Visualizing The Declining Purchasing Power Of The US Dollar

The U.S. dollar has steadily lost value over the past century. According to Federal Reserve data, the purchasing power of one dollar today is equal to just a few cents in 1913 (the year the Fed was created).

In this graphic, Visual Capitalist's Marcus Lu tracks the decline in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar since the early 1900s, illustrating how inflation has eroded its value.

Data & Discussion

The data for this visualization comes from Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED). It measures the “Purchasing Power of the Consumer Dollar” across all U.S. city averages, indexed to consumer prices.

The higher the index, the more purchasing power the dollar has. As the index declines, goods and services become relatively more expensive.

Date Purchasing Power of the Consumer Dollar in U.S. City Average 1913-01-01 1017.8 1914-01-01 994.2 1915-01-01 987.6 1916-01-01 956.2 1917-01-01 855 1918-01-01 715.9 1919-01-01 604.5 1920-01-01 517.7 1921-01-01 524.9 1922-01-01 590.2 1923-01-01 595 1924-01-01 578.8 1925-01-01 577.9 1926-01-01 557.3 1927-01-01 570.1 1928-01-01 578.8 1929-01-01 584.5 1930-01-01 584.5 1931-01-01 628.8 1932-01-01 699.1 1933-01-01 775.4 1934-01-01 755.7 1935-01-01 733.5 1936-01-01 722.8 1937-01-01 709.3 1938-01-01 702.4 1939-01-01 715.9 1940-01-01 717.7 1941-01-01 709.3 1942-01-01 638.1 1943-01-01 591.4 1944-01-01 574.3 1945-01-01 561.4 1946-01-01 549.2 1947-01-01 464.8 1948-01-01 421.4 1949-01-01 415.7 1950-01-01 424.4 1951-01-01 393.2 1952-01-01 377.4 1953-01-01 375 1954-01-01 370.8 1955-01-01 373.5 1956-01-01 372.6 1957-01-01 361.5 1958-01-01 349.3 1959-01-01 344.8 1960-01-01 340.6 1961-01-01 335.2 1962-01-01 332.8 1963-01-01 328.6 1964-01-01 323.2 1965-01-01 319.6 1966-01-01 313.6 1967-01-01 303.5 1968-01-01 293.3 1969-01-01 280.4 1970-01-01 264.3 1971-01-01 251.1 1972-01-01 243 1973-01-01 234.3 1974-01-01 214.3 1975-01-01 191.8 1976-01-01 179.6 1977-01-01 170.6 1978-01-01 159.8 1979-01-01 146.3 1980-01-01 128.4 1981-01-01 114.9 1982-01-01 105.9 1983-01-01 102.1 1984-01-01 98.2 1985-01-01 94.6 1986-01-01 91.3 1987-01-01 89.9 1988-01-01 86.4 1989-01-01 82.6 1990-01-01 78.5 1991-01-01 74.3 1992-01-01 72.4 1993-01-01 70.1 1994-01-01 68.4 1995-01-01 66.5 1996-01-01 64.8 1997-01-01 62.8 1998-01-01 61.9 1999-01-01 60.8 2000-01-01 59.2 2001-01-01 57.1 2002-01-01 56.5 2003-01-01 55 2004-01-01 54 2005-01-01 52.4 2006-01-01 50.4 2007-01-01 49.4 2008-01-01 47.4 2009-01-01 47.4 2010-01-01 46.1 2011-01-01 45.4 2012-01-01 44.1 2013-01-01 43.4 2014-01-01 42.8 2015-01-01 42.8 2016-01-01 42.2 2017-01-01 41.2 2018-01-01 40.3 2019-01-01 39.7 2020-01-01 38.8 2021-01-01 38.2 2022-01-01 35.6 2023-01-01 33.4 2024-01-01 32.4 2025-01-01 31.5 2025-09-01 30.8 Inflationary Eras and Economic Shocks

Major inflationary periods can be identified by looking at the steepest drops in the chart. For example, World War I and World War II strained government finances, leading to massive increases in public spending and money creation, which pushed prices sharply higher.

Similarly, the oil shocks of the 1970s caused energy costs to spike throughout the world, feeding into broad-based inflation. In each case, rising prices significantly eroded the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar.

From Gold Standard to Fiat Currency

Until 1971, the U.S. dollar was backed by gold.

This system was ended by President Nixon because the U.S. was creating more dollars than it had gold to support. Furthermore, foreign countries were increasingly demanding gold in exchange for their dollar reserves.

While ending this system gave policymakers more flexibility to manage the economy, money creation became easier, as shown by this chart of the M2 money supply. M2 comprises the most liquid forms of U.S. money, including physical currency, checking deposits, plus near-liquid assets like small-value time (CD) deposits, retail money-market funds, and other readily convertible savings vehicles.

An expanding money supply can be healthy when it grows in line with factors like population, economic output, and demand for credit, but becomes inflationary when it outpaces real economic growth.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Gold Production by Region in 2024 on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/02/2025 - 05:45

How A Generation of Women Was Misled About Hormone Therapy

Authored by Jingduan Yang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

“Was I misled?”

That’s the question I hear most from my patients lately—asked with anger, exhaustion, and the quiet devastation of women who wonder if they lost years of their lives to menopause symptoms they were told were untreatable.

Getty image/MoMo Productions

The answer came earlier this month when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced it would remove “black box” warnings from hormone therapy products after 23 years. For many women, the reversal is an admission that arrives decades too late.

What Happened in 2002

In July 2002, preliminary data from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) were published in JAMA, showing that combined hormone therapy (estrogen and progestin) increased the risk of breast cancer, stroke, and pulmonary embolism. Major media outlets interpreted early signals from the study as definitive danger, and the announcement led to an instant and dramatic decline in the use of hormone therapy.

Women who had been sleeping well for the first time in years suddenly poured their medications into the trash. Pharmacies fielded calls from panicked patients demanding immediate discontinuation. Primary care doctors, most of whom had never been trained deeply in menopause management, told their patients to “stop now and ask questions later.”

Women did stop, and many suffered in silence for the next 20 years.

The FDA’s Historic Reversal

On Nov. 10, the FDA announced that it is initiating the removal of broad “black box” warnings referencing risks of cardiovascular disease, breast cancer, and probable dementia from hormone replacement therapy products for menopause.

When FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary spoke publicly about the shift, he didn’t mince words. He said the media had frightened women away from a potentially life-changing therapy, and he noted the difference between estrogen-only therapy and synthetic combination regimens. He acknowledged, openly, that the “fear machine” had begun long before the scientific data had been fully understood.

He also said something that struck many women deeply: “After 23 years of dogma, the FDA is stopping the fear that has steered women away from this life-saving treatment.”

For many of my patients, that sentence felt like a validation they had waited half a lifetime to hear.

The Devil Is in the Details

The details that matter most sat quietly in the medical literature for years—in the 2002 article and the two follow-up studies published in 2011 and 2020 in JAMA.

The Study Population Was Older

Women recruited in the WHI study were all postmenopausal, aged 50 to 79 years, with an average age of 63—more than a decade past the onset of menopause. Most had not used hormones before, and many had cardiovascular risk factors.

The Hormones Were Synthetic

The adverse results found among older women taking combined conjugated equine estrogen and medroxyprogesterone acetate—both older, synthetic formulations developed in a different era—were generalized to all hormone therapy types and all age groups.

Estrogen-Only Therapy Showed Different Results

The estrogen-only group in the WHI study—women who had hysterectomies and therefore received estrogen without synthetic progestins—had a lower rate of breast cancer.

In the storm of fear that followed, no one wanted to hear nuance.

The Critical Factor

Yet even in the early 2000s, there were physicians who paused, confused because something about the reporting didn’t align with what they were seeing clinically. The hormones used in the WHI study weren’t the bioidentical estradiol and progesterone that many clinicians were already prescribing with good results. More importantly, the women who seemed to benefit most from hormone therapy were those who began it near menopause—not in older age.

Timing is critical. The body responds to estrogen very differently pre-menopause versus a decade post-menopause. After years of low estrogen, the blood vessels lose their flexibility, plaque accumulates, and metabolic changes settle in. The risk-benefit balance is fundamentally different for women who initiate hormone therapy at different ages.

This is what we in medicine now call the “timing hypothesis”—a concept that should have been central to every headline but was lost entirely.

And for two decades, women lived inside that headline and endured the consequences of fear and misinformation.

What Women Lost

The point is not that hormone therapy is perfect or appropriate for everyone. It’s that women were never given the chance to make an informed choice.

Women who begin hormone therapy earlier—ideally within 10 years of menopause—tend to experience improved sleep, reduced anxiety and irritability, and protection against bone loss.

Many report better cognition, improved cardiovascular markers, and enhanced sexual health and relationship well-being. Although spoken about more quietly, perhaps the most profound benefit is the simplest one: the return of themselves.

Takeaways

The new FDA guidelines do not signal a new fad or a sudden reversal. They mark a return to evidence-based medicine—the kind that millions of women should have received all along.

