advice, in one major instance, it resulted in grave harm. 

Starting with the 1958 edition of his bestselling tome, The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care, Spock recommended to parents that they put their babies to sleep on their front, rather than on their backs. "If he vomits, he’s more likely to choke on the vomitus," Spock reasoned. "Also, he tends to keep his head turned to the same side—usually toward the centre of the room. This may flatten the side of his head."

At the time, there was an active debate about whether front-sleeping or back-sleeping was healthier for infants, so Spock's recommendation – which we now know to be dead wrong – could be excused. However, in the dozen years since Spock urged prone-sleeping, scientific studies made clear that the practice markedly raised the risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) compared to back sleeping. A 2005 historical analysis conducted by researchers with the Centre for Evidence-based Child Health in London showed that by 1970, the scientific literature indicated that front-sleeping tripled the risk of SIDS compared to back-sleeping.

Spock, however, neglected to consult this gathered scientific evidence and didn't update his book Baby and Child Care to reflect the new reality for some time. As Marit L. Bovbjerg, an Associate Professor at Oregon State University focusing on maternity care in the U.S., wrote in 2011:

"Dr. Spock's book was not the only popular book to advocate prone sleeping at the time, but further revisions continued to make the recommendation nine years after solid epidemiological evidence had accumulated regarding the increased risk of SIDS for babies being placed on their stomachs for sleep."

Spock's book was by far and away the most read parenting guide to advocate prone sleeping. According to the New York Times, for a half-century since its publication, Baby and Child Care was the second-best-selling book, behind only the Bible.

The researchers behind the aforementioned 2005 scientific review estimated that the collective failure, led by Dr. Spock, to alter the advice on safe-sleep for infants in a timely fashion, resulted in an extra 10,000 infant deaths in the UK and at least 50,000 in Europe, the USA, and Australasia after 1970.

With great influence comes great responsibility. In failing to change his mind on infant safe-sleep in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, Dr. Spock showed that he was not worthy of the standing he garnered and the trust he earned from the world's parents.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 14:05

FDA Says Many Fitness Wearables, AI Tools Exempt From Regulation

The Food and Drug Administration on Jan. 6 clarified that it will not regulate some artificial intelligence (AI) tools and wearables.

In a guidance document, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said tools used to help make clinical decisions are sometimes exempt from FDA oversight, such as those not intended to analyze medical images.

In a second document, the FDA said it does not regulate “low risk products that promote a healthy lifestyle,” including “low risk general wellness products” such as exercise equipment and software programs.

The agency listed as examples products that track and record a person’s sleep, work, and exercise and products that make claims about weight management and physical fitness.

“For a lot of the decision support out there, we need to get out of the way as a regulator,” FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said in a video. “We have a clear lane for medical-grade products. But otherwise, we need to adapt with the times, and be proactive with guidance, so that companies and developers are not left confused about what they should be doing, or what the FDA wants.”

Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary in Washington on July 29, 2025. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

As Zachary Stieber details below via The Epoch Times, Makary said the FDA is “here to promote AI” and added during an appearance on Fox Business that at least some of the tools use AI.

“If something is simply providing information, like ChatGPT or Google, we’re not going to outrun that lion, we’re not going to go in there and say there is one result that is inaccurate and therefore we have to shut down,” Makary said. “We have to promote these products, and at the same time, just guard against major safety concerns.”

When asked about concerns regarding inaccurate information, Makary said, “We don’t believe in censorship.”

“If people are looking up a symptom on an AI-based tool, let’s have that conversation when they come in to see their doctor or do a virtual visit,” he said.

OpenAI, which developed ChatGPT, said this month that more than 5 percent of ChatGPT messages are about health care, with more than 40 million users turning to the AI bot with health care questions.

Researchers reported in 2025 that at least half of responses from AI models to health-related questions are not fully supported by their sources and that some answers are contradicted by the sources.

Wearables, a category that includes fitness trackers and glucose monitors, are also not subject to regulatory oversight if they are simply providing information, according to Makary.

“The only stipulation is if they make claims of something being medical grade, like a clinically appropriate clinical-grade blood pressure measurement,” he said on Fox. “We don’t want people changing their medicines based on something that’s just a screening tool or an estimate of a physiologic parameter.”

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said people should start using wearables as part of efforts to improve their health.

The FDA had in 2025 warned Whoop, which makes wearable products, that it was marketing monitoring of blood pressure without FDA approval.

“We believe the agency is overstepping its authority in this case by attempting to regulate a non-medical wellness feature as a medical device,” a Whoop spokesperson told news outlets at the time.

The FDA later issued consumer alerts telling people not to use unauthorized devices for monitoring blood pressure and infant vital signs.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/08/2026 - 13:45