Latest News
"Racism Is Only White" – Anti-White Art Installation Goes Viral, Sparks Outrage
1747294200 from ZEROHEDGE
"Racism Is Only White" – Anti-White Art Installation Goes Viral, Sparks Outrage Via Remix News, A number of anti-White slogans were used in an art installation at the University of Grenoble in France for “Equality Month,” with widespread outrage leading the president of the university to demand they be taken down. The inscriptions repeatedly attack “White males” and claim that only White people are guilty of racism, with the entire scandal going viral and garnering tens of thousands of comments and millions of views on French social media. There were approximately 40 such artistic inscriptions, with four of them deemed especially offensive towards White people, which read: 1. The world is in pain. That’s normal, it is ruled by white men. 2. Earth is monochrome like a rainbow, racism is only white. 3. It’s the work of the Arabs that built Versailles. 4. In chess, as in life, whites have a head start. 🇫🇷🚨 Incredible anti-White racism from France's University of Grenoble. Four glass plaques installations read: 1. The world is in pain. That's normal, it is ruled by white men. 2. Earth is monochrome like a rainbow, racism is only white. 3. It's the work of the Arabs that… pic.twitter.com/tmjbfrLSlE — Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) May 14, 2025 Other slogans were slightly less controversial, but still deemed problematic, such as: “I would like to overthrow the French government.” The slogans are affixed to the glass walls of the affixed amphitheater gallery in the Pierre Mendès France building at the university’s campus, and were commissioned from the artist Petite Poissone. It is unclear how much he was paid to produce the racist slogans. The conservative student union, UNI Grenoble, denounced the messages, saying they represent “anti-white propaganda.” “These unacceptable messages encourage racism against white people and spread the woke idea that we are in a systematically racist society,” said UNI national delegate Yvenn Le Coz, who requested the university immediately take down the artworks. After the UNI alerted President Yassine Lakhnech, who claimed he only became aware of the inscriptions despite them already being up for two months. The inscriptions have become a part of a national news story, with some of the biggest outlets in the country now questioning how such racist inscriptions were installed. Le Figaro questioned the president, Lakhnech, who said the messages “do not reflect the university’s positions or values.” He claimed they would now be removed, but only the ones that caused a problem. A press release has gone out and noted that the artwork was given “sufficient oversight.” However, university students are claiming that 10 inscriptions out of 50 were already reviewed and deemed inappropriate, which, if true, means university staff saw all the messages beforehand and allowed them to go up. The artist, a 42-year-old Grenoble resident, has numerous anti-White and anti-male comments and artworks on her Instagram account.· Anti-white racism at French and Western universities has been commonplace in the last decades, as Remix News has reported. In 2021, Remix News wrote that the elite Paris Institute of Political Studies, also known as Sciences Po Paris, is experiencing a growing rise in racist, de-colonial, and anti-White ideologies. Many conferences, research papers, and courses are under the influence and supervision of small but aggressive ideological militant groups. Read more here... Tyler Durden Thu, 05/15/2025 - 03:30
Netanyahu Charges Macron With 'Despicable' Support For Hamas As Spat Deepens
1747291500 from ZEROHEDGE
Netanyahu Charges Macron With 'Despicable' Support For Hamas As Spat Deepens A new Gaza-related spat is now raging between the leaders of France and Israel, amid new reports that famine is hitting the Palestinian population, which is said to be impacting 500,000 people. French President Emmanuel Macron has called the military policies of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "shameful" and "unacceptable" in a fresh interview with a national broadcaster. "What the government of Benjamin Netanyahu is doing is unacceptable," Macron began in a Gaza segment of the interview. "There is no water, no medicine, the wounded cannot get out, the doctors cannot get in. What he is doing is shameful," he continued. Via Associated Press He then interestingly appeared to leverage recent reports saying that Trump-Netanyahu relations have reached a low point, and that the White House is fed up with Bib. "We need the United States. President Trump has the levers. I have had tough words with Prime Minister Netanyahu. I got angry, but they [Israel] don't depend on us, they depend on American weapons," Macron said. Macron here seemed to be calling on Washington to essentially put the Netanyahu government in its place, as Trump has sidelined Tel Aviv on everything from the Houthi ceasefire to gaining the freedom of Israeli-American hostage Edan Alexander. And more: "My job is to do everything I can to make it stop," Macron said, adding that the possibility of revisiting the EU trade cooperation agreements with Israel is on the table. Never one to back down from a diplomatic war of words, Netanyahu hit back on Wednesday, going so far as to say that Macron stands with Hamas. "Macron has once again chosen to stand with a murderous terrorist organization and echo its despicable propaganda, accusing Israel of blood libels," a statement from the Israeli prime minister's office said. "Instead of supporting the Western democratic camp fighting the Islamist terrorist organizations and calling for the release of the hostages, Macron is once again demanding that Israel surrender and reward terrorism," the blistering Netanyahu statement added. The NY Times has issued an alarming report this week which said "Some Israeli military officials have privately concluded that Palestinians in Gaza face widespread starvation unless aid deliveries are restored within weeks, according to three Israeli defense officials familiar with conditions in the enclave." The report continued by saying "Israeli military officers who monitor humanitarian conditions in Gaza have warned their commanders in recent days that unless the blockade is lifted quickly, many areas of the enclave will likely run out of enough food to meet minimum daily nutritional needs, according to the defense officials." Shocking statement from French President Macron: Netanyahu’s blocking of aid to Gaza is shameful. • What is happening in Gaza is an unacceptable and horrific humanitarian tragedy that must be stopped. • Pressure must be put on Israel pic.twitter.com/D4efgGNWAu — Furkan Gözükara (@GozukaraFurkan) May 13, 2025 Currently a US-backed aid plan is being worked on, which is said to be 'independent' amid accusations that Hamas has been stealing and reselling inbound aid. Others have accused Israel of blocking it, in pursuit of a total siege policy. What's clear is that Netanyahu is increasingly in the political hotseat not just at home, but on the international stage as well - where his closest ally the United States has appeared to grow somewhat cool on the previously enthusiastic support and relationship. Tyler Durden Thu, 05/15/2025 - 02:45
Yemen Taught Trump Some Lessons That He'd Do Well To Apply Towards Ukraine
1747288800 from ZEROHEDGE
Yemen Taught Trump Some Lessons That He'd Do Well To Apply Towards Ukraine Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack, The lessons from Trump’s Yemeni debacle could inform his future decisions on Ukraine... Five New York Times (NYT) journalists collaborated to produce a detailed report earlier this week about “Why Trump Suddenly Declared Victory Over the Houthi Militia”. It’s worth reading in full if time permits, but the present piece will summarize and analyze its findings. To begin with, CENTCOM chief General Michael Kurilla proposed an eight- to -10-month campaign for degrading the Houthis’ air defenses before carrying out Israeli-like targeted assassinations, but Trump decided on 30 days instead. That’s important. The US’ top regional military official already knew how numerous the Houthis’ air defenses were and how long it would take to seriously damage them, which shows that the Pentagon already considered Houthi-controlled North Yemen to be a regional power, while Trump wanted to avoid a protracted war. It’s little wonder then that the US failed to establish air superiority during the first month, which is why it lost several MQ-9 Reaper drones by then and exposed one of its aircraft carriers to continued threats. The $1 billion in munitions that were expended during that period widened preexisting divisions within the administration over whether this bombing campaign was worth the mounting costs. New Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John Caine was concerned that this could drain resources away from the Asia-Pacific. Seeing as how the Trump Administration’s grand strategic goal is to “Pivot (back) to Asia” for more muscularly containing China, this viewpoint was likely decisive in Trump’s final calculations. Oman reportedly provided the “perfect offramp” for him by proposing to his envoy Steve Witkoff, who was visiting them as part of the US’ nuclear talks with Iran, that the US could stop bombing the Houthis while they’ll stop targeting American ships but not ships that they deem helpful to Israel. This draws attention to that country’s outsized diplomatic role in regional affairs, but it also shows that the US was hitherto unsure of how to end its campaign in a face-saving way despite already realizing that it failed. Two pathways were considered: ramping up operations for another month, carrying out a “freedom of navigation” exercise, and declaring victory if the Houthis didn’t fire on them; or continuing the campaign while strengthening the capacity of local Yemeni allies to start another offensive in the North. Both were reportedly scrapped in favor of Trump’s sudden victory announcement after another US jet fell off of an aircraft carrier, a US attack killed dozens of migrants in Yemen, and the Houthis hit Ben Gurion Airport. Five conclusions can be drawn from the NYT’s report. For starters, Houthi-controlled North Yemen is already a regional power and has been so for some time, the status of which they achieved despite the Gulf coalition’s previous years-long bombing campaign and ongoing partial blockade. This impressive feat speaks to their resilience and the effectiveness of the strategies that they’ve implemented. North Yemen’s mountainous geography indisputably played a role in this, but it wasn’t the sole factor. The second conclusion is that Trump’s decision to authorize a very time-limited bombing campaign was therefore doomed from the get-go. He either wasn’t fully informed of the fact that North Yemen had already become a regional power, perhaps due to military officials self-censoring for fear of getting fired if they upset him, or he had ulterior motives in having the US bomb them for only a brief time. In any case, there was no way that the Houthis were going to be destroyed in just several months’ time. Optics are important for every administration, and Trump’s second one prioritizes them more than any other in recent memory, yet the third conclusion is that he still beat a hasty retreat once the strategic risks started spiraling and the costs began piling up instead of doubling down in defiance. This shows that ego- and legacy-related interests don’t always determine his policy formulations. Its relevance is that no one can therefore say for sure that he won’t cut and run from Ukraine if peace talks collapse. Building upon the above, the Trump Administration’s acceptance of Oman’s unsolicited proposal that led to the “perfect offramp” shows that it’ll listen to proposals from friendly countries for defusing conflicts in which the US has become embroiled, which could apply towards Ukraine. The three Gulf states that Trump is visiting this week have all played roles in either hosting talks or facilitating exchanges between Russia and Ukraine so it’s possible that they’ll share some peace proposals for breaking the impasse. And finally, the China factor looms over everything that the US does nowadays, ergo one of the reported reasons why Trump suddenly ended his unsuccessful bombing campaign against the Houthis after being informed by his top brass that it was wasting valuable munitions that would be better sent to Asia. Likewise, Trump might be convinced by similar arguments with regard to the strategic costs of defiantly doubling down in support of Ukraine if peace talks collapse, which the Gulf states might convey to him. Connecting the lessons from Trump’s Yemeni debacle with his ongoing efforts to end the Ukrainian Conflict, it’s possible that he might at first instinctively double down in support of Ukraine if peace talks collapse only to soon thereafter be dissuaded by his top brass and/or friendly countries. Of course, it would be best for him to simply cut his country’s losses now instead of continuing to add to them, but his increasingly emotional posts about Putin hint that he might blame him and overreact if talks collapse. It's therefore more important than ever that peace-loving countries which have influence with the US immediately share whatever creative diplomatic proposals they might have in mind for breaking the impasse between Russia and Ukraine. Trump is creeping towards a Yemeni-like debacle in Ukraine, albeit one with potentially nuclear stakes given Russia’s strategic arsenal, but there’s still time to avert it if the “perfect offramp” appears and he’s convinced that accepting it would assist his “Pivot (back) to Asia”. Tyler Durden Thu, 05/15/2025 - 02:00
Adapt Or Die: Redefining Wargaming For The Age Of Algorithmic Warfare
1747279500 from ZEROHEDGE
Adapt Or Die: Redefining Wargaming For The Age Of Algorithmic Warfare Authored by S.L. Nelson via RealClearWire (emphasis ours), Commentary “Adapt or die.” This isn’t just a cliché; it’s a fundamental truth of human survival. Security—the psychological need for stability and protection—is second only to food and water in Maslow’s hierarchy. War directly threatens this security, so understanding war is essential for preserving peace. One of the oldest tools for grasping the nature of war is wargaming. It is, in essence, a rehearsal—an intellectual simulation that helps leaders make sense of complex, high-stakes decisions before lives and national resources are on the line. But while its utility has persisted, its form has not evolved fast enough to meet the demands of the modern battlefield. The Problem With Today’s Wargaming Wargaming is indispensable, but too often, it’s outdated, misused, or misunderstood. In some defense circles, it functions as little more than a stage for confirmation bias, where senior leaders seek validation for preconceived notions rather than insight into novel threats. Worse, wargames frequently remain trapped in analog formats: players huddle around maps, move tokens, make subjective choices, and imagine the rest. This traditional model assumes that human decisions lie at the heart of conflict. That remains true. But the battlefield is rapidly changing—and the human element is no longer acting alone. As militaries increasingly rely on uncrewed systems, autonomous platforms, and AI-driven operations, our method of simulating war must evolve accordingly. To prepare for war in 2030, NATO and its allies cannot afford to rely on wargaming methods from 1980. The urgency of modernizing wargaming is not a choice but a necessity for our collective security. The Rise of Algorithmic Warfare Consider this: some forecasts suggest that by the 2030s, one-third of militaries could consist of robotic systems. In Ukraine, drone production is trending toward over 2.5 million units annually. This isn’t speculation—it’s already reshaping how war is fought. In such a world, the idea of a wargame that exclusively simulates human decision-making is dangerously incomplete. Swarms of autonomous drones executing algorithm-driven tactics change not only the character of war but also the speed, scale, and unpredictability of combat. Abstracting these developments away misses the point entirely. A game without machines is a game divorced from reality. Critically, decision-making itself is changing. While senior leaders continue to anchor their intuition in past experiences, research shows that overconfidence increases in situations involving more chance and ambiguity. Gut instinct, seasoned though it may be, will not suffice when confronted with system-level interactions between thousands of autonomous platforms and sensors. Technology as a Catalyst, Not a Crutch The tools to modernize wargaming already exist. Digital environments can now simulate everything from force placement to logistics flows to legal compliance, with users interacting via natural language, voice, or keyboard. This technological advancement offers a beacon of hope for the future of wargaming, allowing commanders to stress-test strategies in real time and track every decision across a replicable digital thread. This is not science fiction. It is an underused science fact. Yet many in the defense establishment cling to narrow definitions of wargaming. A leading DoD-affiliated practitioner recently declared, “If the players or sponsors are better equipped at the end of the wargame to do the things they need to do, then there is value. Nothing else matters.” Another dismissed the importance of outcomes altogether, stating that “wargames are about ideas, not facts.” That’s a dangerous mindset. Strategy may be rooted in ideas, but execution lives in facts. As Churchill famously warned, “However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.” Toward a New Definition of Wargaming Commanders’ expectations have evolved, even if the tools haven’t. In 1945, General Eisenhower might have asked his staff for a logistics overlay of the European theater—delivered with pen, paper, and pins. In 2025, General Cavoli might make the same request—but with the expectation of a digital interface offering dynamic updates, AI-enhanced forecasting, and real-time operational feedback. Unfortunately, EUCOM and NATO commanders still rely too heavily on analog tools. What they need are decision-support systems embedded in the planning process—not adjuncts or afterthoughts. This calls for a redefinition of wargaming. A New Definition Wargaming must be understood not as a parlor game of human strategy but as a rigorous, replicable method of exploring conflict at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels. This includes human decisions and system-level interactions conducted in a synthetic digital environment. A proposed new definition: “Wargames represent human actions and system-level interactions of conflict or competition in a synthetic environment from the strategic to the tactical level.” This definition bridges the gap between cognition and computation, people and platforms, gut instinct and algorithmic feedback. It accounts for the growing role of autonomy and artificial intelligence without excluding the indispensable human element. The Stakes Wargames must evolve not only because they can but because they must. Definitions matter. The current models fall short of providing leaders with the clarity they need to design force structures that are effective, affordable, and aligned with future threats. Failure to modernize wargaming risks misinforming critical decisions, wasting resources, and, worst of all, misjudging the very nature of the next fight. The stakes are high, and the battlefield of 2030 will not wait for the analog mind to catch up. To prepare, we must simulate what war has been and what war is becoming. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 23:25
The Pandemic Agreement: Surveillance, 'One Health', & A New Industry Of Government Grift
1747276500 from ZEROHEDGE
The Pandemic Agreement: Surveillance, 'One Health', & A New Industry Of Government Grift Authored by REPPARE (REevaluating the Pandemic Preparedness And REsponse agenda) via The Brownstone Institute, After three years of negotiation, the delegates of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) agreed on the text of the Pandemic Agreement, which now goes for vote at the 78th World Health Assembly (WHA) at the end of May 2025. This text comes after the negotiations were extended for an additional year due to ongoing disagreements about intellectual property and technology transfers (Article 11), access to ‘pandemic-related health products’ (Article 12), and One Health. After extending the negotiations into a series of last-minute 24-hour sessions in April 2025, a draft was ‘greenlined’ with many countries suggesting that they had gone as far as they could via negotiation, and it was now time to bring it to vote. There are several interesting elements within the new draft of the Pandemic Agreement. For example, the Pandemic Agreement foresees ‘participating manufacturers’ (yet to be determined) to make 20% of their related pharmaceutical production available to the WHO, half as a donation, and half at ‘affordable prices’ (also to be determined). The expectation is that the WHO and other international partners will pool these and other resources for distribution (in an improved COVAX-like mechanism yet to be determined). In addition, a still relatively undefined ‘Coordinating Financial Mechanism’ (CFM) will be established to support the implementation of both the Pandemic Agreement and the amended International Health Regulations (IHRs), as well as to disburse surge funding to developing countries in the event of a pandemic. These commitments build on the IHR amendments that come into force in September 2025, which authorise the WHO Director-General to declare a ‘Pandemic Emergency.’ This represents an escalation of the Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), with a ‘Pandemic Emergency’ now representing ‘the highest level of alarm,’ which is meant to trigger a host of national and international responses. The PHEIC has been declared eight times since 2005, including for the ongoing Mpox outbreak in Central Africa, and there remains ambiguity about whether an outbreak like Mpox would now also qualify as a Pandemic Emergency. The Pandemic Agreement also now defines the first somewhat tangible effects of declaring a Pandemic Emergency, although these triggering effects are currently most clear regarding the mobilization of ‘pandemic-relevant health products.’ In general, the text reads as one might expect when diplomats from almost 200 countries spent years negotiating and scrutinising every sentence. Although the United States and Argentina withdrew from these negotiations earlier this year, the document still had to navigate the manifold and often conflicting interests of delegates from Russia and Ukraine, Iran and Israel, India and Pakistan; not to mention members of the Africa Group who largely saw the Pandemic Agreement as a raw deal for Africa (see below). The result is therefore 30 pages full of vague declarations of intent, often qualified by references to the preservation of national sovereignty in an attempt to neutralize opposition. As it stands, the ‘Agreement’ looks primarily of symbolic importance, since a failure to reach an agreement would have been embarrassing for everyone involved. Yet, it would be churlish not to understand that the Pandemic Agreement consolidates ‘pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response’ as a definitive ‘space’ of global political action, for the purpose of which numerous new institutions and funding streams have already been created. Its potential passage into international law is unusual in global health and represents only the second time such a global health covenant has been created (the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control being the first), with the potential to mobilize substantial resources and policies. For example, according to estimates by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), expenditure on preparing for future pandemics had already more than quadrupled between 2009 and 2019 before the Covid-19 pandemic unmistakably moved the topic into international ‘high politics.’ In the Agreement, governments pledge to ‘maintain or increase’ this funding for pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and to support mechanisms for its execution. As reported elsewhere by REPPARE, the requested funds for pandemic preparedness are $31.1 billion a year (for comparison, about 8 times global expenditure on malaria), of which $26.4 billion must come from low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), while $10.5 billion in new overseas development assistance (ODA) would need to be raised. Presumably, the WHO’s preferred mechanism for the distribution of this ODA is via the yet-to-be-defined CFM. Vaccine Equity The declared guiding principle of the Pandemic Agreement is ‘equity.’ The focus on ‘equity’ is driven largely by the WHO and associated philanthropists, NGOs, scientific advisers, and several LMICs (particularly in Africa), who view a lack of equity, primarily ‘vaccine equity,’ as the main failure of the Covid response. Representatives of poorer countries, but also important donors, have criticised the inequitable access to vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 as a key failure of the Covid response and the reason for increased Covid mortality. This inequitable access has been labelled ‘vaccine nationalism,’ which refers to the stockpiling of Covid vaccines in high-income countries (HICs) during the pandemic, limiting availability to vaccines by LMICs. The World Economic Forum, for example, claims that a fairer distribution of vaccines would have saved over a million lives. While enough Covid vaccine doses were ordered in Europe to immunise the entire population from infants to the elderly more than three times over, and are now being destroyed, many African countries were denied access. In fact, developing countries only received large quantities of coronavirus vaccines months after richer countries had been ‘fully vaccinated.’ Even after vaccination had been universally available in most HIC countries by summer 2021, under 2% in low-income countries had been vaccinated, many of them with Chinese vaccines that Western countries deemed inferior and thus not qualifying for travel clearance. The proponents of the Pandemic Agreement do not question the success of universal vaccination despite its limited and rapidly declining protective effect, nor the numerous reported adverse effects. But even if we assume that coronavirus vaccines are safe and effective, global comparisons of vaccination rates remain nonsensical. In HICs, most Covid-19 deaths occurred in people over 80, suggesting the need for context-specific interventions in the case of the most vulnerable. In most low-income countries (LICs), this risk group comprises only a tiny fraction of the population. For example, the average age in Africa is 19, presenting an entirely different pandemic risk and response profile. In addition, a meta-analysis of blood tests by Bergeri et al. suggests that by mid-2021 most Africans had already had post-infection immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Yet, despite these variables, the manufacturers of the vaccines were encouraged to mass produce vaccines for global rollout, were given emergency authorisation, were released from liability, cashed in on advanced purchasing commitments, and were able to make record profits at the expense of taxpayers. As reported elsewhere, committing large resources to pandemic preparedness, particularly expensive surveillance, diagnostic, R&D, and the manufacturing of biomedical countermeasures, threatens to produce high opportunity costs since many LMICs must confront other more pressing and destructive disease burdens. This was at least implicitly recognised by many African countries during the Pandemic Agreement negotiations. Many resisted the inclusion of One Health into the Agreement, arguing that it was unaffordable and not a priority within their national strategic health plans. To paraphrase an African delegate on the INB, ‘We have difficulty doing coordinated surveillance within the health sector, let alone integrated surveillance across sectors.’ This concern not only suggests the need for more locally owned strategies to assure the efficient use of scarce resources, but also the need for strategies that better capture contextualised need to deliver greater effectiveness and true health equity, not just ‘product equity.’ Yet, even if product equity is a desired and justified outcome in particular cases, there is nothing in the Pandemic Agreement that guarantees this, since, in practice,e poor countries without their own production capacities will always be last in line. Although the ‘pathogen access and benefit system’ (PABS) in Article 12 of the Pandemic Agreement seeks to improve product equity, it is reasonable to expect wealthy countries to meet their own demand before making larger quantities available to LICs or the WHO for distribution (leaving it reliant on donations – which proved problematic during COVAX). As a result, it is hard to see what the Pandemic Agreement has improved in this regard, other than the codification of extremely loose normative commitments aiming to improve equitable access to pandemic products – an area on which countries would already broadly agree. The Pandemic Agreement also calls for more transparency for contracts between countries and manufacturers. This measure is seen as a mechanism that can expose rampant vaccine nationalism and profiteering, albeit only ‘as appropriate’ and ‘in accordance with national regulations.’ Thus, it is questionable whether such flimsy wording would have stopped EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen from fixing billion-dollar deals with the Pfizer CEO through undisclosed text messaging nor stopped other countries from engaging in their own bilateral pre-purchasing and stockpiling activities. Of course, LMIC negotiators in the INB were aware of all this, which is why the fault line in the Pandemic Agreement negotiations mainly centred on issues of intellectual property and technology transfer. In essence, developing countries do not want to rely on handouts and want to produce vaccines and therapeutics themselves without having to pay expensive licensing fees to the pharmaceutical giants of the North. In contrast, the North has been steadfast in their commitments to intellectual property protections as outlined in TRIPS and TRIPS-Plus, seeing these legal mechanisms as important protections for their pharmaceutical industries. As a ‘compromise,’ the Pandemic Agreement contains provisions for ‘geographically diversified local production’ of pandemic products and closer international cooperation in research and development, with simplified licensing procedures intended to ensure technology transfer. However, the wording within the Pandemic Agreement is nonspecific and the EU insisted on adding last-minute footnotes to the technology transfer provision to ensure they only take effect ‘as mutually agreed.’ Thus, the Pandemic Agreement looks like the solidification of business as usual. Surveillance and One Health Whereas a lack of ‘equity’ is understood by advocates of the Pandemic Agreement as the main failure of the Covid response, a ‘failure of preparedness’ is also seen as allowing the emergence and subsequent global spread of the novel coronavirus in the first place. The goal of eliminating the ‘existential threat’ of emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) is dominant within the policy lexicon, endorsed by the G20 High Level Independent Panel, the World Bank, the WHO, The Elders’ Proposal for Action, and the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board. As we have argued elsewhere, these assessments are largely based on weak evidence, problematic methodologies, the use of political eminence over expertise, and simplified modelling, yet they remained unquestionable mainstays within INB negotiations. In response to future zoonoses, the Pandemic Agreement calls for a ‘One Health’ approach. In principle, One Health reflects the self-evident fact that human, animal, and environmental health are closely connected. Yet, in practice, One Health requires the targeted monitoring of soil, water, domestic animals, and farm animals with the view to identifying possible spillover to humans. As highlighted above, implementing One Health necessitates integrated systems across sectors with sophisticated laboratory capacities, processes, information systems, and trained personnel. As a result, the costs of implementing One Health are estimated by the World Bank to be approximately $11 billion a year, which would be in addition to the $31.1 billion currently estimated as required to finance the IHRs and Pandemic Agreement. With more laboratories looking for pathogens and their mutations, it is guaranteed that more will be found. Given the current practice of over-securitized knee-jerk risk assessments, it is foreseeable that more discoveries will be deemed ‘high risk,’ even though humans have coexisted with many of these pathogens without major incident for centuries, and even though the risk of geographical spread is low (e.g., reactions to Mpox). The logic of the Pandemic Agreement is that, based on genomic advancements, ‘pandemic-related health products’ can then be quickly developed and distributed via the ‘WHO Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System’ (PABS). This is disquieting for at least three reasons. First, large resources will be poured into responding to these low-burden potential risks while everyday killers like malaria will continue to receive an underwhelming response. Second, this aspect of the Pandemic Agreement will undoubtedly engross under its own momentum, where new perceptions of threat legitimate ever-more surveillance, which will uncover even more potential threats in a self-perpetuating regress of securitization and over-biomedicalization. Lastly, nowhere in the Pandemic Agreement is there any mention of the fact that dangerous gain-of-function research will continue to be conducted to develop the ‘pandemic benefits’ expected under PABS, although biosafety and biosecurity obligations are mentioned in passing. This suggests that the risk assessments associated with the Pandemic Agreement are singularly focused on natural zoonosis spillover events, ignoring an area of risk that may have actually been responsible for the worst pandemic in the last 100 years. Thus, the recent Covid-19 pandemic is likely irrelevant to the Pandemic Agreement in terms of pandemic preparation and prevention. Infodemics The calamities of the Covid response have eroded trust in the WHO and other public health institutions. This has manifested in a clear scepticism of pandemic preparedness. For example, hundreds of thousands of people signed petitions warning of the WHO’s ‘power grab’ to undermine national sovereignty. These messages arose primarily after the proposed amendments to the IHR started to circulate, which contained original language allowing the WHO to issue binding recommendations to national governments during a pandemic. Ultimately, such plans did not materialise. The drafters of the Pandemic Agreement have seemingly agreed with such concerns. Article 24.2 states in unusually clear terms: ‘Nothing in the WHO Pandemic Agreement shall be interpreted as providing the WHO Secretariat, including the WHO Director-General, any authority to direct, order, alter or otherwise prescribe the national and/or domestic laws, as appropriate, or policies of any Party, or to mandate or otherwise impose any requirements that Parties take specific actions, such as ban or accept travellers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures or implement lockdowns.’ In practice, this clause has no effect, as there is no way of arriving at the interpretations Article 24.2 rules out, since the WHO simply does not have legal jurisdiction to force compliance. Regarding non-pharmaceutical measures, the signatories to the Pandemic Agreement merely agree to conduct research into their effectiveness and adherence. This includes not only epidemiology, but also ‘the use of social and behavioural sciences, risk communication and community engagement.’ In addition, states agree on taking ‘measures to strengthen science, public health, and pandemic literacy in the population.’ Here, nothing is binding nor specified, leaving sufficient room for countries to determine how and to what degree to deploy non-pharmaceutical measures (for better or worse). It is just putting (again) in writing what States are already doing – an arguably pointless exercise. That said, references to the behavioural sciences are likely to trigger suspicion from those critical of the WHO. In particular, those concerned about the Covid response remember how behavioural scientists advised the British government to make people feel ‘sufficiently personally threatened’ and how UK Secretary of Health Matt Hancock shared WhatsApp chats about how he planned to ‘deploy’ the announcement of a new variant to ‘frighten the pants off everyone.’ Although it is the job of public health authorities to issue recommendations to guide the public, there are honest and more effective methods of doing so. Otherwise, public perceptions of disingenuousness undermine trust, something advocates of the Pandemic Agreement suggest is crucial for an effective pandemic response. In some ways, the explicit ruling out of WHO-imposed lockdowns or vaccine mandates is an excellent example of what the WHO calls ‘infodemic management.’ In the WHO’s ‘Managing Epidemics’ handbook, an infodemic is defined as ‘an overabundance of information, accurate or not, in the digital and physical space, accompanying an acute health event such as an outbreak or epidemic.’ Infodemic management also made it into the revised IHR, where “risk communication, including addressing misinformation and disinformation” is defined as a core capacity of public health. It is understandable that critics of infodemic management understand ‘addressing misinformation’ as a euphemism for censorship, especially given how scientists who spoke against mainstream narratives during Covid were sidelined and ‘cancelled.’ However, the first principle of infodemic management highlighted in ‘Managing Epidemics’ is ‘listening to concerns,’ which the Pandemic Agreement appears to have done by proactively ruling out lockdowns that they could not legally impose anyway. While the ‘zero draft’ three years ago still foresaw countries being expected to ‘tackle’ misinformation, this is now only mentioned in the preamble, where the timely sharing of information is said to prevent the emergence of misinformation. Nonetheless, the language around infodemics raises several concerns that remain unaddressed and require greater reflection. First, the criteria by which information is meant to be judged as accurate, and by whom, are unclear. Although this leaves the process undefined, allowing countries to design their own control mechanisms, it also leaves room for abuse. It is entirely feasible that some countries (with WHO support) could silence dissenting views under the guise of infodemic management. It is also not beyond imagination that mission creep will occur, where non-health-related information is also controlled under the pretext of ‘maintaining peace and security’ during a health or other emergency. Second, there is a serious risk that the poor management of information will exclude good science by accident, undermining overall public health. As witnessed during Covid, messages proclaiming that ‘the science is settled’ proliferated, and were often used to discredit credible science. Third, there is an underwritten presumption within the logic of infodemics that public health authorities and their affiliates are correct, that policies are always based entirely on the best evidence available, that those policies are free of conflicts of interest, that information from these authorities is never filtered nor distorted, and that people should not expect reason-giving from authorities via immanent critique or self-reflection. Clearly, public health institutions are like any other human institution, subject to the same potential biases and pitfalls. The Future of Pandemics and This Agreement Wenham and Potluru from the London School of Economics estimate that the protracted negotiations on the Pandemic Agreement had already cost over $200 million by May 2024. Of course, this is only a fraction of the public expenditure on preparing for hypothetical future pandemics. The amount of ODA that the WHO, World Bank, and G20 have called for annually would correspond to about five to ten times the annual expenditure on combating tuberculosis – a disease that, according to WHO figures, has killed about as many people in the last five years as Covid-19, and at a much lower average age (representing higher years of life lost). Although the $10.5 billion a year in development aid for pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response is unlikely to materialise, even a more cautious increase will come with opportunity costs. Moreover, these financial demands come at an inflection point in global health policy, where development assistance for health (DAH) is under massive pressure from serious stoppages and reductions from the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Japan. Thus, increase in scarcity requires the better use of health financing, not simply more of the same. Furthermore, as REPPARE has shown, the alarming statements of pandemic risk by the WHO, World Bank, and G20 are not well-grounded in empirical evidence. This means that the entire basis for the Pandemic Agreement is questionable. For example, the World Bank claims millions of annual deaths from zoonotic diseases, although the figure is less than 400,000 per year in the half-century before the Covid-19 pandemic, extrapolated to the current world population, 95% of which is attributable to HIV. The fact that many more new pathogens are being found today than just a few decades ago is not necessarily evidence of an increased risk, but rather the consequence of increased interest in research and, above all, the use of modern diagnostics and reporting processes. In many ways, the Pandemic Agreement is just a figurehead of a new pandemic industry that has already grown more robust in the last five years. This includes, for example, projects for pathogen surveillance, for which the Pandemic Fund set up at the World Bank in 2021 has already received $2.1 billion in donor commitments while raising almost seven billion for implementation (when additionality is calculated). In 2021, the WHO Pandemic Hub was opened in Berlin, where data and biological material from all over the world are collated as an early warning system for pandemics. In Cape Town, the WHO mRNA hub seeks to promote international technology transfer. And the 100 Days Mission, driven primarily by the public-private partnership CEPI, aims to ensure that vaccines are available in just 100 days during the next pandemic, which not only requires substantial investment in R&D and production facilities, but also a further speeding up of clinical trials and emergency use authorisation, posing potential risks regarding vaccine safety To coordinate the complex ecosystem of different pandemic initiatives, the signatories to the Pandemic Agreement will need to develop ‘whole-of-society’ pandemic plans that will presumably be ignored in the event of a real crisis, as happened with the existing plans in 2020. They are further expected to ‘report periodically to the Conference of the Parties, through the Secretariat, on their implementation of the WHO Pandemic Agreement.’ The WHO Secretariat, in turn, publishes ‘guidelines, recommendations and other non-binding measures.’ This suggests that the Pandemic Agreement will set global norms and seek compliance through the usual mechanisms of nudging, naming, and shaming, and through conditionalities imposed by the CFM or through other World Bank development loans. It is in the case of the latter where policy choices designed within the Conference of Parties could become more coercive on low-income countries. However, the importance of this new global pandemic bureaucracy should also not be overestimated, and the potency of the Pandemic Agreement is not immediately clear. After all, it is just one in a long list of United Nations agreements, only a few of which, such as the Climate Change Conference or the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, receive any broader attention. Thus, it is feasible that both the Conference of Parties and Pandemic Agreement will become politically inert. Nevertheless, what tempers this moderate view is a key similarity between the three aforementioned policy areas. Namely, nuclear proliferation, climate change, and pandemics are all continually presented as an ‘existential threat,’ which drives media coverage, consequent political motivation, and continued investment. In the case of pandemic risk, the official narratives project an apocalyptic vision of ever-increasing pandemics (e.g., every 20 to 50 years), with ever-increasing severity (2.5 million dead per year on average), and ever-increasing economic costs (e.g,. $14 to $21 trillion per pandemic if investments are not made). Therefore, it is to be expected that the Pandemic Agreement will continue to enjoy a status of high politics and increased investment through perpetual fear and vested interests. Consequently, if the draft Pandemic Agreement is adopted at the 78th WHA and subsequently ratified by the required 60 countries, the key to its potency will be how various legal obligations, governance processes, financial instruments, and ‘partner’ commitments are defined and implemented into policy via the Conference of Parties (COP). In many ways, the drafters of the Agreement merely ‘kicked the can down the road’ regarding the most difficult and contentious disagreements in hopes that future consensus will be found during the COP. Here, comparisons and contrasts between the Climate COP and Pandemic COP could help to glean some useful insights on how the politics of the Pandemic Agreement might play out. Both have become industries with significant levels of vested governmental and corporate interest, both use fear to motivate political and fiscal action, and both rely heavily on the natural proclivities of the media to propagate fear and justify states of exception as dominating narratives. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 22:35
Parallel Peace Blitz: New Pope & Trump Are Saying Similar Things As Conflicts Rage
1747275000 from ZEROHEDGE
Parallel Peace Blitz: New Pope & Trump Are Saying Similar Things As Conflicts Rage The newly installed Pope Leo XIV is making clear that he's preparing to go on a peacekeeping blitz at a moment of several hotspots and major war zones across the globe. Leo this week quoted the late Pope Francis in denouncing the multiple raging conflicts, from Ukraine to Gaza to Yemen to India-Pakistan to Syria to Sudan to Ethiopia to Libya, saying it was a "third world war in pieces." He's already been making phone calls to Kiev and Gaza. "I carry in my heart the sufferings of the beloved Ukrainian people," he said. "Let everything possible be done to achieve genuine, just and lasting peace as soon as possible," he added, just ahead of Russia-Ukraine peace talks set for Thursday. President Trump is not expected attend these negotiations in person, despite earlier teasing the idea. Getty Images In a fresh message this week, the Pope has also called for the release of all prisoners of war (POWs) and further praised the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, reportedly brokered by President Trump, it should be noted. “I, too, address the world's great powers by repeating the ever-present call ‘never again war,’” Leo had also said starting Sunday. President Zelensky has invited the new Pope to visit Ukraine and see the war-ravaged country in person. Currently, the Pope is preparing to travel to Turkey at a later date, to mark the 1,700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea (in Asia Minor). In Wednesday audience remarks, Leo also highlighted the plight of the suffering Christians of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, and elsewhere in the Middle East. He acknowledged that that the region's ancient Christian populations have been forced to flee their homelands because of "war and persecution, instability and poverty." "It was a reference to the exodus of Christians from the Middle East, Iraq and Syria especially, where entire communities have been displaced by years of Islamic extremist violence," The Associated Press writes. "Many of these communities in northern Iraq were some of the oldest of the faith, where the dialects of Aramaic – the language of Jesus – are still spoken." The newly installed pontiff said he is ready to "help bring enemies together, face to face" as a peacemaker. "Who better than you can sing a song of hope even amid the abyss of violence?" he declared. "From the Holy Land to Ukraine, from Lebanon to Syria, from the Middle East to Tigray and the Caucasus, how much violence do we see!" Trump putting the world on notice that the new leadership and alliances will be based on friendship and commerce; “not chaos.” The Saudi Crown Prince with a smile in agreement and appreciation.pic.twitter.com/koZ9MFh0H2 — Based Infidel (@SouthernSwag_) May 13, 2025 Interestingly, Trump too has begun to present himself as a 'peacemaker' - and his message to the Middle East this week has been one of 'deal-making, not chaos' - and so the timing of this dual messaging from the Vatican as well as Washington could make for better chances at peace in the various conflict zones. However, it remains that Trump has been in the Gulf overseeing hundreds of billions of dollars in new weapons sales... so there's that. On Iran, Trump said at a state dinner in Doha to his Qatari hosts on Wednesday, "You’re also working with us very closely, with respect to negotiating a deal with Iran, which is the far friendlier course that you would see." "I mean, two courses, there’s only two courses. There aren’t three or four or five, there’s two. There’s a friendly and a non-friendly, and non-friendly is a violent course, and I don’t want that. I’ll say it up front. I don’t want that, but they have to get moving," the president added, as he attempts to forge ahead on a new nuclear agreement with Tehran. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 22:10
End Of Ranching In Iconic California Community Signals Bigger War On Land Use In West
1747273500 from ZEROHEDGE
End Of Ranching In Iconic California Community Signals Bigger War On Land Use In West Authored by Beige Luciano-Adams via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), POINT REYES STATION, Calif.—The buffalo milk soft serve here is an open secret, found near the butcher’s counter at the back of the local market. Like everything else in this tiny farm town, nestled in the coastal grasslands about an hour north of San Francisco, it’s made with milk from a nearby dairy. Cows walk out to pasture after being milked at a dairy in Point Reyes Station, Calif., on June 12, 2007. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images California’s Marin County is a pioneer in organic ranching, known for its gourmet cheeses, multi-generational dairies and pasture-raised beef. The legacy of more than 150 years of agricultural production is baked into its contemporary rural charms, which, along with the nearby Point Reyes National Seashore, make it a popular tourist destination. It’s also a corner of the country where locals tend to see ranching and environmentalism as symbiotic pursuits. But after years of conflict among preservationists, ranchers, and the federal government, a recent deal to end most ranching—all of it organic—on the Seashore has incensed locals and revealed a deep chasm between competing visions of environmental stewardship. The agreement between three environmental groups—the Resource Renewal Institute, the Center for Biological Diversity, and the Western Watersheds Project—the National Park Service, and the Point Reyes Seashore Ranchers Association saw 12 of 14 ranches on Point Reyes agree to cease ranching within 15 months. On one side, preservationists say cattle and dairy ranching at Point Reyes has led to environmental degradation that threatens the future of the park and biodiversity in the state; on the other, family ranchers see themselves as stewards of the land, their practices as the future of conservation—and as a bulwark against the ravages of Big Ag. As the Trump administration moves to roll back Biden-era reforms, the high-profile case has become a flashpoint in the broader fight over land use in the West—where the federal government owns nearly half of all public land, and where ranching is considered a living legacy, part of the cultural heritage that built the West itself. Now, a congressional investigation and two new lawsuits against the park are giving hope to critics of the Point Reyes deal that a policy shift could again be on the table, making the future of the park anything but settled. What’s at stake, insiders say, is more than the dozen family ranches set to leave the park by next year. The questions Point Reyes raises will determine more than the fate of the National Seashore. Multiple Use Mandate While national forests and lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management have long been governed by a multiple-use mandate, which includes grazing, timber, resource extraction, and recreation, national parks are typically more focused on preservation. Point Reyes, a spectacularly beautiful coastal peninsula where ranching predates the park itself by a century, is an unusual case—and one bound to attract scrutiny from activists who oppose ranching on public lands. A cow runs past a corral of cows waiting to be milked at the Kehoe Dairy in Point Reyes Station, Calif., on June 12, 2007. In a landmark January 2025 settlement, most ranching operations within Point Reyes National Seashore are set to end within 15 months, following a long legal battle between environmental groups and ranchers. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images “ I’ve never seen a private grazing lease on public lands that wasn’t doing environmental damage, whether it’s to salmon or to sage grouse, it doesn’t matter what ecosystem you’re in,” said Jeff Miller, a senior conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the organizations that sued the National Park Service over its ranching leases in 2014 and 2022, resulting in the current agreement. In the West, damage from private cattle grazing leases is “immense,” Miller said, second only to logging. Preservationists cite water pollution, soil erosion, and habitat loss, among other concerns. The organization has focused on the issue since its founding in 1989, routinely intervening with National Forest and Bureau of Land Management plans and suing over grazing leases in cases where there is explicit and documented environmental damage, Miller said. Over the past several years, the Biden administration advanced an agenda broadly favorable to conservationists, with national monument expansions and an initiative to conserve 30 percent of the nation’s land and water by 2030, as well as the 2024 Public Lands rule that allows prioritizing conservation above established multiple uses. The Trump White House has indicated its intent to rescind the Bureau of Land Management’s Public Lands Rule, a move lambasted by environmental groups, who argue the administration is ushering in an era of unrestrained exploitation. Congressional Republicans contend Biden’s upending of the multiple use doctrine has been a disaster both for rural communities and the country, driving up housing prices in Western cities surrounded by federal land and gutting local economies. “President Biden left America’s public lands and natural resources in a sorry state,” Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wis.) told the House Natural Resources Committee during a February hearing on restoring multiple use. “For four long years President Biden and his federal land managers have abandoned the longstanding and previously uncontroversial principle of multiple use. Instead, they adopted top-down, preservationist schemes designed to placate extreme environmentalists.” In the same hearing, Tim Canterbury, president of the Public Lands Council, an organization representing cattle and sheep producers who hold 22,000 grazing permits across the West, highlighted challenges for ranchers, and urged Congress and federal agencies to recognize public lands ranching as an essential part of the multi-use framework. “I manage these lands and waters, and the wildlife and multiple uses they sustain, as if they were my own,” Canterbury said. He said the infrastructure, ecological stewardship and investments that ranchers provide benefit the public and environment, not just privately owned livestock. “My family has managed the lands we utilize since 1879. Our commitment to these lands is baked into our way of life,” Canterbury said of his Colorado ranch operation, adding that “deep historical and ecological knowledge of the working landscape” are handed down through generations. Point Reyes Lighthouse in Inverness, Calif., on March 16, 2025. Keegan Billings/The Epoch Times Ivan London, a senior attorney with the Mountain States Legal Foundation, which frequently intervenes pro-bono on behalf of ranchers facing challenges to their grazing permits, said regulatory interpretations may shift with the balance of power in Washington, but the law governing grazing rights hasn’t changed. “Congress actually said, ‘Here are some priority uses of public land—grazing, timber, harvesting, mineral production.’ And that law hasn’t changed. But from administration to administration the various regulators find ways to read it differently,” London said, pointing to President Bill Clinton’s attempts to increase grazing fees in the 1990s, and President Joe Biden’s embrace of conservation easements. “According to the Taylor Grazing Act—an actual law, unlike the conservation leases—grazing and ranching are the highest use of public lands,” London said. That regulations allowing conservation leases to “lock up land away from ranchers” might be ending under the Trump administration is “huge,” he said. The Mountain States Legal Foundation in 2023 successfully intervened on behalf of Wyoming ranchers when the Center for Biological Diversity, the Western Watersheds Project, and other groups alleged that one of the oldest cattle drives in the country threatened grizzly bear populations in violation of the Endangered Species Act. Recognized as a Traditional Cultural Property on the National Register of Historic Places, the Green River Drift cattle drive is still operated by descendants of families that homesteaded the area in the 19th century. It’s a familiar narrative, often reduced in court to a zero-sum game between preserving either vulnerable animal or plant species, or prized human cultural practices with histories that pre-date the authority managing the lands. The families in question, their lawyers argued, cared for the land longer and better than any agency or activist, their continued existence providing “124 years of evidence that ranchers are the real conservationists.” In other cases, such as Santa Rosa Island—now part of California’s Channel Islands National Park—the outlines of which presaged the fate of Point Reyes, environmental activists have succeeded in bringing nearly a century of ranching to a close. In 1986, the federal government purchased Vail & Vickers Ranch, run by four generations of cattle ranchers on what was known as “Cowboy Island.” In 1998, the last working island cattle ranch in the United States shuttered for good. “Cowboys versus environmentalists” is a common tableau throughout the West, with infamous spectacles such as Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s militarized standoff with the federal government. In Point Reyes, the fight has pitted environmentalist against environmentalist in one of the most liberal enclaves in the country, exposing an existential schism within the conservation movement. Ranchers Say They Were Pressured In a protracted battle over the park’s ranch management plan that culminated in lawsuits in 2016 and 2022, both ranchers and the organizations who sued the park service accuse the agency of bias. After years of studies and thousands of public comments, the park service in 2021 decided to issue 20-year leases, finally following through on a 2012 directive. Environmentalists filed a new lawsuit, ranchers intervened on behalf of the park, and the parties entered private negotiations. Point Reyes North Beach in Marin County, Calif., on March 16, 2025. Keegan Billings/The Epoch Times But the settlement, completed just before the Trump administration took office, was celebrated internally among Department of Interior senior staff as a “win” for the department, the park, and for conservation—a “nice one to go out on” in the final hours of the Biden administration, according to emails unearthed in a Freedom of Information Act Request and published on Substack. “These emails prove they were totally in on it and celebrating this victory against ranching,” said Andrew Giacomini, a San Francisco attorney representing pro-bono more than 60 ranch workers and subtenants who are set to be displaced by the Point Reyes settlement. Despite apparent neutrality, Giacomini accused the government of conspiring with the conservationist organizations, which brought in a third party to mediate a settlement behind closed doors, all in an effort to push out ranchers. “They could have defended that lawsuit and won,” Giacomini said. Instead, he alleges, the park service entered secret negotiations, overturned the results of a public process, and kowtowed to a “handful of special interests.” “It’s exactly as our lawsuit says. The way it was handled violates the law in multiple ways and it can’t stand.” Even before the case begins moving through the courts, Giacomini said he thinks shifting priorities in the new administration may result in a reversal of the decision to end ranching at Point Reyes. Miller, of the Center for Biological Diversity, said the idea of any collusion between his organization, fellow plaintiffs, and the park service is “absolute nonsense,” calling the park’s 2014 ranch management plan a “wish list” from the ranchers, developed in secret without input from conservationists or the public. Particularly egregious to conservationists was a request to cull once-endangered tule elk herds, which compete with cattle for food during periods of drought. “They rolled this thing out in 2014 and said, ‘Guess what? We’re going to shoot tule elk. We’re going to expand ranches, and we’re going to enshrine private commercial ranching forever in the park.’ That was the park service’s first bite at the apple,” Miller said. “That is not conservation, that’s collusion with the ranchers, which is what the park service has been doing for half a century.” The Department of the Interior and its National Park Service did not respond to inquiries. Miller contends the park service “has never taken an environmental position in their entire history—we’ve had to sue them the entire way.” The Center for Biological Diversity, he said, will intervene in two new lawsuits against the park: one brought by ranch workers set to be evicted due to the recent settlement, and another brought by remaining ranchers seeking to preserve agricultural use in the park. “We are not going to allow a settlement between them and Trump’s Department of Interior.” But ranchers say they were pressured to accept the January settlement and keep quiet about the process, which they say was negotiated behind closed doors by The Nature Conservancy, a nonprofit powerhouse that raised a reported $30 million for the buyout. Once ranchers agreed to leave, the Park Service rezoned 16,000 acres of land originally set aside for ranching as a new Scenic Landscape Zone, and handed over management of it to the Conservancy. In a March letter to the Center for Biological Diversity and other plaintiffs, Republican members of the House Committee on Natural Resources alleged a “lack of transparency surrounding the settlement,” as well as potential environmental and legal consequences. The lawmakers requested extensive discovery information. Read the rest here... Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 21:45
Buying A John Deere Tractor? Leading Indicators Signal Supply-Side Inflection Point For Used Market
1747272000 from ZEROHEDGE