Hormone therapy is not appropriate for every woman, and it is not a cure-all. However, it is a powerful tool, and for the right woman at the right moment, it can restore a quality of life she thought she’d lost forever.

Our job now—as clinicians, as journalists, as a society—is to give women back what fear took from them: clarity, choice, and control.

Everything that follows in this series of columns will build on that mission.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/02/2025 - 05:00

Which Countries Prescribe The Most & Least Antibiotics?

World Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Awareness Week ended last week.

Antimicrobials are medicines used to prevent and treat infectious diseases. These can be used on humans, animals and plants and come in the forms of antibiotics, antivirals, antifungals and antiparasitics.

Although resistance to these medicines occurs naturally, due to genetic changes in pathogens over time, this process can be exacerbated when humans use antimicrobials too frequently or do not finish a course fully. The result can be deadly, with dangerous strains of bacteria endangering lives and threatening the ability to treat common infections and, as a result, to perform life-saving procedures from cancer chemotherapy to caesarean sections.

As Statista's Anna Fleck details below, a recent report by the OECD highlights significant disparities in antibiotic prescribing practices across countries.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Among those providing data, Greece had the highest prescription rate in 2023, with 26.7 defined daily doses (DDDs) per 1,000 people.

This is well above the OECD average of 16 DDDs and nearly three times the level seen in Sweden and the Netherlands, where the rates were 8.7 and 8.8 DDDs per 1,000 people, respectively.

While the volume of antibiotics prescribed has generally decreased across most OECD countries, Finland (-5.8 DDDs/1,000) and Canada (-5.6 DDDs/1,000) have shown the greatest reductions since 2013.

The OECD states that antibiotics should only be prescribed when supported by clear evidence.

Antibiotic resistance can also build up through more indirect means, such as via eating the meat of live feed that has been treated with antibiotics, or consuming meat or dairy products contaminated with antibiotic resistant pathogens. 

Data from 2020 shows that countries such as Thailand, China and Australia rely on the practice of giving animals antibiotics far more heavily than nations including Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/02/2025 - 04:15

Britain Is Lost

Authored by T.L.Davis, 

A recent interview Tucker Carlson had with George Galloway, a long-time member of the British Parliament and with a show himself in Britain, who was recently detained at the border under terrorism charges for, apparently, the opinions broadcast on his show.

No nation has fallen quicker or more completely than Britain into the totalitarian mindset.

It’s why we highlighted this aspect of modern Europe into the film Deconstruction.

Britain, as long as it pursues the same oppression of free speech as the Soviet Union, can not be called or considered an ally of the United States.

This is what we have to decide as a people, the American people, who will and who will not be our allies. Governments, especially now, are poor judges of character. They will hold onto traditional alliances, when those alliances have long been strained, simply because they would be unsure of what that would do to international relationships. If we lose Britain, France and Germany as allies, what effect does that have on NATO?

My question, however, is what damage does continued alliances with nations who punish their people for what they have said, posted or broadcast do to international perception? Are we not tarnished by their brush? Yes. It also signals that the United States is not determined to uphold the right to free speech. That in order to maintain these alliances will betray their own people.

As Britain, France and Germany turn toward implementing a police state to support immigrants who rape and kill their sons and daughters, put protesters in jail and silence not only their own citizens, but any who arrive through the internet, can they still be considered allies of a free nation? No. So, how free is that “free” nation? It is not free as it supports and continues alliances with nations diametrically opposed, not only to free speech, but a series of democratic principles.

The battle taking place within the European nations draw a stark contrast to the Central and Eastern European nations, formerly Soviet client states, who distance themselves from European Union dictates that promote illegal migration and the silencing of objectors.

The whole idea of democracy comes from the idea that the people have a say in who governs them and the policies they impose. When freedom of speech is so blatantly outlawed and only approved narratives permitted, there is no democracy. I don’t know what sort of government Britain has, but it is not a democracy as it claims. Yes, I know it’s technically a Monarchy, but the King or Queen has nowhere near the political power they once held.

All of this centers around illegal migration, it’s where people like Keir Starmer intend to derive their power, in the end. If he supports the replacement population when it is unpopular to do so, they might look kindly on him when the Islamists take full control of the politics, but he is a useful idiot.

They continue to put forth the idea that a declining birthrate is the reason for the importation of these migrants, but if European and American birthrates are dropping, as it is in all Western societies, it would seem that the logical conclusion would be to outlaw abortion, not import rapists and murderers.

But that’s not the reason. It isn’t the birthrate, it’s an attempt to forever change politics that eliminates the right, the Christians. This point was made clear by Viktor Orban in the film Deconstruction that’s coming out soon.

Communists and Islamists work well together. They have the same goal, supremacy through murder and imprisonment of an uncompliant populace. Democracies must tolerate the naysayers, the critics, that’s the difference. It won’t be long and the UK will be an Islamic nation, just as Iran became an Islamic nation. Are they still allies of the US? If so, why are not all Islamic nations allies? Because Islamic nations are at war with the US. “Death to America” does not seem like the pronouncement of an ally. Will it be heard across Britain, while we still consider it a close ally? Of course.

The United States had better figure this out, too. The only true allies the US has in Europe are the Central and Eastern European nations.

They are also the ones that need more protection from Russia and China, because, as smaller economies, they can’t afford to be too choosy about who they do business with and the more that the United States can be a better economic partner, the stronger we will all be.

The world is changing rapidly and our government is incapable of keeping up with the pace. It has to be led by the people.

The film Deconstruction makes this point. 

Here’s a trailer that we’ve produced that gives one a sense of where we’re going with the message of the film.

It’s important, because a lot of changes are coming down the pike and if we don’t build some sort of resistance mechanism by which the people will have an increasing say in what policies our government promotes, all is lost. Governments can’t understand issues as quickly as the people can. When the internet came along, the government did not prevent corporations from using and selling information required to establish an account. They did nothing, now it’s just a land of pillage and plunder, unless one spends an inordinate amount of time protecting oneself from it.

AI is coming and the government is not in a position to be able to control it, or protect its citizens from being victimized. Already, I get AI solicitations for marketing my books. No human has read the books and has come up with the information about them. I delete those, even though they are quite complimentary about my work. I don’t want anything to do with AI, or as little as I can tolerate. I don’t want anything to do with AI film production, even though it can be a lot cheaper and quick to produce.

There’s value in simply rejecting what is obviously detrimental to the people. Who gains form AI? Just corporations. Yes, it might be slightly more convenient, but is that worth the ultimate sacrifice of a doomed economy, soaring electric costs and depleted water resources? Not to me.

The need to fight back is urgent. And I expect my warnings to go unheeded, as always. The average person is much too willing to give up, to not fight it when everyone in a position of power decides something. This was illustrated during the pandemic. A lot of us knew it was a false flag, that what they were saying was untrue, that masks didn’t help, that the vaccine wasn’t even a vaccine, but a DNA altering injection. Yet, everywhere I went, people just lined up and took it, accepted the ridiculous distancing and mask wearing.

We’re now in for a lot of that, because it was not ridiculed out of existence from the very beginning. That’s the power of the people, the ability to ridicule nonsense. Finally, slowly, the whole transgender nonsense is losing potency due to that very ridicule that we all possess naturally. Use it.

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

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/02/2025 - 03:30

Visualizing The World's Total Supply Of Gold

Gold is on a hot streak, up more than 50% to-date despite retreating from October’s record highs of $4,380 per troy ounce.

Driving global demand is the mixture of geopolitical tensions, a weaker U.S. dollar, and sticky inflation. In Q3 2025, central bank purchases were up 28% over the quarter, while inflows of gold-backed ETFs hit $26 billion.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Dorothy Neufeld, breaks down the total global supply of gold, both above and below ground, based on data from the World Gold Council.

All of the World’s Above and Below-Ground Gold

As of year-end 2024, the total above-ground stock of gold was 216,265 tonnes. Based on a gold price of $4,166 per troy ounce, all of the world’s mined gold is valued at $29 trillion.

When including identified underground gold, the total reaches 348,375 tonnes. All of the world’s gold together in a sphere would be about 107 feet tall, matching the approximate height of the White House from the south side’s lawn to the top of its flagpole.

The data table below breaks down all of the world’s above and below-ground gold and its value.

 

The world’s below-ground stock (gold that hasn’t been mined yet) is an estimated 132,110 tonnes, covering reserves and resources. Gold reserves are the part of underground gold resources (identified deposits) that are economically viable to extract at current prices.

Resources are not yet proven to be economically viable to mine and process.

How Much Gold is Left to Mine?

With most of the world’s gold already having been mined, only about 38% of the known gold supply remains underground, identified as reserves and resources.

At 2024’s pace of roughly 3,661 tonnes of gold production a year, that below-ground stock equates to just under four decades of additional output, assuming prices or technological advancements make resources economically feasible to mine in the future.

For investors, that mix of finite physical supply, ongoing central-bank purchases, and rising investment demand helps explain why this 107-foot sphere of gold now represents more than $47 trillion in combined above- and below-ground value at current prices.