Buying A John Deere Tractor? Leading Indicators Signal Supply-Side Inflection Point For Used Market Goldman analysts point to a bullish supply-side inflection point in the heavy machinery market, emphasizing that shrinking used equipment inventories have historically led to price increases in used machinery within 6–9 months and in new equipment within roughly 12 months. This inflection point suggests that a strategic window to purchase used heavy machinery has likely opened. Goldman's Jerry Revich and Clay Williams reiterated their "Buy" ratings on Deere (DE), Caterpillar (CAT), and United Rentals (URI), citing a bullish supply-side inflection point in the machinery cycle. According to their Machinery Supply tracker, declining used equipment inventories—a leading indicator—signal tightening supply and a capital stock drawdown for the first time in three years. Here are the key highlights of the note: Shifts in used equipment inventories lead used values by ~6-9 months, new equipment production by ~12 months, with coincident performance vs. stocks. Jerry makes a purely supply-side call that points to upside beyond the economic cycle; he sees (i) declining capital stock for the first time in three years, (ii) under-production over the past year amid dealer inventory destocking, (iii) estimates that embed full tariff headwinds, and (iv) valuation upside on mid-cycle earnings. Previously in 2016, the used market inflection marked the start of a multi-year recovery in ag equipment demand despite relatively soft farmer incomes. We are now seeing used inventories declining on a year-over-year basis for consecutive months which supports jerry's bullish DE view. Used values have historically been coincident wih DE stock price and histroically lead used equipment values by 6 to 9 months. Our focus is less on individual names like DE, CAT, and URI and more on the underlying equipment used and new values charted by Goldman analysts, which points to a clear supply-side inflection point in the heavy machinery market. The analysts show tightening inventories of used construction equipment, with used values appearing to bottom out and begin an upward trend. "As the inflation environment has normalized, we believe the relationship will revert to past cycles," the analysts said. Exhibit 17 illustrates the full history of supply imbalances in the heavy machinery market—highlighting how periods of under- and oversupply have consistently driven pricing trends in the secondary market. Similar dynamics are underway for the used ag equipment market. Is a 2016-like reversal ahead for the 100 horsepower used tractor market? Ag used inventories vs Deere dealer inventories... This insight is particularly valuable for business owners and operators weighing the decision to purchase used or new heavy machinery or ag equipment, offering a clearer view of where prices are likely headed in the quarters ahead. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 21:20
70% Of Americans Support A Fresh Nuclear Deal With Iran; New Poll Finds
1747270500 from ZEROHEDGE
70% Of Americans Support A Fresh Nuclear Deal With Iran; New Poll Finds Authored by Kyle Anzalone via AntiWar.com, A new poll finds a large majority of Americans across the political spectrum support reaching a deal with Iran that allows Tehran to maintain a peaceful nuclear program. According to the University of Maryland’s Critical Issues Poll, 69% of Americans favor reaching a nuclear deal with Iran. Nearly two-thirds of Republicans and over three-quarters of Democrats said they want a "negotiated agreement limiting Iran’s nuclear program to peaceful ends, with stringent monitoring." Under a quarter of Republicans, and just five percent of Democrats, support using the military to take out Iran’s nuclear program. Ensuring that Tehran did not decide to break out and build a nuclear weapon was the purpose of the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal negotiated by President Barack Obama. During his first term, Donald Trump withdrew from that agreement, arguing that it did not place enough limits on Iran’s missile program and its support for political and military movements in the Middle East. While American politicians often hype the threat presented by Iran’s nuclear program, the US intelligence community has repeatedly stated that Tehran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon. Iran’s program is within the limits of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and is similar to that of Japan, Germany, and Brazil. Since returning to office, Trump has engaged with Tehran on developing a new nuclear agreement that restricts Iran’s program beyond the limits imposed by the NPT. However, Trump’s demands have been unclear. At times, White House officials have said they are willing to allow Tehran to keep its ability to enrich uranium. Other officials have stated that any deal will require Iran to give up its entire enrichment program. Tehran views its enrichment program as central to its sovereignty, but is willing to consider caps and additional inspections to give Washington and Tel Aviv assurance that it is not weaponizing its civilian program. The Critical Issues Poll also asked Americans if Israel and Iran having nuclear weapons would lead to a more stable Middle East, with 69% saying they preferred neither country having a nuclear weapon. However, Israel currently possesses a large strategic stockpile. Only 10% of Americans believe that the status quo will create peace in the Middle East. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 20:55
"Paying The Price For Failed Leadership": Maryland Hit With Moody's First Credit Downgrade In 50 Years
1747269000 from ZEROHEDGE
"Paying The Price For Failed Leadership": Maryland Hit With Moody's First Credit Downgrade In 50 Years Maryland's tax-and-spend Democrats—obsessed with a far-left progressive agenda, ranging from condoms for kids to gender identity to reparations to climate change to criminal illegal aliens—have pushed the state closer and closer to the brink. The self-created financial mess unfolding in the state predates President Trump's second term and derives from leftist activists who have seized power in recent years and squandered taxpayer funds. Now, Maryland's financial credit profile is deteriorating—for the first time in decades—after Moody's downgraded the state's creditworthiness to Aa1 from AAA, according to Fox Baltimore. Since 1973, Maryland has maintained a top-tier credit rating, long seen as a reflection of fiscal discipline and responsible governance. However, far-left Democrats in Annapolis have chosen to run deficits to fund their progressive pet projects. This credit downgrade puts Maryland on the disastrous pathway toward becoming "Illinois 2.0." The move by Moody's ends more than three decades in which Maryland held the highest bond rating from the three rating agencies: Moody's, Standard & Poor's and Fitch. Moody's had given Maryland a AAA rating every year since 1973 — until Wednesday. Prior to Wednesday's announcement, Maryland was one of 14 states to have the highest rating from the three major agencies — Fitch, Moody's and Standard & Poors. -Maryland Matters About a year ago, Moody's downgraded the state's outlook from stable to "negative," citing significant concerns about looming structural deficits due to Annapolis' out-of-control education spending. Moody's assessment of Maryland's deteriorating creditworthiness comes as Democrats in control of the General Assembly and the governor's seat struggle to tame a projected $3.3 billion deficit through cuts, cost shifts, and $1.6 billion in taxes and fees. Democratic leaders in Maryland—including Governor Wes Moore, Senate President Bill Ferguson, House Speaker Adrienne Jones, the state treasurer, and the comptroller—are pointing fingers at federal cutbacks tied to President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative as the source of the state's fiscal strain. "To put it bluntly, this is a Trump downgrade. Over the last one hundred days, the federal administration's decisions have wreaked havoc on the entire region, including Maryland," the joint statement from Gov. Moore and others stated, adding, "Washington, D.C. received a credit downgrade. Thousands of federal workers are losing their jobs. Actual and proposed cuts to everything from health care to education will continue to exact an incalculable toll on Maryland and states across the country." But this deflection by Maryland Democrats masks years of unsustainable progressive policy decisions not rooted in financially sound decision-making. Meanwhile, Maryland's economy remains heavily exposed to government spending because roughly 20% of its GDP is tied to government spending: 10% from local government, 6% from the federal sector, and 4% from state operations (as of 2023). In such a heavily government-reliant economy, even modest reductions in government activity can have outsized effects, yet those cuts take time to work into the system. Republicans have criticized Gov. Moore and Democrats for their previous spending binge... "A year ago, Moody's changed Maryland's fiscal outlook to 'negative' due to our looming deficits and Blueprint spending. This was well before President Trump's reelection and before any federal retrenchment," Republican House Minority Leader Jason Buckel said via a statement, adding, "Foisting the blame anywhere but at the feet of the excessive spending championed by Maryland's Democratic party is, at best, disingenuous." "Governor Moore promised to make this 'Maryland's Decade,' but he and Maryland's Democratic supermajority keep putting all their eggs in one basket, banking our entire economy on the federal government instead of building a diversified, competitive private sector," said Republican Senate Minority Whip Justin Ready. "Since well before Governor Moore, Maryland governors—Democrats and Republicans alike—protected this AAA rating as a symbol of our financial integrity," said Republican Senate Minority Leader Steve Hershey. Hershey noted, "But in just over a year, Governor Moore's administration has eroded that legacy through unchecked spending and a lack of serious fiscal discipline. His feel-good messaging can't cover up the fact that the choices made under his leadership have left Maryland weaker, not stronger." Maryland Loses AAA Bond Rating: Senate Republican Leaders Say “We’re Paying the Price for Failed Leadership” pic.twitter.com/c6kDYjFQtK — Maryland Senate Republicans (@MDSenateGOP) May 14, 2025 In February, we noted: Our recent conversation with a large asset management firm in the region revealed the state's dire fiscal situation and how their clients are being told not to add Maryland munis to their bond portfolio. Some clients are being advised to find residency in conservative states amid fears Democrats will enact out-of-control tax hikes as the state implodes. Even though Maryland still holds one of the highest possible credit ratings, the slippery slope has begun for the state as unaccountable Democrats have done everything in their power to ignore taxpayers to prioritize illegal criminal aliens, woke, and climate change nonsense. Maryland's demise via a series of reporting pieces: June 5, 2024: "Self-Created Hole": Education Reforms Push Maryland Toward Financial Cliff July 13, 2024: Maryland "Can't Import Itself Out Of Energy Crisis" Amid Urgent Need To Boost In-State Power Generation November 28, 2024: Maryland's Death Spiral: Reckless Democratic Lawmakers Spark Budget Crisis Fears As "Deep Recession" Looms February 23: Maryland Democrats' 'Extremist' Green Agenda Sparks Power Bill Crisis Crippling Households February 27: Maryland Democrats "Clearly In Denial" As State Faces Twin Crises March 5: Maryland Dems Lose All Sense Of Reality: Focus On Condoms For Kids, Reparations As Crises Pile Up March 29: Maryland Democrats Pass "Sleep Tax" - Is A Thinking Tax Next? April 3: Far-Left Maryland Lawmakers Pass Reparations Bill While Financial Crisis Looms . . . Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 20:30
Don't Be A Panican, But Question Government Shenanigans
1747267500 from ZEROHEDGE
Don't Be A Panican, But Question Government Shenanigans Authored by Matthew Williams via The Mises Institute, “Don’t Be A Panican” is a memeable mantra adapted from a Truth Social post released by the President during the market turmoil triggered by the threat of a broad-sweeping tariff policy. While the panican meme is comical and jovial, its sentiment carries a more insidious undertone. Voting conservatives have given lip service to the classical liberal tenet that a smaller government is the most effective way to run a country—though we will not delve into how this desire fails to manifest in Washington, D.C. Traditionally, conservatives are supposed to question government, support free markets, condemn government overreach, and uphold constitutionalism. On April 2, 2025—“Liberation Day”—Trump announced a litany of tariffs. However, they were not genuine tariffs but pseudo-tariffs. The calculations relied on the ratio of trade deficits to US imports, producing a falsely-inflated tariff percentage. In response, Trump introduced retaliatory tariffs based on this misleading figure. Critics argued that the tactic was inherently dishonest. Yet, when confronted with this faulty approach, many of President Trump’s most ardent followers retorted, “trust the process” or “it’s going to hurt in the short term”—believing that the ends justify the means. Tariffs sent the markets into a frenzy. Both Trump and representatives from his administration conveyed conflicting messages about the tariffs’ ultimate purpose. Meanwhile, obsequious conservative think tanks scrambled to justify the policy, often issuing paradoxical interpretations of tariffs as a strategy. A Euthyphro’s dilemma of sorts emerged. Were tariffs sound policy—capable of paying debt, replacing taxes, and bolstering American exceptionalism—or were they valuable solely because they could be leveraged to bargain for free trade with other nations? Rather than reconciling this dilemma or acknowledging the inherent contradictions, followers and messengers embraced all premises, frequently conflating disparate ideas. The goal was clear: to cast Trump’s decision in a positive light. Even more disheartening was the fact that many of these trusted intellectuals compromised their foundational values, such as the commitment to free trade, in an effort to justify an enigmatic presidential move. Put bluntly, “Don’t Be A Panican” was less about avoiding panic and more a euphemism for “trust Donald Trump.” This message—emerging from traditionally skeptical conservatives—is particularly troubling given the garbled communications from the Trump administration. There were ample reasons to be skeptical—regardless of the ultimate outcome or one’s political leanings. Unfortunately, this blind trust had already taken root before April 2, and it is not a phenomenon confined solely to the Right. Don’t Be A Panican: Bias Media and Public Health Figures Five years ago, a novel virus swept the globe. Covid was a highly-contagious threat, particularly dangerous to high-risk individuals, and it cost over one million American lives. Public health figures urged citizens to confine themselves at home—no visiting family or friends, mask up, and even avoid hiking outdoors. Media outlets broadcast death counters alongside the latest news, and images of people isolated at home—waving from behind windows or hugging through plastic barriers—became ubiquitous. Commercials urging citizens to mask up and do their part to stop the contagion inundated every broadcast, fostering an environment of pervasive fear. A vaccine was developed in record time and though—sometimes a controversial point—data showed the vaccine safe; its efficacy in containing the spread of the contagion was questionable. Regardless, many companies and institutions pushed mask and vaccine mandates on the public at the discretion of government entities like the Center for Disease Control (CDC). These mandates were poorly managed and infringed on many American freedoms. Questioners or dissenters were frequently excluded from public discourse, their concerns dismissed without proper debate; in some instances, individuals even faced career-ending repercussions. Worries about vaccine side effects were labeled as “conspiracy theories.” When side effects became public knowledge, there was neither an apology nor an admission of error. Covid policy and response was a complete disaster. The panican narrative was quite different in this situation. It was the panicans urging the public to blindly trust authorities and the “science,” while non-panicans exercised caution and rejected that narrative. Non-panicans fervently detested and rejected the technocratic establishment. Fast forward to 2025, and new faces have supplanted the technocrats in institutions of public health, such as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Many non-panicans—once adamantly opposed to bureaucrats lecturing us on health decisions—now welcome these new figures as leaders in public health. Some even call for them to use bureaucratic power to remove additives or unwanted ingredients from foods and baby formula. Such calls are often embellished with justifications like, “They are poisoning us!”—a claim that sounds awfully like an appeal to panic. In this scenario, there are several reasons to reject—or at least protest—the advocacy for government intervention as a panacea that should be obvious to government minimalists—and non-panicans. First, the idea that government regulations will hold corporations accountable is debatable, as evidence suggests that such measures can instead embolden corporate entities. Second, emboldening the market, by decreasing regulations and bureaucratic controls, to apply pressures on corporations is the orthodox conservative approach. What happened? Conversely, the panicans have reacted in an entirely opposite manner. Now, it is the panicans telling us to no longer trust the experts—blaming them for measles outbreaks and for wasting taxpayer money on frivolous experiments like investigating a cause for autism. This stance seems excessive and misleading, especially since anti-vaccine sentiments had been on the rise before figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. came to prominence. Ironically, this anti-vaccine trajectory appears largely as a reaction to the panican response during covid. It is bewildering that the covid panicans failed to assume any responsibility for this trend, choosing instead to project blame onto figures like RFK Jr. and Dr. Bhattacharya for the growing movement against established scientific thought. The polarization surrounding nearly every policy decision leaves one questioning the appropriate course of action. To Be or Not to Be a Panican It seems the American public is constantly instructed on when to be—and not to be—a “panican” by the powers that be. While only two scenarios have been outlined above, recent years have presented a plethora of examples: Russian collusion, Biden’s mental health decline, “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor,” etc. The list is extensive. It is good advice not to be a panican. Panic induces strong emotions of fear and uncertainty, rendering individuals more susceptible to short-sighted solutions that promise comfort or security. Typically, these solutions manifest as government interventionism—leading to rigid legislation and eventual bureaucratic expansion. In the words of V from V for Vendetta, “Fear got the best of you and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor [the government].... Fear became the ultimate tool of this government.” However, a more troubling message accompanies the panican mantra. Whether one is labeled a panican or not often depends on partisan politics rather than objective analysis. Although panicans are generally associated with the Left and non-panicans with the Right, this alignment is not absolute. Both camps tend to place their trust in government solutions solely based on who is in power—a stance that builds a house on a foundation of sand. At its core, this philosophy assumes that the government will, or is, acting in the best interests of the people. Demagoguery has become commonplace in political discourse and in approach to policy. This trend sets a dangerous precedent by encouraging the abandonment of the very ideals on which our nation was founded. The Founders believed strongly in rights endowed by an extrinsic, all-powerful Creator, not government. This belief is potent precisely because it shifts power away from a flawed human institution and places it in individual rights, which transcend human authority. Thomas Jefferson famously averred, “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.” On the other hand, President Trump has taken significant steps to reduce government power in some areas through initiatives such as DOGE, executive orders implementing sunsetting legislation, and crackdowns on illegal immigration—actions that support a smaller government framework. These decisions should be lauded, as they position Trump as a champion of reducing government overreach. Trump excels when held accountable and listens to his base—a notable strength—it is all the more important that conservatives uphold their values rather than succumb to populist rhetoric and defenses. We must remember that America’s values do not originate from those in power but from a set of ideals that exceed human authority. When the administration pursues actions that contradict these values, it is our duty to question and hold them accountable. Excusing or attempting to justify poor policy sets a dangerous precedent. With that being said, don’t be a panican. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 20:05
Tyson Responds To Beef Shortage With "Hard" Push Into Chicken Production
1747266000 from ZEROHEDGE
Tyson Responds To Beef Shortage With "Hard" Push Into Chicken Production Speaking at the BMO Global Farm to Market Conference in New York, Tyson Foods CEO Donnie King said the U.S. cattle industry appears to be in the early stages of a rebuilding cycle, with the national herd size hovering near 70-year lows. In response to alarmingly low herd levels pushing cattle futures in Chicago to record highs, King noted Tyson plans to ramp up chicken production. Chicken is viewed as an affordable alternative to beef, making it increasingly attractive to cost-conscious consumers. "We've got more opportunity to grow," King told industry insiders and investors at the market conference, adding the company is looking to work its assets "a little harder." King said Tyson will expand chicken production to meet growing demand as a more affordable alternative to beef. The cattle shortage, plus new developments this week of U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins shutting down live cattle, horse, and bison imports from southern border land ports, sent cattle futures in Chicago to fresh record highs earlier this week. King expects chicken demand to remain robust through the second half of this year into 2026. This will help the U.S. largest meat processor to offset sagging beef profits amid one of the worst cattle shortages in a generation. King reiterated his call, first mentioned on Monday in an earnings call, about emerging signs ranchers are in the early innings of rebuilding depleted herds. He cautioned that such an effort could take at least two years. The White House's Rapid Response 47 X account reposted a video from Fox News that interviewed a rancher who warned, "it's going to take time to rebuild" the nation's herd. 5th Generation Cattle Rancher Steve Lucie: I think at this point, we should be all-in on what's happening... We have the lowest beef herd that we've had since 1950 and that's because so many people have gotten out of the industry. If we could've exported more of our beef, I don't… pic.twitter.com/Hmkq30KmYa — Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 7, 2025 The question on our minds: Will the cattle shortage actually worsen in the second half of the year and into 2026? The rebuilding cycle takes time, which likely means higher beef prices and potential supply constraints—think back to the brief egg shortage. At ZeroHedge, we're not waiting around to find out. We've launched a "Rancher-Direct" e-commerce platform to secure access to clean, American-raised beef sourced from independent ranchers across the country. It's about planning ahead in uncertain times. Relying on multinational supermarket chains for clean, reliable food has become a major issue over the years. The smarter path forward is building direct relationships with local ranchers—knowing where your food comes from and securing that connection before the next supply chain crunch hits. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 19:40
UnitedHealth Shares Plunge Continues On Reported DoJ Probe For Medicare Fraud
1747264500 from ZEROHEDGE
UnitedHealth Shares Plunge Continues On Reported DoJ Probe For Medicare Fraud And the hits just keep on coming... UNH shares are plunging after hours (down 6% and back below $300 for the first time since September 2020) following a report from The Wall Street Journal that, according to people familiar with the matter, the DOJ is investigating UnitedHealth Group for possible criminal Medicare fraud related to its Medicare Advantage business. While the exact nature of the potential criminal allegations against UnitedHealth is unclear, the people said the federal investigation is focusing on the company’s Medicare Advantage business practices. The Justice Department’s criminal healthcare fraud unit focuses on crimes such as kickbacks that trigger higher Medicare and Medicare payments. UnitedHealth’s latest annual securities filing says the company “has been involved or is currently involved in various governmental investigations, audits and reviews,” and flags involved agencies including the Justice Department. It doesn’t specifically mention the criminal, civil and antitrust probes the Journal has reported. The probe adds to a list of government inquiries into the company, including investigations of potential antitrust violations and a civil investigation of its Medicare billing practices, including at its doctors offices. All of this comes as the Trump administration and Congress look to cut federal health spending, a key source of UnitedHealth’s success. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 19:15
Out Of Chaos, A New World Order
1747256400 from ZEROHEDGE
Out Of Chaos, A New World Order Authored by Allan Feifer via AmericanThinker.com, Watching President Trump speaking from Saudi Arabia, I almost felt sorry for a moment for our enemies. They must ponder how to stay relevant as the world seemingly metamorphizes before them, powerless to stop the transformation. In his speech, the President said something so powerful yet unconventional that I had to stop and consider why he was the first leader of our country to say it: Before our eyes, a new generation of leaders is transcending the ancient conflicts and tired divisions of the past and forging a future where the Middle East is defined by commerce, not chaos; where it exports technology, not terrorism; and where people of different nations, religions, and creeds are building cities together, not bombing each other. Commerce is a recurring theme for Trump. His detractors miss the significance of exactly why commerce is so central to Trump’s vision of world peace and why he does not believe in “forever” enemies. I admit that Trump’s beliefs are unconventional for many, including myself. Trump sees Russia, North Korea, China, and a great many nations and people as future participants in a world of commerce. At the same time, Trump views some nations, traditionally considered friends, as potential adversaries and impediments to such a change in posture. It’s a lot to take in. In essence, Trump’s vision can be seen as a balance between stakeholder interests and dogma. I admit millions of us are heavily invested in dogma, including myself. Dogma is generally thought of as: A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith set forth authoritatively by a religion. A principle or statement of ideas, or a group of such principles or statements, especially when considered authoritative or uncritically accepted. That which is held as an opinion, a tenet, a doctrine. Trump sees dogma as static thinking that sees us imprisoned in a cage of a single acceptable outcome, based not on logic but on past decision matrices that have worked at one time or another, but are not readily transferable to the current challenges. The world economy is on a path to bankruptcy, with almost no country putting debt management first. We reflexively return to the old solutions rather than look for an entirely new Rosetta Stone. At American Thinker, Thomas Kolbe wrote: In the first quarter of this year, global debt surged to a record high of $324 trillion. This milestone becomes significant when compared to global GDP, which currently hovers around $110 trillion. Governments worldwide now owe 100% of GDP -- an alarming reality, as no modern state has ever managed to free itself from the ensuing fiscal bind once this threshold is reached. That Rosetta Stone is about collective wealth creation versus inevitable death through debt. When I am plagued trying to reconcile ambiguities, I frequently fall back on my love of the 18th-century thinker Immanuel Kant, who is most remembered for his work explaining “pure reason,” “practical reason,” and his ideas concerning applying judgment. I tend to understand Kant best with these three statements: What we experience and our perceptions are not necessarily reality. The limits of our abilities can be reflected in our choices, which almost always demonstrate the limits of our knowledge. The morality of our actions can only be defined by what can be logically inferred, yet it is imperfect. The bottom line that extends these three precepts into the here and now is Trump’s new dictum—trade makes right. In other words, nations that depend on each other to be wealthy and prosperous rarely fight each other. The old Reagan dictum was “Peace through strength.” Trump would turn that around to “Peace through interdependent trade.” We have a Scythian choice before us. Keep doing the things that are comfortable and familiar, or do something radically different, even if it may seem risky or untried. Trump demonstrates that he is not a theoretician by flatly denying Iran access to nuclear weapons. This is proof positive that he is not naively foolish. We haven't seen an entirely new approach that promises to change the trajectory of the world economy since the Marshall Plan was implemented immediately after WWII. Trump hasn’t named his plan, but the means and objectives are now clearly in sight. We should all wish him success because he is the captain of our Ship of State. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 17:00
'Hey, Comrade Putin, Just Go': Brazil’s Lula Presses Russian President On Istanbul Talks
1747251900 from ZEROHEDGE
'Hey, Comrade Putin, Just Go': Brazil’s Lula Presses Russian President On Istanbul Talks Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was just recently one of the some 29 heads of state who attended the Victory Day Red Square parade and events in Moscow. He also met with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin while in the country. And now amid plans for 'direct' Russia-Ukraine talks to be held in Istanbul Wednesday, Brazilian media is reporting that Lula is urging Putin to attend in person. "It costs me nothing to say, ‘Hey, comrade Putin, go to Istanbul and negotiate, come on'," Lula was quoted as saying by Brazil’s state news agency Agencia Brasil. Presidents Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Vladimir Putin. Kremlin.ru But on Wednesday, Kommersant newspaper is reporting that not even Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in the Istanbul talks. "Speaking to reporters during a visit to China, Lula said he would stop in Moscow on his way back to Brazil in an effort to press Putin to take part in negotiations," another regional source reports. As for the United States, President Trump is dispatching his two top diplomats, but there are reports they could arrive after main talks are scheduled to happen, while currently they are accompanying Trump in the Gulf: US President's Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will arrive in Istanbul, Türkiye, on Friday, May 16, reports The Guardian. As the outlet reports, Witkoff told journalists that he and Rubio will head to Istanbul on Friday for talks regarding Russia and Ukraine. He also noted that it remains unclear whether Russian President Vladimir Putin will be present at the planned negotiations. However, the potential talks between Ukraine and Russia in Istanbul are scheduled for Thursday, May 15. The Kremlin has since confirmed that it still plans to participate, also as Zelensky is trying to goad Putin into attending in person. Zelensky has said he's ready to be there if Putin is. And even Trump had days ago said he was "thinking about actually flying over"; however, this is looking increasingly unrealistic. Rubio and Witkoff might arrive late, as regional sources are reporting. Despite some sensational recent headlines and statements, one thing we can be sure will not happen is President Putin's personal presence. There's no reason for him to be there - from a strategic point of view - given Kiev has yet to make any major concessions, and Russian forces are winning on the ground in the east. And if Moscow is not willing to send Lavrov, it's a clear sign the Kremlin is not approaching the Istanbul meeting as if it will result to much of great consequence or substance. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 15:45
What's Behind Ethereum's Recent Price Surge?
1747248300 from ZEROHEDGE
What's Behind Ethereum's Recent Price Surge? Authored by James Hunt via TheBlock.co, Ethereum has lagged behind Bitcoin and alternative Layer 1s throughout this cycle amid a wave of relative bearishness. And yet, since the crypto market's April lows, ETH has surged nearly 100% - gaining 65% in the last 30 days alone to tap $2,750, back above pre-election levels (and key technical levels). So what's driving the move? Analysts at research and brokerage firm Bernstein, led by Gautam Chhugani, said in a Wednesday note to clients that several narratives have been put forward attempting to explain this performance. While bitcoin claimed all-time highs, crossing the psychological $100,000 barrier, the ETH/BTC ratio has dropped 45% over the past year as bitcoin dominated store-of-value mindshare amid the success of Bitcoin exchange-traded funds and corporate treasury adoption, while retail flows shifted to faster Layer 1s like Solana, the analysts wrote. Ethereum, caught between its Layer 2 roadmap and limited ETF traction comparatively, was "stuck somewhere in the middle," they added - neither the best store of value, nor the best blockchain destination for speculative retail trenches. Stablecoins and tokenization, Layer 2 institutionalization, and an ETH short unwind However, according to the analysts, the narrative is beginning to change amid a boom in stablecoin and securities tokenization, Layer 2 institutionalization, and an ETH short unwind. The cycle is expanding beyond store-of-value use cases, they said, with stablecoin payments and tokenized securities gaining real traction. Stripe's $1.1 billion acquisition of stablecoin platform Bridge and Meta's recent comments about reigniting its stablecoin venture are helping to bring back a focus on the underlying blockchains, and Ethereum — which holds 51% of the total stablecoin supply — is emerging as the key platform proxy for this growth trend, they added. Traditional finance giants like BlackRock and Franklin Templeton are also advancing adoption of a real-world asset tokenization market now valued at over $22 billion, according to RWA.xyz — with Ethereum again dominating deployment. Secondly, while critics question the value accretion of Layer 2s to ETH, the Bernstein analysts said that with networks like the Coinbase-incubated Base earning revenue of around $84 million last year, Ethereum Layer 2s are taking a growing role in institutional crypto infrastructure. With Robinhood's recent acquisition of WonderFi — which also runs an Ethereum Layer 2 — brokers may soon offer tokenized equities on their own chains, they argued. Since these Layer 2s use ETH for gas and settlement, they help drive Ethereum demand and position it as a leading platform for institutional smart contract adoption, they added. Finally, the third driver of ETH's recent outperformance is more tactical, in the analysts' view. Over the past 12 to 18 months, crypto hedge funds have often used ETH as a delta-neutral hedge - staying long BTC and SOL while shorting ETH. But as the narrative shifts toward institutional adoption of blockchain and stablecoin payments, and beyond store of value, ETH's role as the underperformer is becoming harder to justify, they said. As a result, the resurgence of ETH and other non-bitcoin assets is good for crypto exchanges and broker-dealers, they argued, as a broader crypto market rally reinvigorates retail traders, driving stronger volumes. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 14:45
US Charges High-Ranking Mexican Drug Cartel Suspects With Narco-Terrorism
1747243500 from ZEROHEDGE
US Charges High-Ranking Mexican Drug Cartel Suspects With Narco-Terrorism Via Headline USA, U.S. officials unveiled an indictment Tuesday against two alleged Mexican drug cartel leaders on narco-terrorism charges. The indictment comes after the Trump administration in February designated the Sinaloa Cartel and seven other Latin American crime organizations as “foreign terrorist organizations,” upping its pressure on cartels operating in the U.S. and on anyone aiding them. President Donald Trump called for the designation in an executive order on Jan. 20, the day he took office in his second term. The “foreign terrorist organization” label is unusual because it deploys a terrorist designation normally reserved for groups like al-Qaida or the Islamic State group that use violence for political ends — not for money-focused crime rings such as the drug cartels. “If you act like a terrorist, you shouldn’t be surprised if you are charged as one,” said Adam Gordon, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of California. Those charged were described as key leaders of the Beltrán Leyva Organization, according to the indictment. The organization is one of a number of warring criminal groups that once formed part of the Sinaloa Cartel and have since split off and warred for territory and power, fueling bloodshed in large swathes of Mexico. Pedro Inzunza Noriega and his son, Pedro Inzunza Coronel, were also charged with providing material support of terrorism in connection with the trafficking of massive amounts of fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine and heroin into the United States, according to court documents. Five other high-ranking members were charged with drug trafficking and money laundering. All remain fugitives, officials said. The father and son have overseen “one of the largest and most sophisticated fentanyl production networks in the world,” Gordon said. The organization is accused of trafficking tens of thousands of kilograms (pounds) of fentanyl into the United States. Mexican authorities in December raided multiple sites controlled by the father and son that resulted in the world’s largest seizure of fentanyl, totaling 1,500 kilograms (more than 1.65 tons), according to court documents. The group is also known for its violence, engaging in shootouts, kidnappings, torture and murders and targeting officials. It controls the drug trade in various parts of Central America and in many areas of Mexico – including in the border city of Tijuana, across from San Diego, according to the indictment. The elder Pedro is paralyzed after being shot by a rival cartel member. His group has been one of the top distributors of cocaine and now fentanyl since 2006, Gordon said. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 13:25
Tether Buys $459 Million In Crypto, Launches New Bitcoin Treasury Company
1747242300 from ZEROHEDGE
Tether Buys $459 Million In Crypto, Launches New Bitcoin Treasury Company Cantor Equity Partners, Inc. revealed in a new filing with the SEC yesterday that Tether bought 4,812.2 Bitcoin for a total of $458.7 million on behalf of Jack Mallers’ recently launched Bitcoin treasury company, Twenty One Capital, which plans to eventually go public under the ticker XXI. “Pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, Tether agreed that within ten (10) business days thereof, it would purchase a number of Bitcoin equal to an aggregate purchase price of $458,700,000,” Cantor stated in the filing. “With the Convertible Notes PIPE, entered into on April 22, 2025 by Pubco and the Company with certain investors, less a holdback amount of $52,000,000), and place such Bitcoin in a digital wallet held or operated by or on behalf of Tether. As Bitcoin Magazine reports, Tether is holding the Bitcoin in a digital wallet, which anyone can view the holdings online here... ...showcasing further transparency into their holdings similar to how some spot Bitcoin ETF issuers and other public corporations, such as Bitwise and Metaplanet, have done with their holdings. “The Initial PIPE Bitcoin will be sold by Tether to Pubco at the closing of the transactions contemplated by the Business Combination Agreement upon the funding of the PIPE Investments by the PIPE Investors for a purchase price of $458,700,000,” the filing further stated. Cantor Equity Partners Inc., currently trading under the ticker CEP, is now live in the markets as it works toward completing its merger with Twenty One Capital. CEO Jack Mallers recently emphasized the firm’s aggressive Bitcoin acquisition strategy, stating: “We do intend to raise as much capital as we possibly can to acquire Bitcoin… We will never have Bitcoin per share negative. At least that is our intent. Our intent is to make sure when you are a shareholder of Twenty One that you are getting wealthier in Bitcoin terms.” JUST IN: Twenty One Capital CEO Jack Mallers says "we do intend to raise as much capital as we possibly can to acquire #Bitcoin" 💥 pic.twitter.com/IrCyy2QVnS — Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) April 23, 2025 In an also recent interview, Jack Mallers described Twenty One Capital’s mission clearly: “We want to be the ultimate vehicle for the capital markets to participate in Bitcoin…building on top of Bitcoin. So we are a Bitcoin business at our core. It’s our founding, it’s in our name, it’s on our board, it’s at our leadership.” At launch, the company will hold over 42,000 Bitcoin, instantly making it one of the largest corporate holders of BTC worldwide - only behind industry giants like Strategy. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 13:05
Circling The Firing Squad: Democratic Party Moves To Negate Earlier Election Of David Hogg
1747241100 from ZEROHEDGE
Circling The Firing Squad: Democratic Party Moves To Negate Earlier Election Of David Hogg Authored by Joanthan Turley, The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is about to show the perils of circling a firing squad. In its announcement that it will nullify the election of David Hogg and another Vice Chair, the DNC reminded the public why they have left the Democratic Party. The sudden decision that there were procedural irregularities in the election (after Hogg said that he would target older Democratic incumbents) leaves the DNC looking more like the CCP. However, it gets worse. Hogg caused a controversy by announcing that he will work to primary older Democratic incumbents through his group, Leaders We Deserve, to bring young candidates into the party. The leadership ordered him to retract the pledge or resign. He did neither. Then, the DNC announced that there were “irregularities” in how he and Pennsylvania state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta won two of the three vice chair positions. The reason? One of the losing candidates, Kalyn Free, filed a complaint during the original election alleging that the DNC failed to follow rules on gender diversity. If you recall, the Democratic Party was widely mocked over the difficulty of the DNC leadership to explain its convoluted rules for guaranteeing gender and racial diversity. It became a parody of itself. This is just one of the efforts to explain the rules: Jamie Harrison eventually had to turn it over to another DNC member who had equal difficulty explaining the gender equality rules and procedures: HARRISON: “Because of our gender balance provisions on this next ballot, you will be able to vote for two candidates of any gender on the next ballot. OK? So on this next ballot, you will be able to vote for two candidates of any gender on the next ballot. If two candidates receive — I’m going to turn to Helen to clarify this last part.” UNKNOWN FEMALE: “You are in this next ballot where you have two votes. As the chair has said, you may vote for two males, two females, two of any gender. OK? No, you can’t do that. Because we’ve got to balance. You could vote for one of any gender, OK? Non-binary gender. Excuse me. It is late. OK?” After she lost, Free filed her complaint. It would have been an easy matter to determine if there was an invalid balloting but the DNC moved on…for months. After Hogg refused to recant or resign, the DNC then issued this procedural excuse to negate the election. For many, the exercise seemed yet another manipulation by the DNC after it refused to have a real debate over the nomination of Kamala Harris and simply held a coronation at the convention after she failed to secure a single primary vote. Despite spending over $1.2 billion, she lost to Trump. DNC members rushed forward to insist that this was just a coincidence and had nothing to do with Hogg’s controversy. However, they then contradicted that claim in comments to the media as Hogg himself said that it was about his campaign to bring in young voters. One former official told the media, “This is not about David Hogg, despite what he’s saying. It is gender balance…. It’s in the rules that the officers need to be balanced between men and women.” However, the same official then added “The full DNC now gets to vote again. If they like what Hogg is doing then that’s great, and he’ll be re-elected. It was disingenuous to not reveal his intentions the first time before they voted. While it has nothing to do with him, it’s an elected position so now we’ll find out if the party supports it or not, which they very well may.” Another former official insisted that the vote was needed because “either Hogg is wrong and misled members or they think he’s doing the right thing. Either way, it’ll be settled. And he can’t complain. A re-vote is not forcing him out, there are other ways to do that if they chose to.” I grew up in a liberal Democratic family in Chicago and spent much of my life working for Democratic politicians. It has been astonishing to watch the current Democratic leadership destroy their own party with identity politics and radical agendas. Yet, this takes the cake. We have not seen such a display since the arrival of the Judean People’s Front Crack Suicide Squad: Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 12:45
Department Of Defense Orders Halt To Gender Transition Medicine, Procedures
1747238700 from ZEROHEDGE
Department Of Defense Orders Halt To Gender Transition Medicine, Procedures Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times, The U.S. Department of Defense said in a new memorandum that it is halting medical treatments and procedures for troops who identify as transgender and other personnel with gender dysphoria (GD). “Within the direct care component, meaning at military medical treatment facilities ... Service members and all other covered beneficiaries 19 years of age or older may only receive mental health care and counseling for GD,” Dr. Stephen L. Ferrara, acting assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, said in the memo, which is dated May 9. “Apart from consults for the diagnosis of GD and provision of mental health care and counseling ... staff will refer all other care (e.g., cross-sex hormone therapy) for GD to the private sector.” The Pentagon did not return a request for comment by publication time. GD refers to when a person believes they’re a gender that’s different from their sex. President Donald Trump, after taking office in January, said in an order that “expressing a false ‘gender identity’ divergent from an individual’s sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service.” Defense officials later said that all troops with a history of GD would be discharged, with limited exceptions. That process was paused after court rulings against the policy. The Supreme Court on May 6 stayed those rulings, enabling officials to resume the process. Officials said on May 8 that they were discharging about 1,000 troops who identify as transgender or otherwise have GD. Ferrara said in the new memo, which was sent to the director of the Defense Health Agency and assistant secretaries at the Army, Navy, and Air Force, that he was providing fresh guidance in light of the Supreme Court ruling. That includes emphasizing that military doctors are not to perform any surgeries that would aid in gender transition, such as breast removal. Ferrara also said that all unscheduled, scheduled, and planned surgical procedures “associated with facilitating sex reassignment for Service members diagnosed with GD” are now canceled, as are any previously approved waivers for the surgeries. Ferrara said his office would accept waiver requests for care deemed medically necessary to address surgical complications. The military is allowing troops with GD who have been receiving cross-sex hormones to keep receiving them until they are separated, if a health care provider recommends that path “in order to prevent further complications.” The Department of Defense, though, will no longer pay for newly initiated cross-sex hormones, according to the memo, as ordered by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 12:05
Don Lemon Rages Over White Refugees: "Most Racist Shit Ever!"
1747233900 from ZEROHEDGE
Don Lemon Rages Over White Refugees: "Most Racist Shit Ever!" Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news, Ex-CNN host Don Lemon had a total meltdown over Trump resettling a small number of white South African refugees in America, calling it “the most racist shit ever.” A mere 59 Afrikaners arrived at Dulles International Airport outside Washington on Monday, prompting widespread derision and demonization from leftists and the media, who claimed they were not real refugees while also monstering them as white supremacists. The backlash to the refugees arriving in America was so vociferous that it became a stunning mask off moment in proving that anti-white hatred is still mainstream. Don Lemon hyperventilated over “this South African farmer bullshit, which is the most blatantly obvious racist shit ever,” implying that Afrikaners couldn’t be refugees because they “own most of the land and the property” in South Africa. Lemon failed to acknowledge that this is precisely why they are being targeted, sometimes violently, and officially by government discrimination in the form of compulsory land grabs. The former CNN anchor’s main bone of contention was that Trump was “trying to cut down on immigration from other countries” while favoring people from white countries. Don Lemon has a meltdown over South African refugees: “The most obvious racist sht ever”pic.twitter.com/eNXmnXTEXu — Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) May 13, 2025 Because legally admitting 59 white people from South Africa is totally the same as the millions upon millions of illegal immigrants who entered America under Joe Biden, many of whom were violent criminals. Lemon then ludicrously tried to justify the South African government taking land from farmers without compensation by claiming it’s only for land that isn’t being used. Who decides whether the land is being used or not? The same government seizing it without compensation. I’m sure that’s a completely impartial and fair process! Suddenly developing a flair for per capita statistics that leftists can’t seem to grasp when it comes to crime, Lemon complained that white South Africans own more land than blacks despite being a minority of the population. Apparently, this alone, in true Communist dictatorship style, is enough to justify the government just stealing it from them without compensation. As we highlighted earlier, African-American influencers are now suggesting that the white refugees should be violently targeted because they’re “racist,” proving precisely why they needed to flee South Africa in the first place. “These racist motherfuckers gonna find out the hard way, they’re gonna fuck around and find out, you can’t talk that shit over here on our soil,” he said. Tiktoker threatens the immigrants from South Africa and says they’re all racist and Trump brought them here to be racist “They’re gonna find out the hard way… These people will start getting their ass whooped” Seems totally normal and stable… pic.twitter.com/NuRrBxweap — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) May 14, 2025 “So what’s gonna happen is that these people will start getting their ass whooped…we’re gonna start lighting motherfuckers up because they don’t know how to talk to black people in America,” he added. The influencer then complained that when white South African refugees start getting violently attacked, people will complain about it, prompting more discrimination against black Americans. * * * Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 10:45
WTI Rebounds From Overnight Dip But 'Drill, Baby, Drill' Remains Elusive
1747233561 from ZEROHEDGE
WTI Rebounds From Overnight Dip But 'Drill, Baby, Drill' Remains Elusive Oil prices are marginally lower this morning after four straight sessions of gains driven by tariff optimism, following a bigger than expected build in crude stocks reported by API overnight. The rise in stocks comes as OPEC+ readies to add another 411,000 barrel per day tranche of supply to the market as it unwinds 2.2-million barrels per day of voluntary production cuts. The new supply is likely to check prices as Saudi Arabia looks to regain market share and respond to a U.S. call for lower prices, even as U.S. President Donald Trump began the first presidential trip of his current term with a visit to Riyadh on Tuesday. "While OPEC officials maintain that the US played no role in the decision to accelerate the phase -in of the voluntary barrels, the oil price environment has provided a beneficial backdrop to the Presidential visit from the Washington standpoint, Helima Croft, Head of Global Commodity Strategy and MENA Research at RBC Capital Markets, said in a note. All eyes now on the official data for confirmation of builds... API Crude +4.29mm Cushing -850k Gasoline -1.37mm Distillates -3.68mm DOE Crude +3.45mm Cushing -1.07mm Gasoline -1.02mm Distillates -3.16mm The official data echoe API's report with a sizable crude build but draws at the Cushing Hub and in products... Source: Bloomberg In a week when the Trump administration proposes a major bill to refill the SPR, total crude stocks rose around 4mm barrels (including 528k barrels to the SPR)... Source: Bloomberg US crude production rose very modestly last week but along with the rig count is basically unchanged since President Trump's election... Source: Bloomberg OPEC released its May Monthly Oil Market Report on Wednesday, sticking with its forecast for 2025 demand growth of 1.3-million barrels per day, higher last week's estimate from the Energy Information Administration for demand growth of one-million bpd this year. The International Energy Agency will release its monthly outlook on Thursday. The cartel also lowered its estimate from production growth for countries outside of OPEC+ by 100,000 bpd to 0.8-million bpd. WTI is rallying back from overnight weakness... Finally, the question many are asking is when will see prices at the pump lower as Refineries are expected to keep ramping up ahead of the summer, allowing nationwide crude processing rates to remain at the highest seasonal level since 2019. ...and along with those lower prices, lower inflation. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 10:39
Trump Praises 'Young, Attractive' President Sharaa, Founder Of Al Qaeda In Syria, Before Qatar Visit
1747231500 from ZEROHEDGE
Trump Praises 'Young, Attractive' President Sharaa, Founder Of Al Qaeda In Syria, Before Qatar Visit As a last major event while still on the ground in Saudi Arabia, and before embarking for Qatar, President Donald Trump met with Syria's President Ahmed al-Sharaa. This signifies a monumental, historic shift in the entire regional order. We are witnessing the final blood soaked after-effects of the culmination of what was laid out in Seymour Hersh's The Redirection, a policy which began all the way back in the Bush administration. Sharaa, also known as Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, got his start early in the Syria war as emissary to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and later became founder of Syrian al-Qaeda, called Jabhat al-Nusra. The terror group went through several name changes, and is now the ruling Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) in the wake of Bashar al-Assad's December ouster. Trump had yesterday in a speech before the US-Saudi Investment Forum described that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had asked him to remove the long in place sanctions against Syria. Trump expressed hope that the country could become stable again under its new rulers. "The sanctions were brutal and crippling and served as an important — really an important function — nevertheless, at the time. But now it’s their time to shine," he said. "So I say, 'Good luck, Syria.' Show us something very special.'" As for 'special'... It took only 6 months. pic.twitter.com/GQFmxWfOoD — Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) May 14, 2025 Indeed, Jolani/Sharaa, went from head of AQ-linked HTS in Idlib province, which is ruled by Sharia law, to standing in Riyadh alongside the United States president. He actually still has not been removed from the US terrorism list, though the ten million dollar bounty which had been on his head was taken off months ago. Trump described the terrorism elephant in the room by telling reporters aboard Air Force One just after the meeting that Sharaa was a "young, attractive guy — tough guy" with a "strong past" and that he now has an opportunity to stabilize Syria. "He's got a real shot at pulling it together," Trump added. Trump had reportedly urged Sharaa to make peace with Israel and join the Abraham Accords. Washington has also been pressing Damascus to protect and respect religious minorities after recent mass killings of Alawites, Druze, and Christians - especially along the coast, in the south, and in some Damascus suburbs. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, President Donald Trump and Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa in Riyadh today. @PressSec/X The conservative publication National Review has it right in saying the following: Trump’s meeting with Ahmed al-Sharaa is even more extraordinary than an American president meeting with some repugnant branch of the Assad family. Until late December, the U.S. government was willing to pay $10 million for information about al-Sharaa’s location, because he was on the “specially designated global terrorist” list. The irony is that the Sharaa meeting happened on the sidelines of the summit of the United States and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members in Riyadh. It was the GCC which early in the Syria proxy war had a big role in funding the anti-Assad jihadist insurgency, which included ISIS and al-Qaeda. Qatar especially was a big financier of the Islamists in Syria who beheaded civilians, massacred Christians, and took women as sex slaves. Qatar even hosted "Free Syrian Army" (FSA) training camps, in coordination with the CIA and Western and Gulf intelligence services. FSA commandoes would then often, fresh of this training, take their weapons into Syria and fight right alongside ISIS. We have previously documented this many times. Looks like Erdogan joined Trump-Sharaa-MbS meeting via teleconference. pic.twitter.com/SzJqxQytRg — Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) May 14, 2025 As for highlights from the readout from the Trump-Sharaa meeting: Trump told al-Sharaa that he had "a tremendous opportunity to do something historic in his country," the readout said. He urged the Syrian leader to sign on to the Abraham Accords, a framework for Arab states to recognize Israeli sovereignty that the U.S. mediated during Trump's first term. He also advised al-Sharaa to tell foreign terrorists to leave Syria, deport Palestinian terrorists, help the U.S. prevent the resurgence of the Islamic State terrorist group and assume responsibility for ISIS detention centers in Syria's northeast. Al-Sharaa affirmed his commitment to Syria's 1974 disengagement with Israel and invited American companies to invest in Syrian oil and gas, the readout said. On Wednesday Trump landed in Qatar, where as Al Jazeera explains "Regional peace, investments, energy and security cooperation on agenda as US President Donald Trump holds talks with Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani in the Qatari capital Doha during the second leg of his Gulf visit." Donald Trump given Cybertruck motorcade through Doha, Qatar today 🇶🇦pic.twitter.com/jwLKIHFD0F — Dima Zeniuk (@DimaZeniuk) May 14, 2025 An American president has not visited Qatar in more than 20 years. But certainly the two sides became closer in the context of the covert push to overthrow Assad, and to wage proxy war against the 'pro-Iran axis' in the region. Qatar is also home to major regional US military and naval facilities. As for another theme which Trump is continued to expected pushing, he said Wednesday: "This is good for Israel" - after reporters asked whether the Netanyahu government is being sidelined in his Gulf trip. "Having a relationship like I have with these countries … I think it’s very good for Israel." As for the ongoing Gaza crisis, not much has been said publicly, but this is likely high on the agenda behind closed doors. After all, the White House wants to "be able to say he hit a home run in all three kingdoms – that he was able to build relationships that are going to transcend his presidency. He wants to overwhelm the US press with a success list." Trump is holding talks with the Emir of Qatar. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 10:05
Generac CEO: Will Slash Reliance On Chinese Supply Chains Within 18 Months
1747230300 from ZEROHEDGE
Generac CEO: Will Slash Reliance On Chinese Supply Chains Within 18 Months Aaron Jagdfeld, chief executive of Generac Holdings, appeared on Bloomberg Television Tuesday evening to discuss how the company is responding to President Trump's trade war and the recently announced 90-day de-escalation period in U.S.-China trade tensions. Jagdfeld, who leads one of America's largest generator manufacturers, highlighted the company's long-term strategy to reduce reliance on Chinese supply chains. He outlined that Generac has been reducing supply chain exposure to China since President Trump's first term and will reduce 10% exposure to 5% in 18 months. "So today, less than 10% of our supply chain comes from China, but that'll be less than 5% in 18 months based on plans we've already had in motion. And this will obviously accelerate those. And where we go next is kind of the question, right?" Jagdfeld said. He continued, "So where are there's going to be winners and losers as companies like ours rotate their supply chains into different countries? You know, India has always held a lot of promise as a supply chain, as a trade partner for the U.S., I think that will probably start to come to fruition more, you know, more meaningfully in the next year or two." Earlier this week, the U.S. and China announced a breakthrough trade agreement that temporarily lowered tariffs on each other's products for 90 days. The U.S. dropped its 145% on Chinese goods to 30%, while China lowered levies from 125% to 10%. Goldman illustrates the rollercoaster ride of the tit-for-tat trade war between the U.S. and China in recent months, as well as the temporary cooling period aimed at de-escalating tensions. On Wednesday morning, Goldman analyst Jerry Shen told clients, "We Now Expect the Effective Tariff Rate to increase by 13pp." Trump's tariff shock is working. However, friend-shoring and or re-shoring will take time. This is a great start because we've described some of the critical supply chains America needs to secure before the 2030s... Read Here. What are the national security implications of having critical backup power generation supply chains overseas? This might be one of those supply chains that need to be re-shored. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 09:45
Leftists Are Furious Over South African Refugees... Because They Are White?