To learn more about where the world’s gold is mined, check out this graphic which breaks down global gold production by region and country.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/02/2025 - 02:45

Putin Increasingly Depends On Beijing For His Growing Arsenal Of Military Drones

Via Remix News,

While Russia is routinely portrayed as a serious military power, as the war drags on, Russia is becoming more and more reliant on Chinese drone components to survive.

Now, China’s drone component supplier Wang Dinhua has just purchased a 5 percent stake in Russia’s Rustakt, a top drone manufacturer in Russia.

Rustakt is subject to sanctions imposed by both Ukraine and the European Union, reports Do Rzeczy, citing an article from FInancial TImes. 

Samuel Bendett, a drone expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted the growing cooperation between the Russian and Chinese military-industrial complexes, as well as Putin’s reliance on Chinese components for Russia’s growing drone needs.

However, this reliance is nothing new. 

Another Russian company, Aero-HIT, has also benefitted from this partnership, reportedly producing up to 10,000 drones per month this year.

It also plans to produce more advanced models.

China is generally considered the leading drone component manufacturer in the world, dominating much of the supply chain to the point that many of the components also purchased by the United States also come from China.

Ukraine has also discovered laser sensors manufactured by a South African company in Russian drones attacking its cities.

It remains unclear how products intended for civilian use ended up on the kamikaze drones, the independent Russian-language website The Moscow Times reported on Friday.

Laser rangefinders from several countries, including South Africa, have been detected in long-range drones modified from the Iranian Shahed, according to Vladislav Vasilyuk, a Ukrainian official responsible for sanctions policy.

Industrial lasers from South Africa’s Lightware are small and lightweight, making them suitable for installation in drones.

The supply of military equipment to countries engaged in armed conflict without the consent of the South African government is prohibited, but Lightware is not registered as a trader in ammunition or dual-use products or technologies.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/02/2025 - 02:00

US Plans To Keep Troops In Caribbean Through 2028, Planning Docs Show

Via The Cradle 

Department of War documents suggest the US military is planning to keep large numbers of troops in the Caribbean Sea for the next three years, The Intercept reported on Monday, in a further sign that a war on Venezuela is imminent. Defense Department contracting documents reviewed by The Intercept show the military has earmarked major increases in food supplies for almost all of its branches, including the US Coast Guard, Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.

The documents show the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) has been contracted to supply large amounts of baked goods, including wrapped honey buns, vanilla cupcakes, sweet rolls, hamburger rolls, and flour tortillas, to US troops in the "Puerto Rico Zone" from November of this year to November 2028.

Getty Images

The US military has already amassed 15,000 troops in the Caribbean in recent months, including 5,000 sailors aboard the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, which has more than 75 attack, surveillance, and support aircraft.

US President Donald Trump has paved the way for a possible invasion of oil-rich Venezuela by accusing Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro and other officials in his government of leading a drug cartel known as Cartel de los Soles.

Trump has provided no evidence of Maduro’s involvement in drug trafficking, and there is little evidence that Cartel de los Soles exists. Despite this, the US president has authorized the US Air Force to carry out more than 20 strikes on suspected drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.

Rights groups have called the strikes, which have killed more than 80 civilians, extrajudicial executions that are illegal under US and international law. Trump has also sought to declare drug cartels as “terrorist” groups, in another step to justify future military action against Venezuela.

"The procurement’s length of time and the level of effort seemed to point to these operations continuing at the current level for several years," said Mark Cancian, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)

"That’s significant because it means that the Navy will maintain a large presence in the Caribbean that is far larger than what it has been in recent years. It further implies that the Navy will be involved in these counter-drug operations," Cancian stated.

In addition to the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier, the US has deployed at least 13 warships, five support vessels, and a nuclear submarine to the region since August.

One DLA document lists multiple US naval vessels involved in the buildup of troops and ships as recipients, causing the quantities of food and costs listed in the contracting documents to surge.

"People will ask whether this means escalation from the strikes on smugglers into a Venezuelan campaign, whatever that eventually looks like," said a former US military official with significant experience in military logistics, procurement, and supply chains.

Other locations in Puerto Rico named in the DLA documents include Muniz Air National Guard Base, Fort Buchanan, a US Army installation near San Juan, and Roosevelt Roads Naval Base.

U.S. Marine Presence in Venezuela May Extend to 2028

Reports suggest Washington’s long-term strategy goes beyond Maduro’s potential removal, with concerns shifting toward armed groups like ELN and FARC.#WashingtonEye pic.twitter.com/mKuVsZJGUQ

— Washington Eye (@washington_EY) December 1, 2025

Last week, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that the airstrikes against alleged drug smugglers in the Caribbean and the Pacific are part of an operation named "Southern Spear."

The Department of War has reportedly presented Trump with various options for attacking Venezuela. Trump has also threatened future attacks on Venezuelan territory, authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations in Venezuela, and stated that he has not ruled out an invasion of Venezuela by US troops.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 22:35

Why Banning Hate Speech Is Evil

Authored by Lew Rockwell,

We often hear demands to ban so-called “hate speech.”

Negative remarks about various groups, including women, black people, homosexuals, Jews, Muslims, can it is alleged, have a negative effect on members of the group who hear or see the speech. It encourages people to hate them and cements negative stereotypes about them in people’s minds. In addition, hearing or seeing “hate speech” offends the members of the group. Free speech may have some value, but whatever value it has it outweighed by the evil of “hate speech.” Almost any group can claim to be victimized by “hate speech,” except for white heterosexual males and Christians, but “hate speech” applies primarily to members of so-called “protected classes.”

From a libertarian standpoint, the question of banning so-called “hate speech” is a no-brainer.

Banning any kind of speech, whether it is good or bad, is incompatible with a free society.

As the great Murray Rothbard has taught us, all rights are property rights. Everyone can set the rules for speech on his own property, and no one has the right to control what anyone says on someone else’s property. This includes speech which counts as “offensive.” Of course, we don’t live in a libertarian society, but we should come as close as we can in practice to it. This means following the strictest possible interpretation of the First Amendment.

“Congress shall make no law. . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

“No law” means “no law” and that includes laws against so-called “hate speech.”

Some states have “hate speech” laws on the books.

New York is considering a law, already passed in California that requires social media companies to report “hate speech.”

This is the “Stop Hiding Hate Act” and has been passed by the State’s Assembly. Here is an account of the measure from Vince Chang, who favors it:

“Under pressure from the ADL [Anti-Defamation League] and other groups, internet platforms have voluntarily adopted measures to regulate hate speech. The ADL described some of the measures that have been taken: Facebook prohibited Holocaust denial content, hired a vice president of civil rights, changed parts of its advertising platform to prohibit various forms of discrimination; expanded policies against content that undermined the legitimacy of the election; and built a team to study and eliminate bias in artificial intelligence. Due to pressure from ADL and other civil rights organizations, Twitter banned linked content, URL links to content outside the platform that promotes violence and hateful conduct. Reddit added its first global hate policy, providing for the removal of subreddits and users that “promote hate based on identity or vulnerability.”

We can see how such laws have a chilling effect on speech if we look at bans on so-called “hate speech” in foreign countries where they are already in operation.

I want to focus especially on the Scottish Hate Speech Act.

Let’s first look at an official summary of the Scottish act, from the Scottish parliament site:

“Hate crime is the phrase used to describe behaviour which is both criminal and based on prejudice.

There are already laws in place to protect certain groups from hate crime.

This Bill aims to do three things. It updates these existing laws and pulls most of these laws into one Bill. It also adds to the groups currently specifically protected by hate crime laws.

Criminal courts can generally take into account any prejudice when sentencing a person. Also, people are protected from hate crime through specific laws that apply.

People are currently protected by specific laws on the basis of:

• disability
• race (and related characteristics)
• religion
• sexual orientation
• transgender identity

This Bill adds age to that list and allows sex to be added at a later date.

The Bill creates a new crime of stirring up hatred against any of the protected groups covered by the Bill.”

The bill was enacted in 2021 and came into force on April 1, 2024.

The supporters of this Act want to create a community that is united in supporting “diversity.”

Do you see the contradiction? If you oppose what these people call “diversity,” then you are not part of the united community. In other words, only those who accept what we say are free and have rights. As George Orwell said in 1984, “Freedom is Slavery.”

Let’s look at what they say in their own words:

“Scotland’s diversity is its strength; and all communities are valued and their contribution welcomed. Hate crime and prejudice threaten community cohesion and have a corrosive impact on Scotland’s communities as well as broader society. Hate crime and prejudice is never acceptable and the Scottish Government is committed to tackling it. This legislation provides an essential element of the Scottish Government’s ambitious programme of work to tackle hate crime and build community cohesion. Anyone who has experienced or witnessed a hate crime is encouraged to report it to the police or to one of the third-party reporting centres that are in place across Scotland. A cohesive society is one with a common vision and a sense of belonging for all communities; a society in which the diversity of people’s backgrounds, beliefs and circumstances are appreciated and valued, and similar life opportunities are available to all. It is through this lens that the Scottish Government has considered the recommendations from Lord Bracadale’s ‘Independent Review of Hate Crime Legislation in Scotland’ in order to inform the modernisation and reform of hate crime legislation in Scotland."