1747227600 from ZEROHEDGE
Leftists Are Furious Over South African Refugees... Because They Are White? A year ago if you were to mention anything about the "great replacement theory" in a public arena you would be immediately attacked by a mob of progressives as a "white nationalist" and a xenophobe. Keep in mind that western nations are the only nations in the world that are expected to embrace open immigration. No other culture on the planet deals with such demands. No other group is criticized so egregiously for refusing to accept foreign invasion. Leftists view open borders as a tool to further their ideological goals of "multiculturalism", the destruction of western civilization, and yes, a way to make America less white. They've been saying this openly in the media for years, and they also openly admit that accelerating demographic changes are about "power and shifting government policy". Though "whiteness" is often treated more like a cultural bi-product than a mere matter of skin color (most of the people that perpetuate the white privilege narrative are white leftists), it's perfectly fair to point out that the far-left is rabidly intent on importing as many non-white people as possible into the US and Europe, and they treat the idea of white refugees with disgust. Case in point - The progressive reaction to Trump allowing white South African farmers to become US citizens under refugee status. They are furious. The media has accused Trump of fabricating claims of racial prejudice against whites in South Africa, interviewing socialist government officials who assert that they are "confused" by the idea that whites face discrimination. They initially stated that almost no one in South Africa was trying to leave and that a movement for whites to leave SA didn't exist. This was a lie. At least 10,000 white farmers rushed to get information on relocating to the US after Trump's announcement. The progressive controlled Episcopal Church has broken ties with the federal government and its immigration programs exactly because Trump is importing whites. The church states: "In light of our church’s steadfast commitment to racial justice and reconciliation and our historic ties with the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, we are not able to take this step...Accordingly, we have determined that, by the end of the federal fiscal year, we will conclude our refugee resettlement grant agreements with the U.S. federal government..." The terms "racial justice" and "reconciliation" are very important - These ideals are rooted in anti-white philosophy. White people cannot be oppressed or persecuted. White people can't be discriminated against. Therefore, white people can't be refugees. Any plight they might experience is Karmic justice for their whiteness. On Monday, the State Department said it had welcomed 59 Afrikaners whose applications to come to the U.S. were fast-tracked under President Donald Trump's executive order issued in February titled, "Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa." The order called on the administration to "prioritize humanitarian relief, including admission and resettlement" for Afrikaners, a South African minority group descended primarily from Dutch settlers, "who are victims of unjust racial discrimination." The propaganda spin on this issue is absurd and the media continues to pretend as if the Afrikaners are under no threat. In case anyone needs reminding, there is an open call among black communists in South Africa to "kill the Boers" (kill the white farmers). And they deny that they’re being targeted and killed. “Kill the Boer” means “Kill the white farmer.” pic.twitter.com/GNyfBqltLp — 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐠 (@WaywardGreg) May 12, 2025 This is not just a political slogan with no teeth. Farmers in the region have suffered an escalation of violence aimed at them over the years. There have been thousands of murders so far, most of them whites. Farm murders in SouthAfrica... 2 attacks a day 2 deaths a week. With a declining Number of farmers now only 30 000. Then with no sympathy from our President & ANC party. With no moral help from the SAHRC with their R224 million annual taxpayers budget & woke agenda... pic.twitter.com/rW5HoSco3X — Danny Nel (@magicdan60) April 3, 2025 And in 2024 the SA government added insult to injury after they codified laws which allow for farmland to be taken without payment in the name of "equity". These laws are specifically meant to redistribute land from whites to blacks. These are provable facts, not theories or rumors or artificially engineered excuses for migration. South African whites have legitimate reasons for wanting to escape to America. The SA refugee situation is a big problem for the political left. It undermines their core ideological belief that all the problems in the world can be directly attributed to "whiteness". It undermines their attempts to enforce replacement immigration. It also exposes the true motives of race communists who claim that Afrikaners "deserve what they get" because of Apartheid over 35 years ago. Social justice is about revenge, not equality. Finally, the South African government has a vested interest in demonizing the relocation of white farmers. They hate the Afrikaners, but over 70% of all agricultural output in the country comes from white owned farms. Without these farmers and their knowledge South Africa will collapse and starve (just as Zimbabwe did). The government would prefer to phase out white farmers slowly and replace them with black farmers, not lose all of them at one time. It would appear that South Africa's loss is America's gain. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 09:00
Trump To Scrutinize Pardons Biden Issued Before Leaving Office
1747226400 from ZEROHEDGE
Trump To Scrutinize Pardons Biden Issued Before Leaving Office Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times, President Donald Trump’s newly tabbed pardon attorney said on May 13 that his work will include scrutinizing pardons that former President Joe Biden issued just before leaving office in January. “I do think that the Biden pardons need some scrutiny. And they need scrutiny because we want pardons to matter and to be accepted and to be something that’s used correctly,” Ed Martin, the pardon attorney, told reporters during a press briefing in Washington. “So I do think we’re going to take a hard look at how they went and what they did and if they’re, I don’t know, but null and void, I’m not sure how that operates,” he added. Biden’s pardons, issued in his final hours in office, went to multiple individuals, including former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.). The pardons were for conduct for which the individuals had not been charged. Biden said at the time that the people “do not deserve to be the targets of unjustified and politically motivated prosecutions.” Trump said in March that the pardons were “hereby declared void” because, he alleged, they were done with an autopen, or a device that lets people sign documents with preloaded signatures. Martin said on Tuesday that the pardons were not particularly reasonable but that he did not necessarily think the use of an autopen would nullify them. Martin is stepping down as the interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia on Wednesday. Trump on May 8 named Martin pardon attorney and director of the Department of Justice’s weaponization working group after some senators publicly opposed Martin’s nomination to take the U.S. attorney post permanently. Asked later on Tuesday about the resignation of Denise Cheung, who had been chief of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia’s Criminal Division, Martin said that he had asked Cheung to look into what he described as unprecedented conduct, or $6.7 billion transferred from the government to a nonprofit that was created just six months prior. That kind of conduct “does make you pause,” Martin said. “That’s what you’re supposed to do, is pause, just like if the Biden pardons are unprecedented in their extent. Right back to when Hunter Biden was whatever age you say, ’that’s uncommon, we ought to take a look at that.'” Biden also pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, 55. Martin also said that the weaponization working group has been looking at various actions taken during the Biden administration, including the prosecution of people who participated in the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol. He said that under him, the group will be giving more updates on its work and is exploring the launch of a portal that will enable people to provide them tips. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 08:40
Coming "Back To Life": Burberry On Track For Best Weekly Performance Since Early 2009
1747224300 from ZEROHEDGE
Coming "Back To Life": Burberry On Track For Best Weekly Performance Since Early 2009 Burberry's earnings report, released Wednesday, indicates modest but encouraging progress in its strategic turnaround. One Wall Street analyst remarked that the iconic British trench-coat maker is "showing signs of life," with early traction visible in brand repositioning efforts. While demand remains soft in key markets like China and the U.S., operational improvements suggest the brand may be approaching an inflection point that deserves investors' attention. Despite a year-over-year decline in revenue and profitability, Burberry delivered several above-consensus results, including sales that fell less than expected in the fourth quarter, while its full-year operating profit and margin beat Bloomberg Consensus estimates. Mainland China and the U.S. remain weak spots for demand. The results suggest the worst may be behind, and with improved execution, Burberry could be at the start of a recovery phase... Fourth-Quarter Results: Retail comparable sales fell 6%, better than expectations of -7.78% (Bloomberg Consensus) Asia Pacific: -9% vs. -10.5% est. Mainland China: -8% vs. -9.5% est. EMEIA (Europe, Middle East, India, Africa): -4% vs. -5.53% est. Americas: -4% vs. -2.76% est. (slightly worse than expected) Full-Year Results: Adjusted pretax loss of £37M vs. £44.8M loss expected (better than forecast). Retail comparable sales -12%, estimate -13.1% Revenue matched expectations at £2.46B, but fell 17% y/y. Retail sales: -14% y/y; slightly ahead of consensus. Wholesale: -37% y/y; in line with estimates. Licensing: +6.5% y/y; beat expectations. Adjusted operating profit: £26M vs. £4.65M est. (significant beat, though down 94% y/y). Adjusted operating margin: 1% vs. 0.25% est. (down from 14.1% y/y). Adjusted EPS: loss of 14.8p vs. loss of 10.4p est. No dividend declared (0p, as expected). CEO Joshua Schulman, who joined the company last July, recently unveiled 'Burberry Forward' to revive the faltering brand and boost popularity for its outerwear products and expensive trench coats. Schulman expanded his turnaround strategy today with a plan to deliver $80 million in cost savings over the next two years, driven partly by a workforce reduction of 1,700 jobs—approximately 18% of total headcount. The move comes amid a broader global slowdown in luxury demand as the company looks to streamline operations and protect margins. In markets, Burberry shares in London jumped 15% during the cash session. For the week, up nearly 24% - and if gains hold through Friday, this could be the company's best weekly stock performance since the first week of April 2009. Shares are trading at 2010 lows... Analyst commentary on the earnings report was mostly positive but cautious. Goldman analyst Louise Singlehurst and Adrien Duverger provided clients earlier with their first take on the report: GS View: We think performance in 2H25, and the focus on strong cost control, demonstrates the pace of execution at Burberry. Despite the tough environment, we note that inventory was -7% cFX (ahead of guidance of broadly at least flat) which we also expect reflects that Q4 trading was ahead of company expectations. The key is the additional cost savings target: we see as this as providing increased confidence for investors on the recovery in EBIT, whilst enabling Burberry to invest in the brand's re-acceleration. We note that post FY25 adjusted EBIT of £26m, Visible Alpha Consensus Data adj EBIT for FY26 is at £138m (GSE £125m). We remain Neutral. Additional commentary from other Wall Street desks (courtesy of Bloomberg): Deutsche Bank (buy) Burberry is showing further progress on its brand turnaround, says analyst Adam Cochrane; an improvement in sales will be the key factor for investors over the next 12 months Outerwear and scarves were better than average, while leather goods were weaker Jefferies (underperform) Burberry's results suggest the brand's turnaround case is in slow-burn mode, writes analyst James Grzinic, given fourth- quarter sales momentum has not built on the third-quarter sequential improvement Reference to a toughening backdrop and a back-end loading to this year's delivery implies a mixed start to the new year on the sales front Citi (buy) Burberry is coming "back to life," writes analyst Thomas Chauvet, with the company's robust strategic plan set to unlock value in the medium term Patience is needed, but the potential rewards now outweigh the risks RBC Capital Markets (outperform) Burberry's results are "an encouraging first step," says analyst Piral Dadhania, with management pursuing the right strategy to reset the business This should, in time, support a return to positive revenue and profit growth Bernstein (outperform) Burberry's earnings look like a small beat on low expectations, writes analyst Luca Solca, which the market will take as an "encouraging sign" However, the new Burberry is yet to appear, given the new CEO arrived just before the SS25 fashion show . . . Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 08:05
Nvidia, AMD Secure Saudi AI Data Center Deals During Trump's Gulf States Tour
1747223100 from ZEROHEDGE
Nvidia, AMD Secure Saudi AI Data Center Deals During Trump's Gulf States Tour Several U.S. tech companies announced big AI deals in the Middle East after the White House announced the kingdom's commitment to invest $600 billion in the U.S. Among the largest deals, Nvidia will supply 18,000 of its cutting-edge Blackwell chips to Humain, an AI startup just launched by Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund. Tuesday's announcement comes as part of the White House's Gulf tour, which includes President Trump and top CEOs. "I am so delighted to be here to help celebrate the grand opening, the beginning of Humain," CEO Jensen Huang told the audience at the Saudi-U.S. Investment Forum in Riyadh on Tuesday, adding, "It is an incredible vision, indeed, that Saudi Arabia should build the AI infrastructure of your nation so that you could participate and help shape the future of this incredibly transformative technology." A New Chapter of Global Technological Leadership — Born in Riyadh! Today at the #SaudiUSForum2025, history was made. Tareq Amin, CEO of HUMAIN and Jensen Huang, visionary CEO of NVIDIA, announced a groundbreaking partnership that is setting a new global benchmark: building AI… pic.twitter.com/Vm6ncjYCrA — Dr Khalid AlShaigi د خالد الشايقي MD MTEI MDI MHI (@K_Alshaigi) May 13, 2025 Huang said that AI data centers are power-hungry, and the energy-rich country can use Nvidia's technology to unlock new capabilities. NEWS: NVIDIA and HUMAIN, an AI subsidiary of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, announced plans to build AI factories that will transform the country into a global AI leader. NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang participated in a state visit today to share how this effort… pic.twitter.com/4Au6NxvTQ6 — NVIDIA Newsroom (@nvidianewsroom) May 13, 2025 Humain plans to develop Arabic versions of large language models. CEO Tareq Amin said the startup would build 1.9 gigawatts of data centers by the decade's end. He anticipates Nvidia's technology will power AI factories across the Middle East. Here are the AI deals that were announced: Nvidia will supply hundreds of thousands of AI chips to Saudi Arabia, starting with 18,000 Blackwell GPUs for Humain, a newly launched AI firm backed by Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund. AMD announced a $10 billion collaboration with Humain to deploy 500 megawatts of AI infrastructure, including CPUs, GPUs, and orchestration software. Qualcomm signed an MoU with Humain to develop server CPUs for future data centers. Saudi firm DataVolt will invest $20 billion in U.S. AI data centers and energy infrastructure. Google, Oracle, Salesforce, AMD, Uber, and DataVolt will invest $80 billion into transformative technologies across both countries. Trump's Gulf tour aims to ramp up trillions of investments between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. Outside of chips, the White House announced a $142 billion defense deal with the kingdom to provide "state-of-the-art warfighting equipment and services from over a dozen U.S. defense firms." This is nearly double Saudi Arabia's 2025 defense budget. Tuesday's announcement highlights how Nvidia's chips have become a bargaining tool for the Trump administration. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 07:45
How Do US Universities Make Their Money?
1747220100 from ZEROHEDGE
How Do US Universities Make Their Money? The cost of funding American universities is huge - covering everything from faculty salaries and special departments to laboratories. Not only that, government funding for public institutions has fallen substantially over the past 50 years, making universities rely more heavily on tuition and other sources of revenue. The Trump administration’s freezing of billions in grants and contracts is adding further strain to elite academic institutions. This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's shows how American public universities are funded, based on data from the National Center for Education Statistics. The Top Sources of Revenue for American Universities Below, we break down the $392 billion in revenues generated across 1,592 public American institutions as of 2023: State government funding, typically in the form of research grants, contracts, and appropriations, makes up the largest share at 28%. Overall, New Hampshire ranks last in spending on higher public education spending per student, followed by Vermont. Going further, 25 states spend less than levels seen in 2008, with Nevada, Arizona, and Louisiana spending 30% less in 2023. In absolute terms, California and Texas spend the most on academic funding, at $22.3 billion and $11.5 billion, respectively in fiscal 2025. Meanwhile, tuition and fees generated 21% of revenues totaling $80.8 billion. Despite tuition costs more than tripling since 1990, it has struggled to make up the funding losses from state cutbacks. At the same time, university spending has swelled for administrators, construction, and faculty salaries as demand for higher education has increased. Looking at private sources of revenue, these brought in $51.2 billion, or 13% of the total. Private sources include endowment additions, investment income, and private grants. While universities have massive endowment funds, funding is often tied to specific purposes. For instance, certain donors will designate funds to scholarships or a specific research center over a series of years. To learn more about this topic from a global perspective, check out this graphic on the top universities outside of America. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 06:55
Florida Troopers Now Federally Credentialed To Arrest Illegal Immigrants On Their Own
1747218600 from ZEROHEDGE
Florida Troopers Now Federally Credentialed To Arrest Illegal Immigrants On Their Own Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), Florida officials announced that 1,800 state Highway Patrol troopers are the first in the nation to receive federal credentials under an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agreement allowing them to arrest illegal immigrants on their own. An Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent and a local police officer arrest an illegal immigrant in Florida in April 2025. ICE Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said at a press conference on May 12 that the state’s ongoing partnership with ICE included what is known as 287(g) agreements, where state and local law enforcement partner with ICE to help arrest and deport illegal immigrants. The Florida Highway Patrol entered into a 287(g) task force model that gives them the power to arrest foreign nationals who are in the country illegally and place detainers on them during routine policing, such as traffic stops. In essence, it allows local law enforcement to operate as an extension of ICE under federal supervision. DeSantis encouraged other states to support President Donald Trump’s efforts to deport illegal immigrants, noting the success of Operation Tidal Wave. The recent joint federal-state operation arrested more than 1,100 illegal immigrants. Some of those arrested included members of gangs such as MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, both designated as terrorist organizations by the Trump administration. Additionally, DeSantis said Florida also swore in 100 troopers as special deputy U.S. marshals, which will allow them to execute federal search warrants and remove dangerous illegal immigrants. Dave Kerner, director of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, said during the press conference that the Florida troopers are the first fully credentialed law enforcement to be fully operational under the 287(g) task force model. “What that means is, if you see a state trooper, he or she has federal authorities to detain, investigate, apprehend, and deport,” Kerner said. “We have troopers in all 67 counties of this great state that have that authority.” Kerner told The Epoch Times that troopers serving as U.S. marshals will be able to go into homes to serve warrants, which isn’t part of the 287(g) agreements. He said that the programs offer flexibility to state and local jurisdictions, allowing them to determine their level of involvement once they sign up for the agreements. “It is, by and large, a voluntary effort,” he said. “You can decide how much you want to participate.” Illegal immigrants from Venezuela turn themselves in to Texas state troopers after crossing the border from Mexico into Del Rio, Texas, on May 18, 2021. John Moore/Getty Images DeSantis added that there’s a plan on the table that, if approved by the federal government, would allow military judge advocates to act as immigration judges and provide makeshift detention space and transportation for illegal immigrants. The governor noted that the state’s experience with disaster response, such as during hurricanes, helped the state come up with the plan. He said there are 70,000 to 80,000 illegal immigrants in the state, with final deportation orders issued by a judge. Getting rid of criminal illegal immigrants helps cut down on crime and save lives, DeSantis said. “You’re really making a difference in your community,” he said. Some 11 million illegal immigrants were apprehended at U.S. borders over the past four years, according to Customs and Border Protection data. Trump campaigned on border security and illegal immigrant deportations. Upon returning to the White House, he has moved to keep that promise through a whole-of-government approach that has included designating several Mexican cartels and other transnational criminal groups as terrorist organizations. As a result, some members of the MS-13 and Tren de Aragua gangs have been deported to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, known as CECOT. As of May 8, ICE statistics show there are 531 agreements with state and local agencies throughout the country. Another 105 applications are pending. Although dozens of states have agreements under the 287(g) program, Florida is the first to have its law enforcement officers credentialed. U.S. military personnel escort alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and the MS-13 gang recently deported by the U.S. government to be imprisoned in the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) prison as part of an agreement with the Salvadoran government, in San Luis Talpa, El Salvador, on March 30, 2025. Office of the President's Press Secretary/Reuters Law enforcement nationwide has been encouraged to sign up for 287(g) agreements by the Trump administration because there are not enough federal officers to find and process millions of illegal immigrants. Besides the task force model, the federal government created the jail enforcement model and the warrant service officer model. The jail enforcement model allows local officers to identify and process removable noncitizens already booked into local jails. The warrant service officer model allows officers to serve and execute administrative warrants on illegal immigrants already in custody. Florida had 266 agreements that included all 67 sheriff’s offices in the state, according to the Florida Sheriffs Association. Texas had the second-highest number of agreements at 77. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 06:30
Bad Day Sunshine? Climate Dimwits Declare War On The Sun
1747213200 from ZEROHEDGE
Bad Day Sunshine? Climate Dimwits Declare War On The Sun Authored by Thaddeus McCotter via American Greatness, “Here comes the sun, and I say, it’s all right” – Wrong, Mr. Harrison! “Good day sunshine” – Not so fast, Mr. Lennon and Mr. McCartney! Standing with both hands extended for a £50 million squeeze of the public teat, United Kingdom scientists claim the sun you celebrate in song contributes to “runaway climate change.” And these white-robed high priests of perfidious Albion’s climate cult have a novel idea to control the weather and forestall the impending apocalypse: dimming the sun. (Apparently, for these climate cult dimwits, sunshine on their shoulders makes them anything but happy.) Per Simon Kent’s article in Breitbart News, this is not the only harebrained scheme these literal dimwits at Aria (the Advanced Research and Invention Agency) promise for someone else’s money. According to the Daily Telegraph, a host of possible options for climate control are being considered by scientists with government approval alongside £50 million in taxpayer funds: Scientists are considering outdoor field trials, which could include injecting aerosols into the atmosphere or brightening clouds to reflect sunshine, as a way to prevent runaway climate change. Clearly, the old-school itinerant cloud seeders preying upon the angst of drought-riddled farmers and their small towns have nothing on Aria and its siren song of salvation, for they have the entire UK government on board to foot the bill for what should have been named “Operation Daedalus.” But though the dimwits will be confronting the sun, they assure us that, unlike the heedless youth in Greek mythology who flew too close to the sun, these climate cultists vow to not go down in flames. According to Professor Mark Symes, there will be “small controlled outdoor experiments on particular approaches.” The professor then went on to preemptively calm any member of the public who had been traumatized by Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and had qualms with a lab-coated, modern Prometheus playing God: “Everything we do is going to be safe by design. We’re absolutely committed to responsible research, including responsible outdoor research… We have strong requirements around the length of time experiments can run for and their reversibility, and we won’t be funding the release of any toxic substances to the environment.” (Author’s Note: The professor is not funding anything. The British public is.) See? The only thing going up in flames is someone else’s money. Besides, what could go wrong when prospectively using “stratospheric aerosol injection” that “would see scientists launching sulfate particles into the Earth’s lower stratosphere at altitudes up 12 miles high?” Unforeseen consequences, you say? Please. Next, you’ll claim that COVID resulted from a lab leak. Nevertheless, one cannot help but wonder how dimming the sun in that renowned fun-in-the-sun island known as England will prevent climate change. Given the UK’s increasing war on free speech, it is best not to ask or to have “Let the Sunshine In” on your iPod. Oh, wait. It isn’t just us recalcitrant climate deniers worried about the unforeseen consequences of trying to change the weather? The Telegraph notes geoengineering projects that seek to artificially alter the climate have proven controversial, with critics arguing they could bring damaging knock-on effects. This has been noted previously when scientists looked to “dimming the sun” as a way to shield the Earth’s surface. There is a rich irony in environmental radicals who only eat organic foods, blithely supporting using artificial means to unnaturally diminish sunlight. I guess it is the climate cult’s version of “We have to destroy a village to save it”—perhaps with dimwits crooning, “I’m blocking out sunshine” to the tune of Katrina and the Waves 1980s hit? Regardless, the climate cult—starting with the dimwits—refuses to admit how all the diplomas and degrees in the world cannot render anyone infallible. And therein is another more bitter irony: what if a climate apocalypse is manmade—by dimwits like these messing up nature by trying to stop it? Anyway, “it’s getting near dawn, when lights close their tired eyes,” and mine are glazing over at the climate cult’s toxic imbecility on display. Suffice to say, however the dimwits give us their “dawn surprise,” we can but hope they don’t usher in the next Ice Age—or worse. Wait! We cannot succumb to our worst fears. That’s what the climate cultists do. No, Annie is right, “The sun will come up tomorrow.” After all, the British public just bet their bottom £50 million on it, right? Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 05:00