One of the most aggressive groups in trying to silence others for has speech consists of so-called” trans” people.

If you don’t agree with them that you can become a man or woman just by “identifying” yourself as one, you can be prosecuted. This is the “democratic community” in action.

The prosecutions are by no means confined to religious and political conservatives. Leftwing “gender critical” feminists, who think that a woman is a woman, have been prosecuted. Jonathan Turley tells us what happened to one of them in 2021:

“There is a free speech fight brewing in Scotland where a prominent feminist, Marion Millar, 50, has been charged with the crime of “malicious communication” due to tweets criticizing gender self-identification.  We have previously discussed how feminists are being accused of hate speech and discrimination in these debates.  Indeed, Millar is accused of being a “terf” (a trans-exclusionary radical feminist) by critics due to her opposition to allowing males to declare themselves to be females.  She could now face two years in jail.

What is particularly concerning in this case is that Millar was not told which of her tweets were deemed “malicious.” Millar has thousands of tweets and was told that the charge is based on tweets between 2019 and 2020.  She was simply ordered to the police station and told that social workers would be sent to care for her young twin boys, who are autistic.  After she emerged from the station, she quoted the novelist Salman Rushdie: “Nobody has the right to not be offended. That right doesn’t exist in any declaration I have ever read.”

There are believed to be six tweets that were cited in the complaint, including pictures of the green, white and purple suffragette ribbons tied around trees to support Millar’s cause. The accuser reportedly said that the ribbons looked like nooses and were therefore threats. How ridiculous can you get?

Fortunately, this particular story has a happy ending, at least relatively so. As The Guardian reports, “Scottish prosecutors have discontinued the case against a woman charged with posting allegedly homophobic and transphobic content online. On Thursday morning, the Crown Office confirmed it had dropped proceedings against Marion Millar, a vocal opponent of the Scottish government’s plans for transgender law reform, before a scheduled hearing next Monday and subject to a review with the alleged victims. Millar, an accountant from Airdrie, had yet to plead, but her defence team, which included SNP MP Joanna Cherry QC, was planning to challenge the prosecution on human rights grounds.”

The next person might not be so “lucky.”

Let’s do everything we can to oppose the bigots who want to censor us and force us to adopt their insane opinions!

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 21:45

Oregon's Far-Left Governor Threatens Lawfare Against ICE Agents

Oregon Governor Tina Kotek (D) has put her state - one of the most progressive in the United States - on a collision course with the Trump administration, threatening to investigate Department of Homeland Security (DHS) personnel and, if necessary, bring state criminal charges against ICE agents for enforcing federal immigration laws.

In a video statement shared to Instagram this week, Kotek accused federal agents of using excessive force and “reckless” tactics that she claimed endanger bystanders and local police. The Oregon governor vowed to monitor ICE operations and treat federal officers the same as any private citizen who violates state law.

        View this post on Instagram                      

A post shared by Governor Tina Kotek (@govtinakotek)

“I believe as you do, in the rule of law and keeping our community safe,” Kotek said. “We also believe in being a welcoming place, where our immigrant and refugee community help our state thrive. The ongoing violent actions of the federal Department of Homeland Security are unacceptable - going after Oregonians, and stoking fear in the name of ‘immigration enforcement.'”

“If a federal officer breaks Oregon law,” she said, “they will be held accountable—just like anyone else,” she added.

Kotek’s opposition to federal authorities bringing law and order to Oregon is nothing new.

During the 2020 Portland unrest, Oregon governor criticized federal agents deployed to protect the federal courthouse, arguing that their presence inflamed rather than calmed the situation and that local authorities should have primary control over street-level order.

For those who view secure borders and consistent enforcement of immigration law as essential to national sovereignty and public order, Kotek’s posture looks like another instance of a progressive state placing ideological commitments above constitutional obligations. The Oregon governor defenders will no doubt frame it as a courageous stand for civil rights and community safety.

Either way, Oregon has now openly declared its willingness to treat federal immigration agents as potential state criminals. If the Kotek administration acts on that threat, the resulting clash will force a federal court—and perhaps the Supreme Court—to remind the states, once again, where the ultimate authority over America’s borders resides.

Kotek is hardly alone among Democratic governors in issuing such threats. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) has gone further, openly suggesting that Trump-administration officials could eventually face prosecution in his state.

“The tables will turn one day,” Pritzker told FOX 32 Chicago last month.

These people should recognize that maybe they’re not gonna get prosecuted today, although we’re looking at doing that, but they may get prosecuted after the Trump administration because the statute of limitations would not have run out.

Pritzker also said he had held discussions with Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul (D) and other attorneys regarding a potential criminal investigation into DHS officials and ICE agents.

"We’re talking to the state’s attorneys and Attorney General to see how they can go at this because what we want to make sure is that they follow the law,” Pritzker said.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 21:20

Trump Gave Maduro A Last Friday Deadline To Step Down As Venezuelan President

Update(2103ET): According to Reuters on Monday night, Maduro told Trump he was prepared to leave Venezuela in last week's recently revealed phone call, but Trump rejected nearly all of his additional conditions - including a demand that Vice President Delcy Rodríguez lead a transitional government before new elections.

Reuters further reports that Trump gave Maduro a deadline of last Friday to depart the country, after which the American leader announced on Saturday that Venezuelan airspace was "closed." 

Things are beginning to move faster, as it looks like Trump plans some kind of significant military action against Caracas, at a moment such a huge Caribbean deployment, including the USS Ford Carrier group, is racking up high bills per day at the expense of the US taxpayer. According to a summary of the latest via Reuters:

• Trump rejected Maduro's requests for amnesty, sanction removal, sources say
• Maduro's safe passage offer expired, prompting US airspace closure, sources say
• Maduro proposed Delcy Rodriguez lead interim government before new elections, sources say
• Maduro's administration seeks another call with Trump, sources say

* * *

A big Washington Post report issued Friday detailed allegations that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave an order to "kill everybody" aboard an alleged drug boat in September.

"Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a spoken directive, according to two people with direct knowledge of the operation," the WaPo report reads. "The order was to kill everybody," it quotes a Pentagon official as saying.

After that, "A missile screamed off the Trinidad coast, striking the vessel and igniting a blaze from bow to stern. For minutes, commanders watched the boat burning on a live drone feed. As the smoke cleared, they got a jolt: Two survivors were clinging to the smoldering wreck."

AFP/Getty Images

From there, Hegseth's 'kill them all' order was followed through with. "The Special Operations commander overseeing the Sept. 2 attack — the opening salvo in the Trump administration’s war on suspected drug traffickers in the Western Hemisphere — ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth’s instructions, two people familiar with the matter said. The two men were blown apart in the water," the Post wrote based on its sources.

President Trump on Sunday addressed the allegations, which the report present as tantamount to 'unlawful orders' and a war crime, as he traveled back to Washington D.C. after the Thanksgiving weekend. Some Congressional leaders, mostly Democrats, have expressed outrage and vowed to look into the apparently standing orders.

Trump in his response declared that he has complete confidence in Hegseth in the top Pentagon post. While Trump said that he personally would have ordered a second strike on the boat, he explained, "I don’t know anything about it. He said he did not say that, and I believe him, 100 percent."

"He said he didn’t do it. He said he never said that," Trump emphasized when asked specifically about the second strike. "He said he didn’t do it, so I don’t have to make that decision." According to more from Trump's response:

“Number one, I don’t know that that happened,” Trump said, when asked whether a hypothetical second strike would be illegal. “And Pete said he did not want them — he didn’t even know what people were talking about. So, we’ll look at, we’ll look into it.”

“But no, I wouldn’t have wanted that, not a second strike,” he continued. “The first strike was very lethal, it was fine, and if there were two people around. But Pete said that didn’t happen. I have great confidence in him.”

A reporter asked the president if he was “saying there’s no second strike.” “I don’t know,” Trump responded. “I’m going to find out about it. But Pete said he did not order the death of those two men.”

Trump was asked "would you be OK if he did do it?"

Reporter: Can you talk a little bit about the strikes and controversy around Hegseth—

Trump: I don’t know anything about it. He said he did not say that.

Reporter: You don’t know if there was a second strike to kill the two men

Trump: He said he didn’t do it

Reporter: Would… pic.twitter.com/JvxUvnaeQJ

— Acyn (@Acyn) November 30, 2025

This is after Hegseth late in the day Friday had blasted the "fake news" Washington Post report, calling the series of strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats "lawful". If Hegseth and Trump as commander-in-chief were to actually say they gave an order to "kill everybody" - such an order could open them up to international legal action related to war crimes, as it would be tantamount to openly admitting to giving orders to pursue extrajudicial killings. This is also given that any survivors of an initial strike would not be a threat, and they would likely be unarmed.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 21:03

A Water War Is Brewing In Texas

Authored by Kurt Cobb via OilPrice.com,

• A hedge-fund-backed plan to pump 15 billion gallons a year from an East Texas aquifer has sparked intense local opposition and legal challenges.

• Growing Texas cities are increasingly tapping distant rural water supplies, accelerating depletion of shared aquifers like the Carrizo-Wilcox.

• Without major conservation efforts, rural communities risk losing water essential for farming and ranching as urban demand continues to climb.

One of the ways you can claim rights to water sources is to own land next to them or over them. It seems intuitive that you should be able to dip into a river running along your property to get a drink for yourself and possibly your livestock, or water for your plants and possibly your farm fields. That works so long as you don't hog too much of the river flow and your downstream neighbors can do the same as you are doing. In practice, there are so many humans today demanding so much water that the amounts each person or enterprise can withdraw are usually regulated by agreement or law.

The same goes for groundwater since aquifers rarely span just one person's property and can be very large, for example, the Ogallala aquifer, which lies below 122 million acres of the U.S. Great Plains.

What is not so intuitive is that water rights can belong to people far from the water itself and that the rights to that water can be traded like any commodity.

That's what residents of the Neches Trinity Valleys Groundwater Conservation District in the middle of East Texas discussed recently and quite heatedly in a public meeting of district officials.

In this community in and around Jacksonville, Texas, about two hours east of Dallas, the residents were discussing permits sought by entities controlled by Dallas-based hedge fund manager Kyle Bass.

Bass's plan is to withdraw about 15 billion gallons annually from the aquifer underneath the district using two properties owned by Bass, one 4,300 acres and another 7,200 acres.

Texas's so-called rule-of-capture water rights allow anyone owning land over an aquifer to withdraw water from it even when this affects other landowners.

(For a primer on the range of water rights in the United States, read more here.)

For now, Bass's plan has been stymied by adverse court rulings that may limit or even prohibit what he proposes to do.

But with huge amounts of money at stake, Bass will almost certainly appeal.

Meanwhile, farmers and ranchers who make up most of those affected worry that their water supplies will be adversely affected and thereby undermine their livelihoods.

The difficult truth for Texas farmers and ranchers is that water under their lands is increasingly seen as a source for the state's growing metropolises. 

Grist reports that the 140-mile Vista Pipeline already moves 16 billion gallons of water per year to San Antonio from the same aquifer Bass wants to tap.

The Carizzo-Wilcox aquifer runs on an angle to the southwest from East Texas to the Rio Grande. The withdrawals have adversely affected water flows from wells near where the pipeline pumps its water supply.

Nearby, Austin is adding to an increasing network of pipes bringing water pumped from adjacent counties.

A logical response might be to say that people should move to where the water is rather than the other way around. But as Marc Reisner, author of the classic study of water in the American West, Cadillac Desert, observed: "Water moves uphill toward money." Reisner was, of course, referring to water that is moved up and over the Tehachapi Mountains on its way to Southern California. But the point is really metaphorical and can be easily generalized.

Grand schemes have been proposed to bring Mississippi River water and water from the Pacific Northwest to the American West.

Neither appears to be practical from an engineering standpoint and would be politically explosive. The timelines for completion of such projects, if they were feasible, would run into the decades.

For America's water-starved areas, that leaves conservation and ever more rapid exploitation of nearby, but dwindling water resources. The farmers and ranchers are right to be worried about their water supplies.

The question is, will those living in the cities seeking that water make the connection between those water resources and the ability to find what they want at reasonable prices at the grocery store, and to visit the verdant rural landscapes when they want to take a trip in the countryside?

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 20:55

Your Health Report Isn't The Final Step - It's A Warning You Can't Ignore

Authored by JoJo Novaes & Arthur Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A 50-year-old man felt completely healthy—no chest pain, no fatigue, no warning signs. So when his routine health checkup revealed an LDL cholesterol level of 231 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL), nearly double the recommended limit, he brushed it aside. After all, he felt fine.

The Epoch Times

However, the numbers told a different story. Reviewing the man’s past reports, Peng-Tzu Liu, deputy director of the Health Management Center at Taiwan’s Shin Kong Wu Ho-Su Memorial Hospital, noticed a steady upward climb: 187 mg/dL in 2022, 191 mg/dL in 2023, and now 231 mg/dL. According to the American Heart Association, healthy adults should keep LDL below 100 mg/dL, while those with cardiovascular disease should aim for 70 mg/dL or lower.

“Had he continued ignoring his results, by around 2030 his cardiovascular system could already be severely damaged,” Liu said on NTD’s “Health 1+1” program, a sister media outlet of The Epoch Times. In other words, a heart attack or stroke waiting to happen—despite feeling perfectly well.

This case, along with others Liu has seen, underscores a critical truth: serious diseases often develop silently, and ignoring abnormal results from a health checkup can allow dangerous conditions to worsen unnoticed.

Sudden Weight Loss–and a Hidden Blood Sugar Crisis

A 60-year-old woman had a similar experience, though in her case the warning sign was more obvious: she suddenly lost 15 pounds in three months. She assumed it was unintentional weight loss and chose to wait until her upcoming annual exam.

Her health report told a more alarming story. Her fasting blood glucose had surged to 279 mg/dL (normal is below 99 mg/dL), and her HbA1c reached 11.6 percent (normal is below 5.7 percent), indicating dangerously uncontrolled diabetes requiring immediate insulin therapy.

Rapid weight loss is not a sign of healthy metabolism, Liu said. When blood sugar remains excessively high, the body cannot use glucose properly; instead, sugar spills into urine, leading to dehydration and unhealthy weight loss.

Her checkup trend chart showed that since 2019, both her blood glucose and HbA1c levels had been steadily rising. However, she had never taken medication consistently, relying instead on exercise and dietary adjustments.

By the time clear symptoms appeared, the damage had already accumulated. After years of unchecked inflammation and elevated sugar levels, insulin could help stabilize her condition, but could no longer fully reverse it.

This case demonstrates that symptoms often appear only when a condition has reached an advanced stage. Liu noted that had the patient begun medication seven years earlier—when her health report first showed warning signs—she likely could have avoided the sharp spike in blood sugar, the rapid weight loss, and the increased risk of long-term complications.

When clear physical abnormalities—such as sudden or unexplained weight loss—occur, Liu urges patients to seek medical attention immediately rather than waiting for the next annual checkup. Those who are uncertain where to start can visit a family medicine or general practice clinic for an initial evaluation and further referral.

Liu said that both cases occurred just a week before his interview, illustrating how often people overlook their test results after a health checkup.

*  *  * 

SiPhox Blood Testing

Separate of this Epoch Times article, you can take testing into your own hands with SiPhox. Try it once or you can subscribe to monitor your Cholesterol, Thyroid, Hormones, and Metabolism. This is a good company with a good product, and your data is secure in a HIPAA compliant portal. 

*  *  *

Why Symptoms Cannot Be Trusted

Both cases highlight a dangerous misconception: the absence of symptoms does not mean the absence of disease. Conditions such as diabetes, high cholesterol, and hypertension often progress quietly for years, causing long-term damage long before patients begin to feel unwell.

For this reason, Liu stresses that health checkups should never be treated as mere formalities—or worse, reports to file away and forget. A checkup is the beginning of preventive care, not the end. Taking action after receiving the report is the most important step in protecting long-term health.

4 Follow-Up Actions After Receiving a Health Report

If your report shows multiple abnormal results, do not panic—or worse, set it aside and forget about it.

Liu shared four practical ways to make the most of your health checkups.

1. Consult a Family Physician

Having a trusted and qualified family physician is crucial for ongoing health management. Many people are unfamiliar with how to interpret their health checkup reports.

Liu recommended sharing the report with a family physician, who can clarify complex data, identify which abnormal results require prompt medical attention, and advise on those that can be improved through lifestyle changes.

2. Seek Timely Referrals When Necessary

Health care providers take patients’ emotional comfort into account and often offer flexible referral options, Liu said.

For example, women who feel embarrassed about undergoing gynecological exams may be given a list of female physicians—or even assistance in scheduling an appointment on the spot—to help prevent unnecessary delays in care.

3. Select Health Screening Items Based on Personal Risk Factors

Health screening items should be selected based on family history and individual risk factors to enable more targeted disease detection. Liu recommended discussing options with a family physician or medical staff at the screening center before the checkup, rather than simply selecting the cheapest or most basic package.

For example, people with a family history of lung cancer or those who smoke regularly should opt for low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) instead of a traditional chest X-ray.

The National Lung Screening Trial—a large randomized controlled trial—found that annual LDCT screening among high-risk people can reduce lung cancer mortality by 20 percent compared with standard chest X-rays.

4. Maintain or Adjust Your Lifestyle Habits

Health checkup results reflect only your current physical condition—but maintaining good health is an ongoing process.

Liu shared a real-life example: A man underwent a health checkup in the morning, and his results came back normal.