Visualizing The Size Of Each Country's Shadow Economy
1747210500 from ZEROHEDGE
Visualizing The Size Of Each Country's Shadow Economy The global shadow economy generates trillions in revenue each year, driven by criminal activity and other unreported transactions. In low income countries, shadow activity makes up a larger slice of GDP, standing at an estimated 42.4% share. In comparison, this drops to 5.9% of GDP in rich countries, with the UAE seeing the smallest share overall. This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Dorothy Neufeld, shows the size of each country’s shadow economy, based on analysis from the Ernst & Young Global Shadow Economy Report 2025. Defining the Shadow Economy To start, the shadow economy includes unreported or untaxed activity, making it difficult for authorities to monitor. This includes illegal enterprises, drug trafficking, street vendors, or cash transactions made off the books. While measuring the informal economy is hard to quantify, it has shrunk from 17.7% of world GDP in 2000 to 11.8% in 2023. Breaking Down the Shadow Economy by Country Here are countries with the largest shadow economies as a share of GDP: Rank Country Shadow Economy % of GDP in 2023 Shadow Economy Value GDP 2023 1 🇸🇱 Sierra Leone 64.5 $4.1B $6.4B 2 🇳🇪 Niger 56.3 $9.5B $16.8B 3 🇳🇵 Nepal 51.0 $20.9B $40.9B 4 🇪🇹 Ethiopia 50.2 $80.2B $159.8B 5 🇧🇮 Burundi 49.2 $2.1B $4.2B 6 🇲🇱 Mali 46.8 $9.5B $20.2B 7 🇹🇿 Tanzania 44.7 $35.4B $79.1B 8 🇧🇫 Burkina Faso 43.8 $8.9B $20.3B 9 🇨🇩 DRC 42.1 $28.2B $66.9B 10 🇲🇿 Mozambique 39.8 $8.4B $21.0B 11 🇰🇪 Kenya 38.4 $41.8B $108.8B 12 🇲🇲 Myanmar 37.9 $24.4B $64.5B 13 🇿🇲 Zambia 35.6 $10.0B $28.2B 14 🇵🇰 Pakistan 35.0 $118.1B $337.5B 15 🇸🇩 Sudan 34.9 $13.3B $38.1B 16 🇨🇲 Cameroon 33.3 $16.4B $49.3B 17 🇹🇯 Tajikistan 33.2 $4.0B $11.9B 18 🇧🇯 Benin 32.9 $6.5B $19.7B 19 🇨🇬 Congo 32.6 $4.6B $14.2B 20 🇧🇴 Bolivia 32.1 $14.6B $45.5B 21 🇵🇬 Papua New Guinea 31.4 $9.6B $30.7B 22 🇺🇬 Uganda 31.1 $15.2B $48.8B 23 🇱🇸 Lesotho 30.9 $0.6B $2.1B 24 🇲🇼 Malawi 30.9 $3.9B $12.7B 25 🇳🇮 Nicaragua 30.7 $5.5B $17.8B 26 🇦🇴 Angola 30.2 $25.6B $84.8B 27 🇳🇬 Nigeria 30.0 $109.1B $363.8B 28 🇧🇩 Bangladesh 29.0 $126.8B $437.4B 29 🇨🇮 Cote d'Ivoire 28.8 $22.7B $78.9B 30 🇹🇬 Togo 28.1 $2.6B $9.2B 31 🇦🇱 Albania 27.8 $6.5B $23.5B 32 🇵🇪 Peru 27.1 $72.5B $267.6B 33 🇲🇦 Morocco 27.0 $39.0B $144.4B 34 🇬🇭 Ghana 26.8 $20.5B $76.4B 35 🇭🇳 Honduras 26.7 $9.2B $34.4B 36 🇪🇨 Ecuador 26.5 $31.5B $118.8B 37 🇰🇭 Cambodia 26.4 $11.2B $42.3B 38 🇿🇦 South Africa 26.3 $100.1B $380.7B 39 🇮🇳 India 26.1 $931.1B $3,567.6B 40 🇻🇳 Vietnam 25.1 $107.9B $429.7B 41 🇮🇶 Iraq 24.8 $62.2B $250.8B 42 🇺🇿 Uzbekistan 24.4 $24.8B $101.6B 43 🇬🇹 Guatemala 24.3 $25.4B $104.5B 44 🇩🇿 Algeria 24.2 $59.9B $247.6B 45 🇹🇭 Thailand 24.0 $123.6B $515.0B 46 🇮🇩 Indonesia 23.8 $326.3B $1,371.2B 47 🇬🇦 Gabon 23.1 $4.5B $19.4B 48 🇮🇷 Iran 22.5 $91.0B $404.6B 49 🇬🇪 Georgia 22.1 $6.8B $30.8B 50 🇪🇬 Egypt 21.2 $84.0B $396.0B 51 🇹🇳 Tunisia 21.2 $10.3B $48.5B 52 🇨🇴 Colombia 20.9 $76.0B $363.5B 53 🇵🇾 Paraguay 20.9 $9.0B $43.0B 54 🇵🇭 Philippines 20.7 $90.5B $437.1B 55 🇧🇷 Brazil 20.6 $447.8B $2,173.7B 56 🇨🇳 China 20.3 $3,612.3B $17,794.8B 57 🇱🇰 SriLanka 20.1 $17.0B $84.4B 58 🇸🇻 El Salvador 19.9 $6.8B $34.0B 59 🇹🇲 Turkmenistan 19.7 $11.9B $60.6B 60 🇱🇧 Lebanon 19.6 N/A N/A 61 🇺🇦 Ukraine 19.3 $34.5B $178.8B 62 🇦🇲 Armenia 18.9 $4.6B $24.1B 63 🇧🇦 Bosnia and Herzegovina 18.6 $5.1B $27.5B 64 🇧🇾 Belarus 18.3 $13.2B $71.9B 65 🇯🇴 Jordan 18.3 $9.3B $51.0B 66 🇲🇽 Mexico 17.9 $320.2B $1,789.1B 67 🇦🇷 Argentina 17.8 $115.0B $646.1B 68 🇦🇿 Azerbaijan 17.7 $12.8B $72.4B 69 🇷🇸 Serbia 17.2 $14.0B $81.3B 70 🇧🇼 Botswana 17.0 $3.3B $19.4B 71 🇲🇰 North Macedonia 16.9 $2.7B $15.8B 72 🇱🇾 Libya 16.3 $7.4B $45.1B 73 🇩🇴 Dominican Republic 16.2 $19.7B $121.4B 74 🇹🇷 Türkiye 16.1 $180.0B $1,118.3B 75 🇨🇷 Costa Rica 13.8 $11.9B $86.5B 76 🇲🇪 Montenegro 13.6 $1.0B $7.5B 77 🇺🇾 Uruguay 13.5 $10.4B $77.2B 78 🇷🇴 Romania 13.1 $46.0B $350.8B 79 🇷🇺 Russia 13.1 $264.8B $2,021.4B 80 🇲🇾 Malaysia 12.3 $49.2B $399.7B 81 🇵🇦 Panama 12.1 $10.1B $83.3B 82 🇬🇷 Greece 12.0 $29.2B $243.5B 83 🇨🇱 Chile 11.9 $39.9B $335.5B 84 🇬🇾 Guyana 11.8 $2.0B $17.2B 85 🇰🇿 Kazakhstan 11.2 $29.4B $262.6B 86 🇲🇺 Mauritius 10.6 $1.5B $14.6B 87 🇧🇬 Bulgaria 10.5 $10.8B $102.4B 88 🇵🇷 Puerto Rico 10.3 $12.1B $117.9B 89 🇵🇱 Poland 9.7 $78.5B $809.2B 90 🇭🇷 Croatia 9.3 $7.8B $84.4B 91 🇱🇻 Latvia 9.3 $3.9B $42.2B 92 🇵🇹 Portugal 9.3 $26.9B $289.1B 93 🇭🇺 Hungary 9.2 $19.5B $212.4B 94 🇸🇰 Slovak Republic 8.9 $11.8B $132.9B 95 🇳🇿 New Zealand 8.2 $20.7B $252.2B 96 🇸🇮 Slovenia 8.0 $5.5B $69.1B 97 🇮🇹 Italy 7.8 $179.5B $2,300.9B 98 🇮🇸 Iceland 7.6 $2.4B $31.3B 99 🇰🇷 Korea 7.6 $130.2B $1,712.8B 100 🇲🇹 Malta 7.5 $1.7B $22.3B 101 🇪🇸 Spain 7.5 $121.5B $1,620.1B 102 🇪🇪 Estonia 7.4 $3.1B $41.3B 103 🇱🇹 Lithuania 7.4 $5.9B $79.8B 104 🇩🇪 Germany 6.8 $307.7B $4,525.7B 105 🇫🇷 France 6.7 $204.5B $3,051.8B 106 🇯🇵 Japan 6.7 $281.7B $4,204.5B 107 🇸🇪 Sweden 6.7 $39.2B $585.0B 108 🇦🇹 Austria 6.6 $33.8B $511.7B 109 🇧🇪 Belgium 6.6 $42.6B $644.8B 110 🇫🇮 Finland 6.6 $19.5B $295.5B 111 🇨🇿 Czechia 6.5 $22.3B $343.2B 112 🇳🇴 Norway 6.4 $31.1B $485.3B 113 🇴🇲 Oman 6.4 $7.0B $108.8B 114 🇳🇱 Netherlands 6.3 $72.7B $1,154.4B 115 🇱🇺 Luxembourg 6.1 $5.2B $85.8B 116 🇩🇰 Denmark 5.9 $24.0B $407.1B 117 🇦🇺 Australia 5.7 $98.5B $1,728.1B 118 🇮🇱 Israel 5.5 $28.2B $513.6B 119 🇧🇸 Bahamas 5.4 $0.8B $14.3B 120 🇨🇾 Cyprus 5.3 $1.8B $33.9B 121 🇬🇧 UK 5.3 $179.2B $3,380.9B 122 🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia 5.2 $55.5B $1,067.6B 123 🇮🇪 Ireland 5.1 $28.1B $551.4B 124 🇨🇭 Switzerland 5.1 $45.1B $884.9B 125 🇺🇸 United States 5.0 $1,386.0B $27,720.7B 126 🇨🇦 Canada 4.5 $96.4B $2,142.5B 127 🇰🇼 Kuwait 4.0 $6.5B $163.7B 128 🇸🇬 Singapore 3.4 $17.0B $501.4B 129 🇧🇭 Bahrain 2.5 $1.2B $46.1B 130 🇶🇦 Qatar 2.2 $4.7B $213.0B 131 🏳️ UAE 2.1 $10.8B $514.1B As we can see, Sierra Leone ranks first overall, with its shadow economy equaling 64.5% of GDP. Like many other sub-Saharan African countries, the informal economy employs millions of workers, including subsistence farmers, street vendors, and small business owners. Underscoring this trend are limited opportunities in the formal sector along with bureaucratic red tape. In particular, the DRC stands out in both the scale of its informal economy and prevalence of organized crime. Meanwhile, Nepal ranks third overall, with shadow activity accounting for 51% of GDP. Notably, the agriculture sector employs a substantial share of informal workers. In fact, 85% of Nepal’s labor force participates in the informal economy, making it a vital source of livelihood for many. In contrast, America’s underground economy comprises just 5% of GDP, yet its sheer size—valued at $1.4 trillion—makes it one of the world’s largest. To learn more about this topic from a violent crime perspective, check out this graphic on violent crime rates by U.S. state. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 04:15
Pop Star Ed Sheeran Admits "Every Area Of London" Is Dangerous Now
1747207800 from ZEROHEDGE
Pop Star Ed Sheeran Admits "Every Area Of London" Is Dangerous Now Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news, According to British pop star Ed Sheeran, “every area” of London is “dangerous” now, including the supposedly nice ones. During an appearance on Theo Von’s podcast, Sheeran was asked by the host, “What’s the most dangerous place to be around here?” “I’d say every area of London, literally every area is sketchy,” the singer responded. Ed Sheeran says "every area of London" is the most dangerous place to be while interviewing on the Theo Von Podcast. pic.twitter.com/fElxLxzJFn — Thomas Hern (@ThomasMHern) May 12, 2025 “The nice areas are sketchy, the bad areas are sketchy, but you just have to not do stupid shit,” he added. Presumably, by “stupid shit,” Sheeran means things like not attaching your mobile phone to your body in case it gets swiped. The crime has reached an “industrial level” in the English capital, with criminals stealing 70,137 devices last year alone, an average of 192 a day. Compare that to as recently as 2020, when 20,000 phones were reported stolen. In the supposedly “nice” areas Sheeran references, wealthier people have stopped wearing expensive watches and jewelry due to the risk of having it snatched by criminals on mopeds. So-called “follow home” robberies, where thieves track victims from luxury shopping districts before striking, are also commonplace in London. Figures released earlier this year also show that knife crime continues to be a major problem, rising 18 per cent since 2022. Meanwhile, take a look at how Manchester has been turned into a dystopian hellscape, mirroring virtually every other major British city, as well as many of the smaller ones. * * * Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 03:30
Asians Work From Home The Least
1747205100 from ZEROHEDGE
Asians Work From Home The Least Asians work from home the least in a global comparison, while college-educated workers from English-speaking countries and Africa do so more frequently. These are the results from a new survey by the Ifo Institute and Stanford University. Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports that while all Asians respondents only worked an average of approximately 1.1 days a week from home, this was around 1.2 days in Europe, 1.25 in Latin America, 1.4 days in Africa and 1.6 days in English-speaking countries. You will find more infographics at Statista Women tend to work from home more than men - except for in Europe - tied to mothers expressing a high desire to work remotely in the survey. The countries which saw the most work from home days were Canada, the United Kingdom and Finland, while the least were observed in South Korea, China, Greece and Japan. In general, people expressed a higher desire to work from home than they actually did, led by mothers who on average said they would like to be present remotely 2.66 days a week, followed by childless men at 2.62 days and fathers at 2.57 days. In 2024, the people in the survey actually worked from home only 1.27 days a week. Tyler Durden Wed, 05/14/2025 - 02:45
Supreme Court Chief Justice: Critique Our Rulings, Not Our Justices
1747193100 from ZEROHEDGE
Supreme Court Chief Justice: Critique Our Rulings, Not Our Justices Authored by Jack Philips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), The U.S. Supreme Court’s chief justice on Monday told an event that criticism of the court should be relegated to its decisions and not the nine justices themselves. Chief Justice John Roberts attends the State of the Union address in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Feb. 7, 2023. Jacquelyn Martin/Pool/Getty Images While speaking at Washington’s Georgetown University, Chief Justice John Roberts said that the Supreme Court “has obviously made mistakes throughout its history, and those should be criticized, so long as it is in terms of the decision.” Roberts said that criticism of the highest court should not be based on “ad hominem” arguments or attacks “against the justices” themselves, referring to the logical fallacy where an argument is dismissed based on the character or background of the individual making that claim. “I just think that doesn’t do any good. The harshest critics are usually colleagues, if it’s the sort of thing where there are dissents. So it’s something we’re used to,” he continued. “And again, it’s a good thing. We’re not immune from any criticism. And there are many, many instances in our history where it’s been effective over time in leading to a better result.” The comment from Roberts marks the third time in nearly as many months in response to criticism about the Supreme Court. In a rare written statement in March, Roberts appeared to respond to President Donald Trump’s public suggestion to impeach a federal judge who had blocked his administration’s deportations of accused Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act. “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” Roberts said in a statement provided to The Epoch Times at the time. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.” Following U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s initial ruling against the administration’s use of the 1798 law to deport accused gang members, Trump wrote that the judge wasn’t elected as president. A senior adviser to Trump, tech billionaire Elon Musk, also commented on the judge’s stymying the administration’s agenda. In a post on Feb. 25, Musk wrote that the only way to allow the agenda to move forward is to “impeach judges,” responding to an article that said El Salvador’s president did the same starting in 2021. Trump hasn’t been critical of the Supreme Court and has indicated that he will follow orders from any court. Since the start of his administration, numerous lawsuits have been filed against his administration, particularly in relation to his immigration enforcement, spending cuts, and efforts to downsize and reshape the federal government. And last week, Roberts said during an event in Buffalo, New York, that the judiciary needs to maintain its independence in order to check executive or congressional power. The judicial branch’s independence is “the only real political-science innovation in our Constitution,” Roberts said. Elaborating, he said that “in our Constitution … the judiciary is a co-equal branch of government, separate from the others, with the authority to interpret the Constitution as law and strike down … acts of Congress or acts of the president.” “And that innovation doesn’t work if … the judiciary is not independent. Its job is to … check the excesses of Congress or of the executive, and that does require a degree of independence,” he said. In his recent remarks and written statement, Roberts did not mention Trump, nor did he mention any other elected official. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 23:25
How China Is Reusing Its Dying EV Batteries And Solar Panels
1747191600 from ZEROHEDGE
How China Is Reusing Its Dying EV Batteries And Solar Panels China is ramping up efforts to build a circular economy around its booming clean energy sector, as retired batteries and solar panels pile up and global trade tensions make critical minerals harder to source, according to the South China Morning Post. “There is huge potential in the business of new-energy waste, because new energy is where China and the world are going,” said Ma Long, sales manager at a Henan Hairui Intelligent Technology subsidiary. His company already generates 70% of its business from battery and solar panel recycling equipment. China’s rapid adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) and solar power is driving this trend. After a decade of EV growth, the country is now facing a “large-scale retirement of car batteries,” with retired batteries expected to exceed 4 million tonnes annually by 2028 and generate over 280 billion yuan (US$38.5 billion) in industry output, according to state estimates. Retired photovoltaic modules are also set to surge in the next five years. “The recycling of minerals is largely for the sake of resource security,” said Du Huanzheng, a circular economy expert at Tongji University. He noted that China’s recycling push, once focused on pollution control, is now also about boosting economic growth and cutting reliance on imported minerals amid rising tensions with the U.S. and its allies. A Beijing-based professor of environmental economics warned that China is “facing more difficulty in buying from allies of the US, such as Australia and Canada,” while other suppliers like Congo and Chile could be pressured by U.S. trade policy. “Business with other [mineral] suppliers may also be affected,” he added. In response, China has created the state-owned China Resources Recycling Group to build a nationwide recycling network for products from electronics to retired wind and solar equipment. The SCMP article says that big players like CATL and BYD are leading the way in battery recycling, but smaller companies are rushing in. Yu Zhongkai, senior manager at Tianli Technology, said a quarter of his company’s business now comes from battery-recycling equipment. “But we’re still experimenting, because there are no industry-wide standards yet, and the market is still unclear,” he admitted. China’s recycling industry remains in its infancy, though its complete industrial chain and massive market give it an edge over global competitors. Du cautioned that despite investor enthusiasm, “large-scale recycling has yet to come, and a mature recycling system has yet to be formed.” The government is tightening regulations, with 156 companies on a white list to standardize battery recycling and prevent safety and environmental risks. In February, the State Council passed an action plan to improve car battery recycling, following a December directive mandating stronger quality assurance and product traceability. Guangdong Brunp Recycling Technology, a CATL subsidiary, claims it can recover over 99% of key metals from retired batteries. “It ensures that the batteries go where they came from, and it improves the resilience of the new-energy industry’s supply chain,” said CEO Li Changdong. However, challenges remain. Many retired batteries end up in illegal workshops, and rural households are starting to discard old solar panels directly into trash bins, warned environmental activist Chen Liwen. For now, legal recyclers face overcapacity as waste collection lags behind, but Ma expects the situation to improve as regulations tighten and battery retirements surge. “So, overall, this is a big track to follow in the next few decades,” he said. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 23:00
Harvard Hammered: Feds Yank An Additional $450 Million In Grants
1747185600 from ZEROHEDGE
Harvard Hammered: Feds Yank An Additional $450 Million In Grants Harvard University is facing another crushing financial blow - this time losing an additional $450 million in federal grants - as the Trump administration ramps up pressure on elite schools it accuses of fostering anti-Semitism and political bias, which for some reason seems like the only topic to which the 1st Amendment does not apply. The decision, announced Monday by the Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism, brings the total value of frozen and canceled grants and contracts to a staggering $2.65 billion. The task force, established in February under a Trump executive order, blasted Harvard for repeatedly failing "to confront the pervasive race discrimination and anti-Semitic harassment plaguing its campus." “Jewish students were subjected to pervasive insults, physical assault, and intimidation, with no meaningful response from Harvard’s leadership,” the task force said in a statement released via the Department of Education. One particularly explosive allegation involves a protester charged with assaulting a Jewish student who was later awarded a $65,000 fellowship by the Harvard Law Review - a decision reportedly approved by faculty. The task force cited the incident as evidence of the “radical” direction of the Ivy League institution. “Harvard’s campus, once a symbol of academic prestige, has become a breeding ground for virtue signaling and discrimination,” the statement said. “By prioritizing appeasement over accountability, institutional leaders have forfeited the school’s claim to taxpayer support.” The move follows a fiery exchange of letters between Harvard President Alan M. Garber and Secretary of Education Linda E. McMahon. In a May 5 letter, McMahon accused Harvard of violating federal law through systemic bias, a politicized admissions process, and “ugly racism” within its academic bodies, including the Harvard Law Review. She slammed the university's leadership, accusing board chair and former Obama commerce secretary Penny Pritzker of “running the institution in a totally chaotic way.” McMahon made clear that the government was done cutting checks. “Harvard should no longer seek GRANTS from the federal government, since none will be provided,” she wrote. The bombshell comes on the heels of an earlier freeze of $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts in April. The May 13 announcement adds another $450 million in terminations, as multiple federal agencies pull support. 'Harvard Will Not Surrender' Garber fired back in a May 12 response, calling the actions political retaliation and accusing the administration of trying to strong-arm a private institution. “Harvard will not surrender its core, legally-protected principles out of fear of unfounded retaliation by the federal government,” he wrote, denying charges of bias and defending the university’s admissions and hiring as merit-based. Garber also rejected suggestions that Harvard students — including its international population — pose a greater risk of violence or misconduct. The university, he said, has “commenced initiatives” to increase intellectual diversity and fight all forms of bigotry, including anti-Semitism. But the Education Department isn’t buying it. In its letter, it cited multiple disturbing allegations — including claims that Harvard Law Review editors discriminated based on race and prioritized submissions based on contributors’ skin color. Federal authorities opened a formal investigation into the student-run journal on April 28. Harvard’s financial headaches appear to be mounting. In a bid to shore up its resources amid the federal crackdown, the university sold $450 million in bonds in March and another $750 million in April. The Department of Education and affiliated agencies show no signs of backing off. “At its best, a university should fulfill the highest ideals of our Nation,” McMahon wrote. “But Harvard has betrayed this ideal.” The New York Post has reached out to Harvard for comment. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 21:20
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Would Slash Suppressor Transfers To Zero
1747182600 from ZEROHEDGE
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Would Slash Suppressor Transfers To Zero In just a few weeks, House Republicans aim to finalize the details of President Trump's "big, beautiful bill," which seeks to fulfill his campaign pledges—such as eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay—alongside new tax breaks, as well as sweeping changes to immigration and energy policy. Beyond the president's populist priorities, the draft version of the tax bill released Monday by House Republicans has sparked controversy within the Second Amendment community. At the center of the debate is Section 112030, which proposes eliminating the $200 transfer tax on suppressors, or "silencers," enacted initially under the National Firearms Act of 1934. While the measure would scrap the tax, it would leave the rest of the NFA intact, meaning Form 4 paperwork and a background check would still be required for each purchase. Gun Owners of America (GOA) slammed House Republicans on X: Congress can gut the National Firearms Act using budget reconciliation because the NFA is a $200 tax. By merely proposing to reduce the transfer tax on suppressors (even to $0), @WaysandMeansGOP are leaving the federal gun registry in place for ... EVERYTHING! This is UNACCEPTABLE! Congress can gut the National Firearms Act using budget reconciliation because the NFA is a $200 tax. By merely proposing to reduce the transfer tax on suppressors (even to $0), @WaysandMeansGOP are leaving the federal gun registry in place for EVERYTHING! This is UNACCEPTABLE! https://t.co/B5pTy0cCBu pic.twitter.com/GwexwolilZ — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) May 12, 2025 In other words, House Republicans aim to eliminate the $200 tax on suppressors rather than fully deregulate purchases. "This isn't a compromise, it's a betrayal. The House Ways and Means Committee chose to leave unconstitutional registration and taxes in place even though they had a clear path to repeal them. GOA made it crystal clear that full deregulation of suppressors and protection for brace owners was achievable under reconciliation. Lawmakers knew it, and they chose political convenience over principle. Gun owners won't forget this," GOA Founder Erich Pratt wrote in a statement. GOA's Aidan Johnston noted: "Congress has a clear path to dismantle the National Firearms Act through budget reconciliation because it is a $200 tax—plain and simple." Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 20:30
Hamas Gaza Leader Muhammad Sinwar Targeted In Israeli Airstrikes On Hospital
1747179600 from ZEROHEDGE