Feeling reassured, he went out that evening to celebrate, indulging in a spicy meal and heavy drinking. Later that night, he began vomiting blood and was rushed to the emergency room, where doctors diagnosed a gastric ulcer.

The man protested in disbelief, “That’s impossible—I just had a gastroscopy this morning, and it showed no ulcer!”

Further examination confirmed that the bleeding was caused by his overeating and excessive alcohol consumption.

“The imaging results from a health checkup only reflect your condition at the time of the examination,” Liu said. “They do not guarantee how your health will be tomorrow or in the coming days. If your test results are normal, you need to maintain your current lifestyle habits to keep your health indicators within a healthy range.”

The True Purpose of a Health Checkup

A health checkup is not a certificate of safety. It is an early warning system designed to detect silent health problems—often years before symptoms appear. Its value lies not in the report itself but in what you do afterward: consulting professionals, adjusting habits, and acting before disease becomes irreversible.

“Preventive medicine begins after you receive the report,” Liu said. “The goal is to transform those numbers into a personalized plan that protects your future health.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 20:05

Cocaine Inflation Erupts After U.S. Strikes On Caribbean Drug Boats

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Administrator Terry Cole told CBS News that President Trump's military strikes on suspected drug-running vessels in the Caribbean have helped drive a sharp increase in cocaine prices.

"Cocaine is getting more expensive. And I think what it is — not only more expensive in the U.S., but we're seeing it become more expensive at first stops. So more expensive in Puerto Rico, more expensive in the Dominican, more expensive once it lands in Guatemala and Honduras and Central America," Cole said.

Cole said cocaine prices have surged 30% to 45% per kilogram because the strikes are disrupting the command-and-control networks that move drugs from South and Central America into the U.S. These trafficking pipelines have mainly fueled the nation's deadly drug epidemic, which now claims roughly 100,000 American lives each year.

Nein, das ist kein Ausschnitt aus einem Zombie-Film – das ist in der US-amerikanischen Stadt Philadelphia, wo sich – wie in vielen anderen Städten der USA – eine massive Krise im Zusammenhang mit dem Mißbrauch von Fentanyl ausbreitet. Fentanyl ist ein synthetisches Opioid, das… pic.twitter.com/7cKcukxn5G

— InfraRot _Medien (@Infrarot_Medien) August 14, 2025

Much of the increased cost is now being incurred at transit points, including Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, and Honduras.

He said hiring boat captains, purchasing engines, and building larger transport vessels are also on the rise.

"It's now more expensive to recruit boat captains, it's more expensive to purchase engines, it's more expensive to build larger boats for transportation," he added. "And this is all due to immense pressure."

Democrats and Deep State media outlets have been up in arms about the Trump administration using the military to eliminate Venezuelan drug boats. We wonder why the left is so up in arms about cutting the drug pipelines fueling America's worst-ever drug death crisis.

As for now, Trump's gunboat diplomacy is a foreign-policy strategy to force regime change in Venezuela. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 19:40

Milei Launches 'Isaac Accords' To Expand Israeli Influence In Latin America

Via The Cradle

Argentinian President Javier Milei formally launched the Isaac Accords on Saturday, a new initiative aimed at strengthening political, economic, and cultural cooperation between Israel and Latin America.

Milei announced the initiative following a meeting with Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, who visited Buenos Aires on Saturday as part of a regional diplomatic tour. 

Via Associated Press

The Isaac Accords are being promoted in partnership with Washington and are modeled after the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab countries, including the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco.

Milei said Argentina would serve as a "pioneer" alongside the US to promote the new framework to other Latin American countries, including Uruguay, Panama, and Costa Rica.

Foreign Minister Gideon Saar praised Milei’s love of Judaism and Israel as "sincere, powerful, and moving." Before the meeting began, Milei recited the "Shehecheyanu," a traditional Jewish blessing, and placed a kippah on his head.

"When the president saw me place the kippah on my head to make the blessing, he immediately placed on his own head the kippah he keeps in his office," Saar wrote. 

After his election, Milei "transformed Argentina from a critic of Israel to one of its staunchest supporters," according to the Times of Israel, including announcing plans to move its embassy to occupied Jerusalem.

Though Milei was raised Catholic, he has stated he will convert to Judaism once he leaves office. Argentine officials said that possible joint projects with Israel in the fields of technology, security, and economic development are already under consideration. 

Argentina’s Foreign Minister Pablo Quirno is scheduled to travel to Israel in February for additional talks to advance the initiative.

Argentina's President Javier Milei:

“Israel exemplifies the values that once made the West great.

Supporting Israel means supporting those same principles we abandoned...”

Genocide, ethnic cleansing, racical supremacy, colonisation, apartheid.
pic.twitter.com/VTSUFYvrnJ

— ADAM (@AdameMedia) November 28, 2025

Since coming to power, Milei has opened Argentina’s economy to exploitation by foreign investors, including by evicting Mapuche tribes from their lands in the southern Patagonia region.

Foreign corporations with major investments in the Argentine Patagonia include the Israeli firm Mekorot, the Italian firm Benetton, and investment companies from the UAE, among others.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 19:15

From Matthew Graham at Mortgage News Daily: Mortgage Rates Erase Last Week's Gains

The prevailing trend saw rates hold a narrow, sideways range with the average top tier 30yr fixed rate in the 6.3s. Last week saw that average drop to 6.20% and now today, we're right back up to 6.31%. [30 year fixed 6.31%]
emphasis added

Tuesday:
• All day: Light vehicle sales for November. The consensus is for 15.4 million SAAR in November, up from 15.3 million SAAR in October (Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate).

Musk Hints At 'Galaxy Mind' Venture To Deploy AI Satellites In Deep Space

Elon Musk is hinting at a new venture that could unite his sprawling business empire under a single audacious goal of deploying solar-powered artificial intelligence satellites in deep space.

In a recent interview with investor Nikhil Kamath, the billionaire entrepreneur suggested his three major companies; SpaceX, Tesla and xAI, are moving toward what he described as an "increasingly" overlapping mission.

"I think that there's increasingly a convergence, actually, between SpaceX, Tesla, and xAI, in that if the future is solar-powered AI satellites—which it pretty much needs to be in order to harness a non-trivial amount of the energy of the Sun—you have to move to solar-powered AI satellites in deep space," Musk told Kamath. "That is somewhat a confluence of Tesla expertise, SpaceX expertise, and xAI on the AI front.”

"It does feel like, over time, there's somewhat of a convergence there. But all the companies are doing great things,” he added. "Very proud of the teams that do great work,” he added.

Following the interview, Musk seemingly indicated on X that the convergence could eventually coalesce into an entity he has referred to as "Galaxy Mind," a platform designed to harness solar energy for AI operations beyond Earth's orbit.

Elon Musk in a new interview on which of his businesses he is most excited about:

“Well, I think that there’s increasingly a convergence, actually, between SpaceX, Tesla, and xAI, in that if the future is solar-powered AI satellites—which it pretty much needs to be in order to… pic.twitter.com/oIVN9OEOty

— Nic Cruz Patane (@niccruzpatane) November 30, 2025

Musk’s vision for Galaxy Mind centers on combining SpaceX's launch and spacecraft capabilities with Tesla's solar and battery technology and xAI's frontier artificial intelligence models, which would result in advanced AI systems operating on satellites powered directly by the Sun in deep space that far from Earth's energy constraints.

In a tweet last month, Musk urged job candidates to help build the Library of Alexandria—distributing copies of humanity's knowledge throughout space and across other planets and moons as a hedge against civilizational collapse under the Galaxy Mind venture.

An internet sleuth appears to have found the trademark for both "Galaxy Mind" and "Galactica," with the latter featuring an official logo on file. While Galaxy Mind has been the name teased publicly, trademark filings suggest Galactica may become the formal corporate vehicle for the initiative.

elon trade marked the companies "Galaxy Mind" and "Galactica"

we dont have an official picture of Galaxy Mind right now and one is running, however we have an official picutre of "Galactica" which is most likely gonna be the company name

something like "Glactica: Galaxy Mind"… pic.twitter.com/WbOvyxW8Ux

— joker121 (@painkiller0942) December 1, 2025

The broader vision reflects Musk's pattern of identifying synergies across his portfolio. Tesla's energy division has pioneered high-efficiency solar panels and battery storage systems, while SpaceX has transformed commercial spaceflight and satellite deployment through its Starlink network. Meanwhile, xAI is racing to build competitive large language models capable of operating at scale and achieve AGI abilities, which Musk recently pegged the odds of Grok 5 achieving at "10 percent and rising.”

(h/t Capital News)

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 18:50

Why Trump's Next PR Pivot Must Be Total, Absolute Political Warfare On Socialism

Authored by Scott Pinsker via PJ Media,

"The more successful the villain, the more successful the picture."