Hamas Gaza Leader Muhammad Sinwar Targeted In Israeli Airstrikes On Hospital The Israeli military has announced a major operation in Gaza, which has targeted Muhammad Sinwar, who took over as the head of Hamas in Gaza following the killing of his brother, the better known late Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, in October. Israeli jets targeted Sinwar during a major hospital strike in the southern Gaza Strip on Tuesday afternoon. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) claimed in a statement that it hit senior leaders in an underground command center, described as below the European Hospital in Khan Younis. Sinwar brothers, with the younger Muhammad Sinwar (right), via Fox News The air raid saw at least nine bombs dropped, with the ground having utterly collapsed in the area of the strike, which suggests there will be high civilian casualties. The jets may have used large US-supplied bunker-busting bombs. Indeed, the Times of Israel soon after reported that "The Hamas-run health ministry reported 16 dead and over 70 wounded in the strike, though there was no immediate word if Sinwar was among the casualties." The IDF is still working to confirm whether Sinwar is among the dead. Israeli sources said there was a "small window of opportunity" for the strike given Hamas leaders are utilizing the vast tunnel network that exists under the hospital. Israeli commanders shrugged off the international outrage and criticism over its jets targeting a hospital to go after a Hamas leader: "The Hamas terror organization continues to use hospitals in the Gaza Strip for terror purposes, cynically and cruelly exploiting the civilian population in and around the hospital," the IDF said. It was only on Monday that Hamas released the last Israeli-American hostage, Edan Alexander, after the Trump White House's mediation. Prime Minister Netanyahu has since vowed to continue hostage negotiations, but stipulated these talks with Hamas would take place "under fire" - meaning there will be no accompanying truce. According to background on Sinwar from the WSJ: Mohammed Sinwar was responsible for building up Hamas’s military wing, and was close to the U.S.-designated terrorist group’s top military commander, Mohammed Deif, who was killed by Israel last year. His brother Yahya, was the mastermind behind the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on southern Israel that launched the war. Israel killed three of Yahya Sinwar’s top deputies throughout the war, including Deif, and Hamas’s political head Ismail Haniyeh. If Mohammed Sinwar is dead, it would mean that the most important Hamas leaders behind the Oct. 7 attack have been taken out by Israel. After the Oct. 7 attack, Israel vowed to kill all of Hamas’s top leadership, including those abroad, and anyone who took part in or planned the attack. 🚨🚨 The attack on the European Hospital in Gaza: An attempt to assassinate Hamas leader Mohammed Sinwar. pic.twitter.com/GGd45hZOXK — Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) May 13, 2025 Meanwhile, President Trump said from Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, "We continue to work to get that war ended as quickly as possible. It is a horrible thing that is taking place." Recent reports say that tensions between Trump and Netanyahu are growing, given the Israeli leader's apparent reluctance to continue negotiating for the freedom of the remaining hostages. Netanyahu is instead pressing forward with a military solution. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 19:40
Turmeric Lowers Blood Pressure-How To Get the Most Out Of It
1747178100 from ZEROHEDGE
Turmeric Lowers Blood Pressure-How To Get the Most Out Of It Authored by Zena le Roux via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), If you’ve cut salt, eased up on caffeine, and tried to stress less, and your blood pressure still won’t budge, perhaps a golden spice in your kitchen cabinet can ease your efforts. Curcumin is found in the root of the turmeric plant, giving it its distinctive golden hue and earthy flavor. It belongs to a group of plant-based substances called polyphenols, known for their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects. These effects may help explain why curcumin—turmeric’s most active compound—is being studied for its potential to support healthy blood pressure. A Natural Ally for Blood Pressure Control The most convenient and widely available source of curcumin is turmeric powder, a pantry staple that adds color and flavor to a variety of dishes. Curcumin may help lower blood pressure and improve blood vessel function by reducing the thickening and stiffness of arterial walls, a common issue in chronic hypertension. Based mostly on animal studies, in some cases, curcumin has also reversed damage—such as thickening and scarring—to blood vessels, especially in pulmonary arterial hypertension, which causes blood vessels to narrow and blood pressure in the lungs to increase. Curcumin may also protect the kidneys and heart, which are key to keeping blood pressure in check. In animal studies, curcumin has also been found to relax blood vessels by increasing nitric oxide levels, which helps improve blood flow and reduce resistance in the arteries. Get the Most Out of Turmeric Although curcumin offers many health benefits, its bioavailability is poor, meaning the body doesn’t easily absorb it. “After being consumed, only a small amount is absorbed through the small intestine, and much of it is quickly broken down by the liver,” Chantelle van der Merwe, a registered dietitian, explained. Very little curcumin actually makes it into the bloodstream to have an effect, she added. To overcome this challenge, researchers have explored ways to improve curcumin’s absorption and effectiveness. One method includes adding ingredients such as black pepper, which helps slow the breakdown and enhance the absorption and retention of curcumin, according to van der Merwe. * * * Grab some potent turmeric here... Anti-Inflammatory packed with antioxidants. Give it a shot, we take it daily... Piperine, the active compound in black pepper, blocks certain liver enzymes that would typically break down curcumin. Piperine may also help by stimulating the release of digestive enzymes from the pancreas, improving overall digestion and nutrient absorption, and increasing blood supply to the digestive system, van der Merwe said. Since curcumin is also fat-soluble, meaning it requires fat to be absorbed, eating turmeric with a fat source—such as avocado, olive oil, or coconut milk—can help the body absorb it better, van der Merwe said. Without fat, curcumin has a harder time transporting across the gut wall and into the body, limiting its effectiveness, she said. How to Incorporate Curcumin Into Meals Beyond how we pair turmeric to boost absorption, it’s a versatile ingredient that can be easily added to a variety of dishes and snacks. Turmeric is traditionally used in curries and enhances the flavor of soups, marinades, and rice dishes, van der Merwe said. In baking, turmeric can add a unique twist to cookies and breads. It also blends beautifully into herbal teas, smoothies, or milk. “My personal favorite ways to enjoy turmeric include spicy, savory muffins packed with vegetables, a soothing blend of rooibos tea with ginger and turmeric, and the classic pairing of a curry served with savory yellow rice,” van der Merwe said. “I personally love it in my overnight oats,” Mary Curristin, nutritionist at ART Health Solutions, told The Epoch Times. Her other options include stirring it into scrambled eggs or roasted vegetables. Remember that a small amount goes a long way—typically, one-fourth to one-half teaspoon of turmeric powder per serving delivers ample flavor and color, depending on personal taste and intensity preferences. Van der Merwe said turmeric also works well with spices such as cumin, coriander, ginger, cinnamon, and cardamom, creating aromatic and flavorful combinations in a variety of cuisines. Golden Latte Recipe One of the best ways to enjoy turmeric is in a cozy golden milk latte. This drink tastes great and brings those health benefits right to your cup—especially when paired with a pinch of black pepper for optimal absorption. Ingredients 350 ml milk of choice ¼ teaspoon ground turmeric ¼ teaspoon ground ginger ½ teaspoon ground cinnamon 1 teaspoon raw honey or maple syrup ½ teaspoon vanilla extract Grind of black pepper Instructions Combine all the ingredients in a saucepan and whisk continuously over low heat or using a milk frother if you have one. Once heated, pour into mugs and top with a sprinkle of cinnamon before serving. To make this golden milk latte truly your own, feel free to tweak the recipe based on your taste preferences: Customize the spice mix to your liking. If you’re a fan of a spicier kick, try adding extra black pepper, ginger, or even a pinch of cayenne pepper. For a creamier texture, use a richer milk, like full-fat coconut milk, or add a spoonful of coconut oil or ghee. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 19:15
Student Loan Delinquencies Surge, Hammer Credit Scores - Southern States Hit Hardest
1747176600 from ZEROHEDGE
Student Loan Delinquencies Surge, Hammer Credit Scores - Southern States Hit Hardest The party is over for millions of Americans who paused payments on their federal student loans over the last several years through pandemic-era forbearance programs. Many had hoped for sweeping loan forgiveness under the Biden-Harris administration, But with the federal government officially resuming collections on defaulted loans this month—for the first time in over five years—borrowers now face sliding credit scores as delinquencies soar, while in April we warned the restart could drain as much as $63 billion from the economy. On Tuesday, the Center for Microeconomic Data at the New York Fed released its Quarterly Report on Household Debt and Credit, updated through the first quarter of 2025. Within the report is a snapshot of consumer credit profiles, including the sharp rise in delinquent student loan debt that's now piling up. Starting with a 10,000-foot view; in the first quarter of 2025 the aggregate U.S. delinquency rate climbed to 4.3% of outstanding debt in some stage of delinquency - up from 3.6% in the fourth quarter of 2024. Total aggregate household debt increased by $167 billion in the quarter, up .9% from 4Q24, while overall, America's consumer debt balance now stands at a whopping $18.20 trillion - an increase of more than $4 trillion since 4Q19. Narrowing it down, while early-stage delinquency rates remained stable across most debt categories, student loans bucked the trend, posting a sharp increase as the federal government resumed credit reporting on missed payments for the first time in nearly five years. "Transition into early delinquency held steady for nearly all debt types; the exception was for student loans, which saw a large uptick in the rate at which balances went from current to delinquent due to the resumption of reporting of delinquent student loans on credit reports after a nearly 5-year pause due to the pandemic," the quarterly report said. The shift comes amid the expiration of pandemic-era forbearance, exposing millions of borrowers to renewed repayment obligations. Last month, Education Secretary Linda McMahon told President Trump at a Cabinet meeting: "We're going to start getting it back," adding "For those people who have borrowed money and have not been paying -- that's just not to be punitive, there are many ways that they can go online to understand how they can get back into the right payment structure. Because when they're in default, they can't buy a house, they can't buy a car, their credit scores go down." Also reported last month (full note available to premium subs), student-loan delinquencies have increased since the pandemic-era forbearance on repayment ended in September 2023. The Biden administration allowed a year for payments to fully ramp back up, which temporarily suppressed delinquency rates. Now, though, missed payments are crossing the 90-day threshold and showing up on borrowers' credit reports. Transition rates into serious delinquency (90+ days past due) held steady for auto loans and credit cards, but rose for mortgages, HELOCs, and, notably, student loans, reflecting growing financial strain among consumers. Bloomberg noted: Transitioning into serious delinquency (90-plus days late) for student loans rose to tie a 10-year-old record for those age 50 and older. Among that cohort, 11.23%, or around one in nine households, is now seriously delinquent on their student loan debt. Americans age 50 and older held $418.5 billion in student loan debt, split among 9.2 million borrowers. The ratios of serious delinquency for younger age groups was lower but still rose sharply. The average age of a delinquent borrower ticked up to 40.4. The Fed's data shows that the credit hit is substantial for newly delinquent student loan borrowers. Among the 7.5% who had a relatively high credit score of at least 720 before the delinquency, their scores dropped by 177 points on average. Overall, the Fed found that 2.2 million borrowers saw their credit scores drop by at least 100 points. Data from Bloomberg shows the student debt bubble stood at a record high of $1.63 trillion. New York Fed economists via Liberty Street Economics published a note with more color about the student loan turmoil unfolding, indicating "more than twenty million federal borrowers were not in repayment and five million federal borrowers had a zero dollar monthly payment," adding, "Among borrowers who were required to make payments, nearly one in four student loan borrowers (23.7 percent) were behind on their student loans in the first quarter of 2025." The economists noted that seven states have a conditional borrower delinquency rate over 30%: Mississippi (44.6%), Alabama (34.1%), West Virginia (34.0%), Kentucky (33.6%), Oklahoma (33.6%), Arkansas (33.5%), and Louisiana (31.8%). These states are located in the heartland and are primarily Trump states. The economists offered their take on the grave situation: After a five-year hiatus, student loan delinquency has returned to the pre-pandemic "normal" with more than 10 percent of balances and roughly six million borrowers either past due or in default. The ramifications of student loan delinquency are severe. The U.S. Department of Education, in concert with the U.S. Treasury, began collection efforts for defaulted loans in May, which includes the garnishment of wages, tax returns, and Social Security payments. Additionally, millions of borrowers face steep declines in their credit standing which will increase borrowing costs or seriously limit their access to credit like mortgages and auto loans. It is unclear whether these penalties will spill over into payment difficulties in other credit products, but we will continue to monitor this space in the coming months. Millennials and GenX feeling the brunt of student debt woes. Credit score downgrades begin... More: What's critical to understand is that delinquent student loan debt continues to pile up quickly, increasingly hitting borrowers' credit reports. This growing wave of defaults could trigger a domino effect on consumer spending, potentially dragging down GDP by as much as $63 billion—a risk we warned about in our note titled The Next Economic Shock: Student Loan Default Wave = $63 Billion GDP Hit ... . . . View the full report here: Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 18:50
'Biggest Untold Story in Tech': Explosive Book Reveals How Apple Sold Out America To China
1747168800 from ZEROHEDGE
'Biggest Untold Story in Tech': Explosive Book Reveals How Apple Sold Out America To China Financial Times journalist Patrick McGee has released a gripping new book that meticulously exposes Apple’s deeply troubling ties with China, revealing how these connections fueled the communist regime’s rise to a global manufacturing powerhouse. (Nikkei Montage / Reuters) In an interview with The Free Press founder Bari Weiss, McGee revealed key insights from his new book, Apple in China, detailing Apple’s complex relationship with the country. Presently, approximately 155 million Americans own an iPhone - a remarkable figure that McGee contends would have been unattainable without Apple’s substantial investments in China. “I think it’s fairly straightforward that China is the only place on the planet that has the tech competence in terms of manufacturing capability, certainly the price, the cost, the quantity, the scale,” McGee told Weiss. My novel argument is that it has those skills because Apple built them there, right? It’s not that China offered something to Apple. Apple didn’t find these skills in China; it shipped people over by the plane load and created them.” .@PatrickMcGee_ lays out how Apple helped China become a manufacturing superpower: "The number of people they trained in China since 2008 is 28 million people—larger than California's labor force." "Apple is investing in China at twice the annual spend of the Marshall Plan." pic.twitter.com/PHDHLSBHKz — Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) May 13, 2025 “And so it’s this another layer of nuance that Apple is dependent on the very capabilities that it created. And I think this is like the biggest untold story in tech over the last 25 years. And like, my jaw was on the floor as I talked to 200 people and sort of unraveled it all. But I mean, some of the numbers— anytime you’re dealing with Apple, the numbers are just crazy. And so the two numbers that really stick out at me are that the number of people they have trained in China since 2008 is 28 million,” the Apple in China authored continued.” “That’s larger than the labor force of California. And the investments they were making in China by 2015 were $55 billion a year. And that’s such a large number that I couldn’t find any corporate equivalent,” he added. “I had to go to nation-building efforts, and I took the Marshall Plan, the most famous nation-building effort ever, converted it to 2015 dollars, and you realize that Apple’s investing in China twice that of the annual spend of the Marshall Plan. And the Marshall Plan was for 16 countries.” McGee outlines Apple's production hurdles and economic incentives that propelled this transformative shift, which he compares to a geopolitical event as significant as the fall of the Berlin Wall. “I have these chapters in the book where they're trying to build iPods and the Sunflower iMac. You might remember it; it sort of looks anthropomorphic, like a Pixar lamp. It's really sexy, and my God, is it a complicated product to build,” McGee said. “And so Apple's trying to do it in Taiwan, but with the help of Singapore, Japan—you know, basically all of Southeast Asia, including China. But the more you're doing things a little bit in China and comparing the costs, the flexible demand of labor, and just the armies of affordable labor, the more it looks like China is the way to go. And they just rapidly begin to consolidate in 2003.” Author @PatrickMcGee_: The West “sleepwalked” into making China a global powerhouse. Corporations like Apple “were setting up the world’s most sophisticated supply chain—and made the rookie and calamitous mistake of putting all their eggs in one basket. And that basket… pic.twitter.com/ASZTatTikm — Honestly with Bari Weiss (@thehonestlypod) May 13, 2025 “So, the sort of fun line I have is that in 1999, zero products from Apple were being made in China. By 2009, virtually all of them were. And that transition, I compare to a geopolitical event, like the fall of the Berlin Wall. But it took place over many years. And it's one that I don't think we've really grappled with or understood,” the author added. Under Tim Cook’s leadership, Apple has significantly deepened its investment in China, most notably through a secretive $275 billion, five-year agreement signed in 2016 with Chinese officials to bolster the country’s economy and technological capabilities, The Information reported in 2021. The deal, aimed at mitigating regulatory threats, included commitments to build new retail stores, research and development centers, and renewable energy projects, while fostering partnerships with local suppliers like Foxconn and enhancing China’s supply chain infrastructure. President Donald Trump has been pushing Apple to move its manufacturing away from China, primarily through aggressive tariff policies aimed at incentivizing U.S.-based production. Since his first term, Trump has consistently advocated for Apple to bring iPhone and other product manufacturing to the United States, famously vowing in 2016, “I’m going to get Apple to start making their computers and their iPhones on our land, not in China.” Apple has responded by shifting production for U.S.-bound iPhones to India and iPads, Apple Watches, and other products to Vietnam, with Cook confirming that by 2026, most iPhones sold in the U.S. will be made in India. In February 2025, Apple announced a commitment to invest over $500 billion in the U.S. over the next four years, aimed at strengthening domestic manufacturing and advancing semiconductor production. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 16:40
Nodule Found In Biden's Prostate During Routine Exam
1747167600 from ZEROHEDGE
Nodule Found In Biden's Prostate During Routine Exam Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times, A small nodule was found in former President Joe Biden’s prostate during an exam, a spokesperson told news outlets on May 13. “In a routine physical exam, a small nodule was found in the prostate, which necessitated further evaluation,” the Biden spokesperson said. It’s not clear whether the additional evaluation has already taken place and, if it has, what it showed. A nodule could indicate the presence of prostate cancer. Out of every 100 men in America, about 13 will suffer from prostate cancer during their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Early treatment can eliminate the cancer, which is fatal in a minority of cases. The most common risk factor is age. Biden is 82. Biden wrote in an Aug. 20, 2024, proclamation during National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month that “we mourn all the courageous men we have tragically lost too soon to prostate cancer” and “we honor the extraordinary resilience of those currently living with and surviving this disease.” Biden left office in January after a single term. He initially launched a reelection bid, but later dropped out under pressure from some fellow Democrats due to his advanced age. President Donald Trump, 78, beat former Vice President Kamala Harris, 60, in the 2024 election. Dr. Kevin O‘Connor, Biden’s physician, reported in 2023 that Biden had a cancerous lesion removed from his chest. The area around the biopsy site was treated, O’Connor said, and no further treatment was required. “The site of the biopsy has healed nicely and the President will continue dermatologic surveillance as part of his ongoing comprehensive healthcare,” he wrote at the time. O'Connor also said in 2019 that Biden had a polyp removed from his colon, describing the polyp as “potentially pre-cancerous.” One of Biden’s sons, Beau, died in 2015 from brain cancer. Ahead of the election in 2024, O'Connor said that an examination showed that Biden was healthy and active. Biden “remains fit to successfully execute the duties of the Presidency, to include those as Chief Executive, Head of State and Commander in Chief,” O'Connor wrote in a summary of the exam. In his first interview since Trump was sworn in, Biden said recently that he did not have any cognitive issues and that he understands the concerns about his age. “I get it,” Biden said. “I understand the concern. I really do. But the point of the matter is that I would offer specific evidence, if we had time, [of] exactly what I got done when I supposedly lost my cognitive capability.” Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 16:20
Bitcoin Treasury Exposure Goes Mainstream As Coinbase Soars On Joining The S&P 500
1747165500 from ZEROHEDGE
Bitcoin Treasury Exposure Goes Mainstream As Coinbase Soars On Joining The S&P 500 On May 19, 2025, Coinbase will officially join the S&P 500 - widely regarded as the most trusted, most tracked equity index in the world. With over $5 trillion in assets benchmarked to it, the S&P 500 isn’t just a measure of corporate strength - it’s a gravitational center of global capital allocation. And starting next week, it will include a Bitcoin treasury company. Coinbase currently holds 9,267 BTC on its balance sheet, valued at $963.8 million at today’s price of $104,000 per Bitcoin, making it the 9th largest public corporate Bitcoin holder globally. As Nick Ward reports for BitcoinMagazine.com, this marks a quiet turning point for Bitcoin in capital markets - one that reframes the treasury conversation and reshapes how companies think about index eligibility, institutional flows, and balance sheet strategy. The Most Passive Flows in Finance Just Found Bitcoin Coinbase’s addition to the index means something profound: millions of investors will soon have indirect exposure to Bitcoin—and they didn’t choose it. Because the S&P 500 is tracked by passive strategies, funds and institutions must purchase Coinbase stock in proportion to its index weight. If Coinbase is assigned even a 0.20% weighting, that implies more than $10 billion in net inflows from index-tracking vehicles. This is not speculative capital. This is mandatory exposure—capital governed by rules, not conviction. And for the first time, those rules lead directly to Bitcoin. Bitcoin Treasuries Are Now Index-Eligible For years, Bitcoin on the corporate balance sheet was treated as a novelty—or worse, a liability. But Coinbase’s inclusion signals something different: Bitcoin exposure is now compatible with the highest standards of institutional eligibility. It’s a powerful validation for public companies already holding Bitcoin—and a strategic consideration for those that aren’t. Index inclusion is not reserved for fiat-only treasuries. Coinbase’s addition confirms that sound operations and a Bitcoin-aligned balance sheet are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they may now be complementary. Strategy May Be Next to Join The S&P 500 Coinbase may be the first S&P 500 company with a Bitcoin treasury—but it likely won’t be the last. Strategy ($MSTR), formerly MicroStrategy, is widely viewed as the next potential candidate. The company meets many of the S&P 500’s baseline criteria: It is U.S.-based and publicly listed on the Nasdaq. It has sufficient free float and market capitalization. Its last four quarters of GAAP earnings are positive. And perhaps most notably: Strategy is the largest corporate Bitcoin holder in the world—by far. As of today, it holds 568,840 BTC, currently worth $59.16 billion. Its balance sheet is no longer just Bitcoin-heavy - it is Bitcoin-native. If admitted, Strategy would represent an even deeper exposure to Bitcoin inside the world’s most influential index. This matters. Because it signals that Bitcoin is becoming a foundational component of corporate capital formation—not an outlier. From Signal to Strategy: A New Corporate Playbook Coinbase’s entry - and Strategy’s potential follow-on - reinforces an emerging thesis: a Bitcoin treasury can enhance a company’s capital profile—not detract from it. Here’s why: Visibility: Index inclusion provides perpetual exposure to new capital. Flows: Passive funds are forced buyers—providing liquidity and price support. Perception: Bitcoin is no longer a reputational liability—it’s becoming a marker of long-term vision and resilience. In this context, treasury strategy becomes a capital markets strategy. Holding Bitcoin isn’t just about hedging inflation or diversifying reserves—it’s about aligning your company with where capital is flowing. BFC Perspective: The Bridge Has Been Crossed From a Bitcoin For Corporations standpoint, this is not just news—it’s a case study in what institutional acceptance looks like. Coinbase has: Navigated the public markets as a Bitcoin-native company, Maintained a material Bitcoin treasury position, and Demonstrated that such positioning is not a barrier to index inclusion—it can be a feature. And Strategy, with its commanding treasury and growing influence, may soon follow—cementing Bitcoin’s place at the core of U.S. corporate indices. This should embolden public companies and pre-IPO candidates alike. It’s proof that Bitcoin alignment doesn’t isolate you from the traditional system—it can embed you deeper into it. This is the BFC thesis in action: Bitcoin-native capital structures are compatible with institutional legitimacy. What Comes Next: Bitcoin Is Entering the Core Portfolio With Coinbase’s S&P 500 inclusion and Strategy potentially next, the implications are clear: Bitcoin is no longer confined to speculative portfolios. Bitcoin treasuries are now appearing in default asset allocations. The passive indexing era is now passively onboarding Bitcoin—whether the end investor realizes it or not. For CFOs and capital allocators, the takeaway is simple: Bitcoin on the balance sheet is no longer a bet - it’s a bridge. To the index. To the allocators. To the long game. With Coinbase joining the S&P 500, Bitcoin exposure is entering the core of institutional portfolios—not through a financial product, but via a public company’s balance sheet. As Strategy positions to follow, this marks a broader shift: Bitcoin treasury strategy is becoming part of the mainstream capital structure. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 15:45
The Latest Border Patrol Numbers Are Here And Wow...
1747161900 from ZEROHEDGE
The Latest Border Patrol Numbers Are Here And Wow... Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news, The Border Patrol has released the latest stats on encounters with illegal aliens at the border and they once again prove that there was an intentional controlled effort to flood America with immigrants under the Biden administration. The numbers from CBP show that apprehensions are down 93% in April, and only five illegal immigrants were released into the country in April, compared to 68,000 last April. You can count them on one hand. The border is truly secure now. April 2025: ➡️8,383 illegal aliens at the southern border ➡️279 apprehensions / day April 2024: ➡️128,895 illegal aliens at the southern border ➡️4,297 apprehensions / day President Trump has secured our border. https://t.co/YYDOpxa7xu — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) May 12, 2025 Even those five were only allowed into the country temporarily for special interest court cases. The figures confirm that April 2025 averaged 279 Border Patrol apprehensions of illegal aliens per day. Compare that to April 2024, which averaged 4,297 Border Patrol apprehensions of illegal aliens per day. A total of 8,383 illegal aliens were apprehended at the southern border in April, down from nearly 129,000 in April 2024. From 129,000 to 8,000. From chaos to control. Turns out, when you treat the border like a national security issue instead of a humanitarian PR stunt, things actually change. Imagine that. — The Undercurrent (@NotTheirScript) May 12, 2025 That 8,000+ were also not put on planes and buses and shipped all over the country. “For the first time in years, more agents are back in the field – patrolling territories that CBP didn’t have the bandwidth or manpower to oversee just six months ago,” said Pete Flores, Acting Commissioner of CBP. “But thanks to this administration’s dramatic shift in security posture at our border, we are now seeing operational control becoming a reality – and it’s only just beginning,” he added. Veteran border reporter Bill Melugin declared “The border is effectively closed/shut down, catch and release is over, gotaways are minuscule, and there has been no traditional spring surge of migrants arriving at the border. Messaging, executive policy, and consequences have intersected to create the quietest border in modern history.” 5 illegals vs 68,000 illegals. Wow. What a difference it makes to have a President who actually cares about American sovereignty & secure borders. THANK YOU PRESIDENT TRUMP! https://t.co/dsVUeEctDj — Abigail Jackson 🇺🇸 (@abigailmarone) May 12, 2025 Hang on, we were repeatedly told by Democrats that this couldn’t be done. But I was told a new bill was needed to do this. — Wisconsin’s Conservative Sponge (@wiz_political) May 12, 2025 NEW: Border apprehensions are down 93% in April, only *5* illegal immigrants were released into the country in April, compared to 68,000 last April. Never forget how the scam artists in the media told you this wasn't possible without spending hundreds of billions of dollars. As… pic.twitter.com/x58mywhEVg — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) May 12, 2025 LIES. All we needed was a new President. 🇺🇸 — 🇺🇲🗑Small Town Chick🇺🇲 (@ejc9029) May 12, 2025 * * * Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 14:45
UK PM Starmer Slammed For Daring To Suggest Immigrants Should "Speak English"
1747157100 from ZEROHEDGE
UK PM Starmer Slammed For Daring To Suggest Immigrants Should "Speak English" Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news, In a jaw-dropping display of political hypocrisy, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer declared Monday that it is “common sense” that migrants should speak English, posting on X that “If you want to live in the UK, you should speak English.” If you want to live in the UK, you should speak English. That’s common sense. So we’re raising English language requirements across every main immigration route. — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) May 12, 2025 Do something then. Empty words years too late. pic.twitter.com/ALEZweZ6UF — m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) May 12, 2025 This from the same Labour leader whose government has overseen the harassment and even arrest of Brits for expressing similar sentiments, branded as potential “hate crimes” under draconian speech laws. “Speak English”? That’s literally a hate crime in your tyrannical fascist hell-hole, jackass. Off to jail for you! Bigot! pic.twitter.com/bVbvIMeAYz — Viva Frei (@thevivafrei) May 12, 2025 But don’t you arrest people for tweeting things like this? You’re such a confusing politician. — The Gay Republican 🇺🇲✝️🇮🇱 (@GayRepublicSwag) May 12, 2025 It's a criminal act to say "if you want to live in the UK, you should speak English" in Britain (cf. Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s. 33, s. 50A), and UK police have issued warnings for asking someone to 'speak English' https://t.co/1fe47lV9Ne — ib (@Indian_Bronson) May 12, 2025 While ordinary citizens face police scrutiny for daring to question unchecked immigration or cultural integration, Starmer now parrots the very rhetoric he once condemned, revealing a spineless opportunism that prioritizes political survival over principle. So if you do a meme in another language you get twice the jail time? — Bo French (@BoFrenchTX) May 12, 2025 That sounds like extreme far-right Brexity-things rhetoric to me. Report him! — Alice Smith (@TheAliceSmith) May 12, 2025 The irony is thicker than London fog: the man who championed open borders and vilified Brexit voters as xenophobes now postures as a defender of national cohesion, all while his Home Office fails to stem the tide of illegal Channel crossings. You let the entire 3rd world invade your country. It’s far too late for that You already destroyed your own country by being a stupid leftist. — Philip Anderson (@VoteHarrisOut) May 12, 2025 This brazen pivot comes as no surprise given the political earthquake shaking Starmer’s Labour Party. The recent local elections saw Nigel Farage’s Reform UK surge, capturing councils and seats with a platform unapologetically slamming mass immigration and woke orthodoxy. Reform’s gains, including a stunning Runcorn byelection upset, have sent Labour into a tailspin, with Starmer’s approval ratings tanking as voters flee to Farage’s turquoise tidal wave. man, the internal polling for labour must be the data version of a slaughterhouse https://t.co/bv06n28QUN — kaitlin (@thefactualprep) May 12, 2025 Polls show Reform’s favourability spiking, particularly among working-class Britons fed up with Labour’s elitist disconnect. Starmer’s sudden tough talk on immigration—complete with promises to slash net migration and impose stricter English language rules—smacks of a desperate bid to claw back voters defecting to Reform. But his words ring hollow, a cynical rebrand from a man who, as shadow Brexit secretary, campaigned for a second EU referendum and scoffed at concerns about immigration’s impact on communities. The stench of Starmer’s double standards is suffocating. While he now preaches “integration” and “fair rules,” his government continues to coddle a system where dissenters are silenced and borders remain porous. Brits who’ve lost jobs, homes, or safety to the strains of mass migration watch as Starmer plays both sides—cracking down on free speech while failing to deport illegals. Reform UK’s rise isn’t just a warning shot; it’s a referendum on Labour’s betrayal of the working class. Starmer’s English language edict isn’t common sense—it’s a calculated flip-flop from a man terrified of Farage’s shadow, and it won’t fool a public fed up with two-faced elites. The most common baby boy name in England is Muhammad. It's too late for this now. https://t.co/2fvyzUfU06 — Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) May 12, 2025 Mere hours after Starmer’s incredible immigration remarks, a suspected arson attack rocked his £2 million north London home, with counter-terrorism police now probing a potential firebomb incident that charred the front door. Obvious fire damage at the entrance to Sir Keir Starmer’s home in Kentish town. Counter terror police are now linking three separate arson attacks. A 21 year old man was arrested in the early hours this morning. pic.twitter.com/c644uHg8DV — Mark White (@markwhiteTV) May 13, 2025 The blaze, one of three suspicious fires linked to properties owned by Starmer, including a car fire and another at an Islington flat, has sparked speculation of retaliation tied to his newfound immigration stance. Pictured: A photograph shared with The Telegraph shows a car – just yards from Keir Starmer’s home – consumed by flames A 21-year-old man is arrested on suspicion of arson by police investigating a fire at Prime Minister’s property Read the full story ⬇️https://t.co/dhK5O0ocuh pic.twitter.com/RXQylrIApH — The Telegraph (@Telegraph) May 13, 2025 Posts on X suggest the attack may be linked to pro-immigration activists or groups like Palestine Solidarity, angered by Starmer’s “island of strangers” rhetoric and English language mandate. While police have arrested a 21-year-old suspect, the timing—coming on the heels of Starmer’s speech—raises chilling questions about whether his cynical pivot has inflamed tensions even further. * * * Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 13:25
US Unveils $1.4BN Weapons Sale To UAE Just Before Trump Visit
1747155900 from ZEROHEDGE
US Unveils $1.4BN Weapons Sale To UAE Just Before Trump Visit Oil, weapons, the United States, and the Gulf Arab monarchies... the foundation of relations, the 'bread and butter' going back at least half-a-century which is still going strong. With President Donald Trump kicking off his Mideast tour in Saudi Arabia, and set to travel to Qatar and the United Arab Emirates next, the State Department has unveiled a weapons sale of over $1.4 billion to the United Arab Emirates. "The sale, which the State Department said was approved and notified to Congress, includes $1.3 billion for Chinook helicopters and $130 million for parts and support for F-16 fighter jets," CNN writes. First Gulf War file image, via War on the Rocks The UAE will be the final stop in Trump's Middle East tour, or what the White House described as his "historic return to the Middle East". Of course, major arms sale are also expected for Saudi Arabia - and the UAE and Saudis often act in concert when it comes to defense needs, as was the case during the coalition's war on Yemen in the last decade. The Republican-led Congress, meanwhile, hasn't done much and likely isn't planning to do much else in the opening months of the Trump administration - other than perhaps rubber stamp these massive Gulf arms deals. However, there will some scant level of pushback: "This year, Democratic lawmakers — who are in the minority in both houses of Congress — have opposed arms sales to the UAE," CNN notes. "In January, Sen. Chris Van Hollen and Rep. Sara Jacobs called out the UAE for providing weapons to the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan." "On Monday, the same day the latest sale was announced, Sen. Chris Murphy said he would seek to block sales to the UAE over an Abu Dhabi-backed investment firm’s $2 billion investment in Trump’s crypto venture," the same report says. The UAE arms deal is also expected to include aerial support equipment such as engines, missile warning systems, in-flight refueling capabilities, and mounted machine guns - along with other aircraft parts. Source: Al Jazeera The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said in a statement that the arms transfer aims to "support the foreign policy and national security of the United States" by bolstering the defense capabilities of Washington ally, the UAE. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 13:05
Aimed At Pressuring Big Pharma; Goldman Says Trump's Drug Exec. Order "Symbolic, Not Substantial"
1747153500 from ZEROHEDGE
Aimed At Pressuring Big Pharma; Goldman Says Trump's Drug Exec. Order "Symbolic, Not Substantial" On Monday, President Donald Trump signed the Most Favored Nation (MFN) Executive Order on drug pricing, aiming to pressure the pharmaceutical industry to lower prices by linking them to those paid in other developed countries. The order directs the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to communicate these international price benchmarks to drug manufacturers. If significant progress isn't achieved within several months, HHS is instructed to initiate a rulemaking process to enforce MFN-based pricing. Following the MFN EO on drug pricing, Goldman analysts Asad Haider and team noted that stocks most exposed to the EO—such as Regeneron and Merck—rallied sharply, as both the text of the order and the subsequent press briefing alleviated worst-case fears priced into pharma stocks. According to Goldman's political economist Alec Phillips, the EO appears more designed to increase the Trump administration's negotiation leverage than to implement sweeping reforms immediately. The analyst expects the HHS to impose MFN-based pricing if no "significant progress" is made within several months. The EO's language is legally cautious. It repeatedly cites the need to act "consistent with law" and lacks clarity on scope—such as whether it applies to Medicare Part B, D, or both. "Overall, while the EO appears intended to create leverage for negotiation with the industry and is likely to increase pressure on companies to announce some concessions, our political economist notes that the process appears to be in early stages and does not expect near-term implementation of the measures contemplated in the EO," Haider told clients on Tuesday. Haider continued, "Our net takeaway is that while the EO removes a potential worst-case scenario, we expect drug pricing to remain a focus and note that clarity across other policy, regulatory, and tariff-related vectors is needed for large-cap biopharma to see a sustained recovery." Here's Alec Phillips' first-take President Trump's executive order (EO) on "most favored nation" (MFN) drug pricing could lead to discussions with pharmaceutical companies regarding potential price concessions but does not look likely to lead to substantial near-term policy changes. It orders the Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) to communicate price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers based on prices paid in other developed economies. If "significant progress" has not been achieved on drug pricing after an unspecified period of time—we would expect the White House to give the industry at least several months—the order instructs HHS to propose a "rulemaking plan" to impose MFN pricing. The EO is unclear on whether this would apply only to drugs covered under Medicare and, if so, whether it would apply to all drugs and whether it would apply to Medicare Part B, D or both. In the event "significant progress" is not made, the EO also instructs: (1) HHS to certify safety of drug reimportation, (2) FTC and DOJ to take enforcement action against anti-competitive practices, (3) the Dept. of Commerce to "review and consider" exports of pharmaceuticals, and (4) FDA to "review and potentially modify or revoke" drug approvals. The order also instructs US Trade Representative to guard against "unreasonable or discriminatory" practices in other countries that raise prices in the US, including foreign price controls, and tells HHS to "consider" a program to sell direct to consumer at MFN prices. Overall, the EO appears intended to create leverage for negotiation with the industry and is likely to increase pressure on companies to announce some concessions. That said, this process appears to be in early stages and we would not expect near-term implementation of any of the measures contemplated in the EO. Later this year, the main question will be whether the administration has authority to implement these kinds of changes unilaterally. With regard to Medicare, the administration has authority to negotiate discounts on 15 drugs this year under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and could potentially pursue broader price concessions as part of a CMMI demonstration. However, Medicaid pricing (rebates) is set in statute, and the administration has limited ability to constrain prices in the private market. In theory, Congress could affect these areas, but for now neither looks likely to be included in the House's budget reconciliation package. Overall, analysts view the EO as primarily a negotiation tool rather than a blueprint for immediate reform. The goal is to bring big pharma to the table to negotiate lower drug prices, allowing the Trump administration to advance its price reduction agenda. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 12:25
Trump Not Going To Istanbul, As Kremlin Downplays 'Direct' Ukraine Peace Talks
1747151100 from ZEROHEDGE
Trump Not Going To Istanbul, As Kremlin Downplays 'Direct' Ukraine Peace Talks The Kremlin on Tuesday affirmed that "the Russian side continues to prepare for the negotiations that are scheduled to take place on Thursday." This after on Sunday Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to resume direct negotiations with Kiev, and proposed the Istanbul talks. Ukrainian President Zelensky then made a performative gesture - likely more meant to prove to the White House that he's 'willing' - saying he's ready to fly to Istanbul in person and urged Putin to do the same. Putin spokesman Dimitry Peskov when grilled by reporters on Tuesday downplayed the whole event, describing that direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul later this week are merely "still possible". As for revealing the line-up for the Russian delegation, and who is expected lead, Peskov said "we will announce it as soon as the president [Putin] deems it necessary." Despite some sensational recent headlines and statements, one thing we can be sure will not happen is President Putin's personal presence. And per the latest from Reuters, President Trump is not going to be there in Turkey either (after on Monday he actually floated the possibility): KELLOGG, WITKOFF ARE HEADING TO ISTANBUL THIS WEEK: REUTERS FORMAT OF TALKS IN TURKEY WITH KELLOGG, WITKOFF UNCLEAR: REUTERS "All of us in Ukraine would appreciate it if President Trump could be there with us at this meeting in Turkey. This is the right idea. We can change a lot," Zelensky had said. And Trump had responded by saying he was "thinking about actually flying over" – which would have to happen immediately on the heels of his big Gulf visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE. Zelensky has meanwhile insisted that any talks should be preceded by the start of a 30-day ceasefire – which Washington appears to be backing, but which the Kremlin has already rejected. Really, all the talk of pushing to get Putin in Istanbul to negotiate in person was about generating mainstream media headlines like the following: Moscow worries that such a lengthy pause in fighting would only be used by Ukrainian forces to rearm and regroup along the front lines, at a moment they are exhausted and steadily losing ground. Peskov told reporters further, "[Western] Europe is, after all, entirely on Ukraine’s side. It cannot claim to have an unbiased approach… Its approach is not balanced, it is rather pro-war, aimed at continuing the fighting, which is in sharp contrast to the approach demonstrated, for example, by Moscow or Washington," according to Russian media. Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 11:45
Hollywood Unions Cautiously Welcome Trump's Movie Tariff Proposal
1747147500 from ZEROHEDGE
Hollywood Unions Cautiously Welcome Trump's Movie Tariff Proposal Authored by Beige Luciano-Adams via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), After the initial shockwaves subsided over President Donald Trump’s May 5 announcement that he intends to implement a 100 percent levy on all foreign-made films, Hollywood labor unions ventured cautious optimism at the idea that at least someone in Washington might be paying attention to the plight of the industry’s rank-and-file workers. Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock “President Trump has correctly recognized that the American film and television industry faces an urgent threat from international competition,” leaders of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), one of the largest and most powerful entertainment unions, said in a statement. “Foreign governments have successfully lured film and television productions, and the multitude of jobs they create, away from the United States with aggressive tax incentives and subsidies. Films intended for initial release in the U.S. are increasingly being shot overseas—and American workers and our economy are paying the price.” The entertainment industry has taken an unrelenting beating over the past several years—streaming wars, the pandemic, mergers and layoffs, strikes, and accelerating runaway production have gutted the industry, leaving record numbers without work and little hope of a rebound. Runaway productions generally refer to productions intended for release or broadcast in the United States but actually filmed in another country, or those made by L.A.-based studios that shoot in other states in order to take advantage of competitive tax incentives or other economic benefits. Calling incentives offered to lure production overseas a “concerted effort” by other nations and thus a national security threat, the president said he was authorizing the Department of Commerce and the U.S. trade representative to immediately begin instituting 100 percent tariffs on “any and all movies coming into our Country that are produced in Foreign Lands.” How exactly tariffs on foreign films would work—or really what even constitutes an American-made or foreign-made film in the age of streaming, co-production and globalized post-production—is yet to be determined. Unlike most of Trump’s trade-related actions thus far, this latest salvo targets not physical goods that come through U.S. ports, but digitally transmitted services that rely on an increasingly international supply chain. There are also questions surrounding the legality of imposing tariffs on film and television under what appears to be Trump’s invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which offers broad powers to regulate economic transactions such as sanctions and tariffs during national emergencies, but protects the exchange of published information or informational materials, including films. The impulse, at least, was appreciated among representatives of Hollywood’s beleaguered workforce. In a statement, the Teamsters applauded the apparent intent to push back against the years-long hollowing out of the industry, which the union blamed on studios that follow “Corporate America’s crooked playbook” of outsourcing union jobs. “Studios chase cheap production costs overseas while gutting the American workforce that built the film and TV industry. These gigantic corporations line their pockets by relentlessly cutting corners, abandoning American crews, and exploiting tax loopholes,” Teamsters President Sean M. O’Brien and Motion Picture Division Director Lindsey Dougherty said in the statement. The union’s motion picture and theatrical division represents drivers and transportation professionals, as well as casting directors, animal wranglers, and other crafts. “We thank President Trump for boldly supporting good union jobs when others have turned their heads. This is a strong step toward finally reining in the studios’ un-American addiction to outsourcing our members’ work. The Teamsters applaud any elected official—Republican, Democrat, Independent—who’s willing to fight for American workers,” they said. Teamsters Union members join striking Writers Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild members outside Amazon Studios in Culver City, Calif., on July 19, 2023. Years of streaming wars, the pandemic, mergers, strikes, layoffs, and runaway production have battered the entertainment industry, leaving record job losses and dim prospects for recovery. Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images The president’s missive appeared to address the fact that an increasing number of American studio films are shot abroad—primarily in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and European countries such as Hungary, which offer competitive subsidies and tax breaks, easy regulatory environments, and lower labor costs for producers trying to deliver a project on budget. IATSE, which represents members in the United States and Canada, also struck a cautious tone, saying it supports all policy measures “that can be implemented to return and maintain U.S. film and television jobs, while not disadvantaging our Canadian members.” IATSE urged federal policymakers to level the playing field for U.S. productions, including with a federal film production tax incentive, but said it would await further information about the administration’s proposed tariff plan. “We continue to stand firm in our conviction that any eventual trade policy must do no harm to our Canadian members—nor the industry overall.” In a recent survey by industry analyst ProdPro, studio executives named their top five preferred locations for 2025–26, and none of them were in the United States. Toronto, the U.K, Vancouver, Central Europe, and Australia dominated the list, with U.S. hubs California, Georgia, and New Jersey ranked below them. “Key factors influencing these preferences include favorable tax incentives, infrastructure, available skilled crew, and currency exchange rate,” the report said, noting an increasingly competitive market of tax incentive schemes will likely shape geographic distribution for years to come. The company’s 2024 Second Quarter Global Production Report shows the total number of productions filming globally last year was still 16 percent lower than in 2022, and 37 percent lower in the United States. “The lower volumes are here to stay,” the report notes, showing the number of U.S. productions that started principal photography in the second quarter of 2024 fell nearly 40 percent from 2022 levels, compared with a 20 percent global dip. Amid this ongoing global decline and sharp competition, filming in Los Angeles, the industry’s historic center, continued to tumble through the first quarter of this year. According to FilmLA, a nonprofit and the official film office of L.A. City and County, on-location production in the Greater Los Angeles area dropped by 22 percent in the first quarter of this year, with feature production declining about 29 percent. “Each drop reflected the impact of global production cutbacks and California’s ongoing loss of work to rival territories,” the organization said in an April statement. There is no central database or reliable way to track runaway production, which has been a subject of concern for Hollywood unions for at least the past two decades. But in the industry, many observe it has accelerated over the past five or so years at an unprecedented rate. A pedestrian crosses a street in front of the Hollywood sign in Los Angeles on Oct. 7, 2021. Calling foreign film production incentives a “concerted effort” and national security threat, President Donald Trump said on May 4 he would authorize 100 percent tariffs on all movies made abroad. Mario Tama/Getty Images ‘Built by the Middle Class’ Other union leaders cautioned against a blanket tariff that fails to account for the realities of the industry. “If this tariff policy is just a headline reaction to productions leaving the U.S., it’s not a solution, it’s sabotage,” David Graves, an executive board member with IATSE Local 728, which represents studio electrical lighting technicians, told The Epoch Times in a text message. Stressing that the film industry doesn’t run on the same timeline or structure as a brick-and-mortar business, Graves said a one-size-fits-all approach may do more harm than good unless informed by people who work in the industry. “If the administration truly wants to understand how to apply tariffs to the American film industry, they need to talk to electricians, grips, camera operators, and wardrobe, not just A-list actors who are disconnected from the realities of payroll taxes, foreign incentives, and what economic contraction looks like on the ground,” Graves said. Big-name producers and celebrity voices, he said, “don’t speak for the working-class crews who are watching their livelihoods disappear with no transition plan, no retraining support, and no safety net.” A day after Trump’s tariff announcement, Oscar-winning actor Jon Voight, whom Trump previously named a “special ambassador” to Hollywood, said in a video posted to social media platform X that he submitted a detailed plan to the president at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida outlining “certain tax provisions” that would help both movie and TV production. “Our industry recently has suffered greatly. ... Many Americans have lost jobs to productions gone overseas. People have lost their homes, can’t feed their families,” Voight said. The same day, Deadline, an industry publication based in Los Angeles, published a draft of Voight’s “Make Hollywood Great Again” proposal, which includes a 10 percent to 20 percent federal tax credit that would be “stackable” on top of available state incentives already provided by states like New York and Georgia. In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, Steven Paul, an advisor to Voight and CEO of SP Media Group, said the document published by Deadline was “part of a private discussion and was never intended for public consumption.” The proposal was crafted “solely for the purpose of discussion,” Paul said, and didn’t reflect any formal policy or position. And while the ideas listed were gathered from exploratory conversations Voight and Paul had with a broad range of industry stakeholders, including unions, studios and streaming platforms, Paul said the leaked proposal “does not claim to represent the collective views of the participating film and television organizations.” Voight’s draft plan requires that 75 percent of physical production and post-production take place in the United States in order to qualify for the federal incentive, and must meet a minimum threshold “American ‘Cultural Test’ similar to that currently used in the U.K.’” All of this would apply to content across the board, including for theatrical distribution, broadcast networks and cable, as well as streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon, and digital platforms such as YouTube. Read the rest here... Tyler Durden Tue, 05/13/2025 - 10:45