- Alfred Hitchcock

AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura

MAGA needs a new common enemy ASAP. Without one, three things will happen before the end of 2026:

1. MAGA infighting will escalate. When conservatives lack a common enemy, we cannibalize our own — and that’s gonna be our fate, because the Groyper/Tucker Carlson “purity test” is incompatible with the rest of the MAGA movement. Which means we’ll be clawing at each other’s throats while the Dems cruise to victory.

2. Our trajectory won’t change without a PR change, and right now we’re headed for a 40+ seat blowout in the House. We lost every meaningful race on Election Day 2025; President Trump’s approval rating has dropped to the mid-30s; and by a 2-to-1 margin, more Americans blame Trump for raising prices than give him credit for lowering them. Ignore these warning signs at your own peril.

3. The Democrats — and their sycophants in the media — will set the PR agenda, and their focus will be on affordability (more specifically, Trump’s failure to lower prices). From the mayoral race in the Big Apple to the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, the common denominator for the Dems was affordability. It’s the one issue that worked for far-left radicals, semi-left radicals, and radicals posing as moderates. And if we know anything about the Democrats, we know they simply can’t resist taking a good idea… and running it into the ground.

(Of course, the Dems also take BAD ideas and run ‘em into the ground, too. It’s what they do.)

Was the Biden administration responsible for runaway inflation? You betcha. Do the American people see it that way? No, they don’t.

We need to change our trajectory, and the quickest way is to cast a new common enemy.

Pinsker’s Law of PR #102: When your current trajectory leads to ruin, don’t be an idiot: Change your trajectory!

If you’re a PJ Media VIP member, this was a topic we discussed yesterday. (And if you’re not a VIP member, shame on you: Our blockbuster Black Friday bonanza ends at midnight.) The question we debated was, “As of today, who’s MAGA’s common enemy?”

Don’t simply say, “It’s the Democrats.” That’s already baked into the cake. In a two-party system, it’s ALWAYS gotta be one or the other.

We need more than that.

Over the past few decades, Republicans have — temporarily, at least — embraced all kinds of different, far-reaching missions. And each mission had at least one great enemy: There was the Cold War mission (bad guys: Russians, commies, and “useful idiots”). There was the Reagan Revolution mission (bad guys: country club Republicans, RINOs, and non-conservatives). There was the post-9/11 mission (bad guys: radical Islam and/or “the Axis of Evil.”). There was the Tea Party mission (bad guys: government waste, bloat, and debt).

Then, of course, came the MAGA mission (bad guys: politicians and policies that put “America Last” instead of “America First”). 

But the MAGA mission has been around for over 10 years now. Donald Trump has either been running for president — or living in the White House — every day since June 16, 2015. And in some ways, he’s a victim of his success. He’s already closed the border, stopped illegal immigration, and reversed countless “America Last” policies.

And today, the globalists are no longer the biggest threat to America’s well-being.

Which is why, as of Dec. 2025, we’re holding casting calls for MAGA’s next Big Bad. If political marketing is the art of strategic storytelling, then selecting our villain is just as important as choosing our hero, because it’s the villain who sets the stakes.

Not the hero.

Strategic storytelling demands it!

(Or, to quote Doctor Who, “You can always judge a man by the quality of his enemies.”)

And the telltale sign of a high-quality political villain is:

1. The contrast is clear, dramatic, and easily understood. Ambiguity must be avoided.

2. It’s something that re-unites our side — but stresses the faultlines of our opponents.

3. It’s gotta be based on something real and tangible. (That’s why the radical left’s “Trump is Hitler” PR campaign fell flat: it’s a fake argument.) And the #1 indicator that it’s a real, tangible issue is when the other side takes the bait and argues back on our terms.

The solution, I believe, is staring us in the face: Donald Trump and the MAGA movement must declare total, absolute political warfare on socialism.

It’ll re-unite our base. From free market-loving Reagan Republicans to Groypers to MAGA, the threat of a socialist takeover supersedes any disputes over Jews, Zionism, Trump, or tariffs. The ethos of capitalism — and rugged, risk-taking individualism — still resonates across the GOP.

Capitalism vs. socialism is a winning issue for Republicans.

It’ll fracture the Democratic Party, because not all Democrats want to be socialists. (At least, not yet.) They might want MORE socialism, but they don’t want the government to seize their personal property and “socialize” their industries.

(Especially the corporate kingpins who pull the DNC’s strings. They’re paying big bucks for crony capitalism and sweetheart deals — not a government takeover!)

And just as importantly, leftists won’t be able to resist taking the bait. It’s not gonna be like their dopey “Trump is Hitler” PR campaign, where Republicans rolled their eyes and mocked the absurdity of the allegations. 

The socialists in the Democratic Party will 100% engage with us!

I mean… have you ever met a socialist?! Their favorite thing in the whole wide world is arguing about socialism. They WANT To have this debate!

They’re DESPERATE to have this debate!

Zohran Mamdani, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders (and so on) aren’t gonna shake their head and say, “That’s just crazy — we believe in free markets, limited government, and private property, too.”

Instead, the opposite is true: With very little pushing, they’ll make our argument for us.

Besides, socialism is un-American. It’s theft. Socialism necessitates the government takeover of wealth, private property, industry, and opportunity. You don’t own anything; it’s all controlled by the big, powerful government.

But right now, socialism is ascending. Its popularity is on the rise — mostly because socialism has positioned itself as a solution to the affordability crisis — and the danger is snowballing.

From Rasmussen Reports: “Democratic Socialism 2028? Most Young Voters Say ‘Yes’”

A majority of voters under 40 want a democratic socialist to win the White House in the next presidential election.

A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports and the Glenn C. Haskins Emerging Issues Center of the Heartland Institute finds that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters ages 18 to 39 would like to see a democratic socialist candidate win the 2028 presidential election. Thirty-six percent (36%) don’t want a democratic socialist to win in 2028, while 17% are not sure.

It’s a helluva storyline: A generational divide! A plot to steal private property! A high-stakes battle for the soul of our country!

The radical left is on the side of big government. And the only thing standing in their way is Donald Trump, the MAGA movement, and the Republican Party.

Pick a side, ladies and gentlemen: Gotta be one or the other.

It’s the smartest PR pivot that MAGA could make.

The opinions of the author do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 18:25

US Navy Drops Constellation-Class Frigate Program

Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Navy is pulling the plug on a new series of Constellation-class frigates, although construction will continue on the first two ships in the program.

Secretary of the Navy John C. Phelan announced his decision to cancel the program in a video message on Nov. 25.

“My job as secretary of the Navy is to be a responsible steward of the trust and resources the American people place in us, delivering modern, lethal, and reliable platforms that strengthen readiness and give our war fighters every advantage to deter, fight, and win,” Phelan said.

The move comes as the U.S. Navy’s shipbuilding efforts are falling behind China’s.

According to a March congressional report, the size of the U.S. fleet has ranged between 270 and 300 battle force ships since the early 2000s, despite a force-structure goal that calls for 355 battle force ships. China’s navy, by contrast, is expected to reach 395 ships by the end of 2025.

Phelan said the decision to cancel the Constellation-class frigates will be his first major public action to reshape the Department of the Navy.

Frigates are generally considered the smallest surface combatants, behind the medium-sized destroyers and larger cruisers.

Plans for the Constellation-class guided-missile frigate called for a warship with 32 vertical launch systems, capable of firing a variety of missiles, including Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles and air-defense missiles. These frigates would also be equipped with 16 additional missile launch canisters.

Fincantieri Marinette Marine won the contract to design and build the Constellation-class frigates in 2020.

The Navy originally planned for 20 ships in the Constellation frigate program. Before the cancellation decision, the service had six frigates under contract, with two under construction.

Phelan said the Navy had reached an agreement with industry partners to cancel four Constellation-class frigates that had not yet begun construction. Construction on the first two ships in the class will continue, for now.

“We greatly value the shipbuilders of Wisconsin and Michigan,” the Navy secretary said. “While work continues on the first two ships, those ships remain under review as we work through this strategic shift. Keeping this critical workforce employed and the yard viable for future Navy shipbuilding is of foremost concern.”

In a statement addressing the changes to the Constellation-class frigate program, Fincantieri said it is expecting new shipbuilding orders from the Navy, guaranteeing work for Fincantieri employees.

“Entering into the future and in alignment with the Group’s industrial capabilities and potential, Fincantieri will support the U.S. Navy, as it redefines strategic choices in the Small Surface Combatants segment, manned or unmanned,” the shipbuilder said.

John Phelan at a Senate Armed Services confirmation hearing in Washington on Feb. 27, 2025. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Frigate Program Faced Growing Concerns

In his video address announcing the decision, Phelan did not offer a specific reason why the Navy is canceling the Constellation-class frigate program. However, the program had faced mounting concerns over costs, construction delays, and whether the final product would be the right design.

A March report by the Congressional Research Service noted that the first frigate of the class, to be named USS Constellation, already faced an estimated three-year delay.

The design for the Constellation-class was based on an earlier design Fincantieri had prepared for European navies, known as the Frigate European Multi-Mission (FREMM) design. The March congressional report noted the Constellation-class design at one point had 85 percent commonality with the FREMM parent design but that alterations to the Constellation design had reduced that commonality to less than 15 percent.

Congressional researchers also highlighted disagreements over the number of vertical launch missile silos the new frigates would carry.

The March report noted that the original plan for the new frigates calls for a ship that’s about three-quarters of the size of the current Arleigh-Burke class guided-missile destroyers, while only carrying about a third as many missile silos as the destroyers. On the other hand, the March report noted that concepts for expanding the number of missile silos on the frigates from 32 to 48 would increase the cost per ship by between 1.3 and 2.2 percent.

Other shipbuilding projects have challenged the Navy in recent years.

In the 1990s, the Navy began pursuing a new class of stealthy destroyers, eventually settling on the Zumwalt-class destroyer. The program was originally set to include 32 ships, but the Navy truncated the class to just three ships in 2008, amid ballooning cost projections.

Crew members of the USS Sioux City, a Freedom-class littoral combat ship, gather before the ship's commissioning ceremony at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., on Nov. 17, 2018. Patrick Semansky, File/AP Photo

The Navy also began a Littoral Combat Ship program in the 2000s, based on two different designs, known respectively as Freedom-class and Independence-class vessels. A 2019 Congressional Research Service report noted that the littoral combat ship program has been troubled by cost overruns, design and construction issues, and questions about the survivability of the vessels in a combat scenario.

Although the first Littoral Combat Ships began construction in 2005, several have already entered early retirement.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 17:40

Luigi Mangione's Lawyers Are Trying To Get His Case Thrown Out

Luigi Mangione, accused of shooting UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson outside a Manhattan hotel last December, is entering a crucial week-long pretrial hearing in New York state court.

The hearing will focus on whether the evidence collected against him was obtained legally and if his statements to police violated his constitutional rights.

Mangione’s defense is pushing hard to have key evidence, including a red notebook described by authorities as a "manifesto," tossed out, arguing the items were seized after an illegal search and that he was interrogated without Miranda warnings.

“The hearing could last at least a week. Marc Agnifilo, one of Mangione’s attorneys, said he expects prosecutors to call as many as 28 witnesses — including some from Altoona, Pennsylvania, where Mangione was apprehended last December at a McDonald’s restaurant days after the shooting,” reports NBC News.

“The proceedings are set to be divided into two sections. Both will focus on whether any evidence or statements were obtained illegally and should be excluded from trial.”

Judge Gregory Carro is overseeing the two-stage pretrial process: 

• In the first part, known as a Mapp hearing, Carro will hear testimony and arguments before deciding whether the police had a legal right to obtain physical evidence.

• In the second, known as a Huntley hearing, Carro will review evidence before ruling whether statements Mangione made to law enforcement were coerced or obtained in violation of his rights.

Carro’s rulings will determine the extent of evidence the prosecution can present at trial, and could potentially make or break the case against Mangione.

Karen Agnifilo, another Mangione attorney, said the defense is not expecting a third section known as a Mosley hearing, which focuses on whether a non-eyewitness can testify about whether a person in a video or photo is Mangione.

Mangione has pleaded not guilty to nine state charges and four separate federal counts, the latter carrying the possibility of the death penalty.

The defense claims police conducted a warrantless search of Mangione's backpack at a McDonald's in Altoona, Pennsylvania, where he was arrested days after the shooting. 

They argue this search violated the Fourth Amendment, making any evidence recovered—including a 3D-printed ghost gun, fake IDs, ammunition, and his writings—inadmissible.

They also contend that officers failed to promptly read Mangione his Miranda rights, questioned him without informing him of his right to remain silent, and thereby violated his Fifth Amendment protections. The defense attorney Karen Agnifolo stressed the prejudice caused by the "manifesto" label and improper police procedures in detaining and interrogating Mangione.

“Law enforcement has methodically and purposefully trampled his constitutional rights by interrogating him without Miranda warnings in violation of the Fifth Amendment and illegally searching his property without a warrant in violation of the Fourth Amendment,” Agnifilo claimed in a statement.

Prosecutors claim Mangione planned the attack by traveling to New York, stalking Thompson, and killing him. Ammunition at the scene was engraved with words like “delay,” “deny,” and “depose,” reflecting grievances against the healthcare industry found in Mangione’s writings. Surveillance footage, including a viral shooting video, captured Mangione’s movements before and after the assassination. The prosecution intends to use this evidence to secure a conviction in what is expected to be a high-profile trial.

Mangione became something of a celebrity on the political left after his capture. Saturday Night Live’s audience even applauded at the mere mention of him. Back in February, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins casually shared Mangione’s legal defense site on social media. In June, a musical about Mangione opened in San Francisco.

The coming days will reveal whether prosecutors can keep their case intact or whether the defense’s sweeping claims of constitutional abuse gain traction, but the stakes stretch far beyond the courtroom.

The hearings will show if a man embraced by the left will be held accountable for the execution-style killing that stunned the country last year.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 17:20

Did A German Court Just Shatter One Of The Biden Era's Biggest Lies

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

Below is my column in The Hill on the latest development in the investigation of the environmental crimes committed in the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines in the waters near Denmark and Sweden in 2022. The German court issued an arrest warrant for a Ukrainian in a move that could prove an embarrassment for not just Volodymyr Zelensky but Joe Biden. The truth is still unknown with allegations against both Russia and Ukraine. There are “false flags” flying on both sides that dismiss clues pointing to one country or the other. However, the Germans appear to be zeroing in on key Ukrainian figures.

It is often said that “the first casualty when war comes is truth.” A criminal warrant just issued in Germany shows that war continues to claim its victims. However, this warrant could prove to be as great an indictment not just of the government of Volodymyr Zelensky, but also of former President Joe Biden.

This week, a German court issued an arrest warrant for Ukrainian Serhii Kuznietsov, which may finally confirm what was long suspected: that Ukraine was responsible for the 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines in the waters near Denmark and Sweden.

The Biden administration may have been given prior warning. It was allegedly told years ago by a Ukrainian whistleblower that a six-person team of Ukrainian special forces was planning to rent a boat, dive to the sea floor and blow up the Nord Stream project. The operation was reportedly led by Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi, commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces.

Nevertheless, after the attack, the Biden administration and many in the media fueled speculation that Russia had destroyed its own pipeline, despite evidence and logic to the contrary.

It was another convenient claim of a Russian false-flag operation that allowed the Biden administration to ignore the possibility that Ukraine had not only engaged in environmental crimes but had also knowingly lied to its allies.

For years, some of us have questioned the official account from the Biden administration about the available evidence of those responsible.

The suggestion of a Russian attack on a Russian pipeline never seemed logical.

However, the administration was funneling billions in support for Ukraine, funding that now exceeds an estimated $180 billion.

Having Ukraine sabotage pipelines to our allies would hardly be opportune when many were questioning the costs to U.S. citizens.

The Biden administration was not alone in running interference for Ukraine, as Zelensky denied responsibility despite mounting evidence to the contrary. When another alleged Ukrainian saboteur was found in Poland, a Polish court blocked the extradition to Germany and ordered his release. The reason? The judge did not base the decision on Ukrainian denials. Instead, he declared that the act had been committed in the name of a just war. (Poland remains the frontline against Russian aggression in Europe).

An Italian court did not engage in such rationalization. It ordered the extradition of Kuznietsov, believed to be a key figure in the conspiracy. The attack involved leasing a yacht in the German port of Rostock, using forged IDs and a screen of intermediaries. Kuznietsov insists that he was an army captain serving in Ukraine at the time.

If the investigators are correct, it was not just the Ukrainian government that was lying to us. Biden was also presumably informed by the intelligence agencies of this evidence. Yet Biden kept suggesting anyway that the Russians were covering up the truth. He told the public, “The Russians are pumping out disinformation and lies. We will work with our allies to get to the bottom [of precisely what happened] Just don’t listen to what Putin’s saying. What he’s saying we know is not true.”

Ironically, even if we were told about this evidence, the public might still have supported the commitment to Ukraine. After all, Ukraine is the victim of a horrendous invasion that has involved repeated charges of war crimes against the Russian forces. However, the public has a legitimate expectation that a country that is receiving billions in support will not engage in environmental attacks on our allies. These pipelines were in the economic zone of two NATO countries.

As the Germans work to find the truth, the question is whether the American public will ever be given transparency on our own government’s alleged complicity or knowledge. The public was asked to pump billions into a war while the administration allegedly covered up an attack by Ukraine on a Western pipeline — and then may have misled the public.

The public also has a right to know if the CIA was told in advance that this attack was coming and either gave tacit approval or said nothing to our allies.

While Johnson is often quoted on his 1929 line about truth in war, the line following was equally poignant: “this mode of propaganda whereby … people become war hungry in their patriotism and are lied into a desire to fight. We have seen it in the past; it will happen again in the future.”

It may have happened in the U.S., and truth was not the only casualty. The American people were treated as chumps who could not handle the truth.

*  *  *

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/01/2025 - 17:00