Zero Hedge

Maryland Democrats Pass "Sleep Tax" - Is A Thinking Tax Next?

Maryland Democrats Pass "Sleep Tax" - Is A Thinking Tax Next?

Maryland lawmakers are scrambling to address a staggering $3.3 billion budget shortfall.

To close the gap, far-left Governor Wes Moore and activist Democrats have proposed a wave of tax hikes that would hit Marylanders' wallets the hardest amid a deepening affordability crisis. 

With power bills already skyrocketing to record highs for many folks due to backfiring and disastrous green energy policies, these same progressive lawmakers are creating even more nightmares for taxpayers—this time by proposing a tax that effectively targets sleep.

A small but vocal group of conservative Republicans in the Maryland House of Delegates were stunned on Friday when far-left Democrats pushed through HB 858—a bill that establishes a mattress stewardship program under the guise of promoting safe disposal and recycling. This is another tax on Marylanders as the state sinks into financial turmoil and elevated credit downgrade risks. The new 6% tax on mattresses is on top of the existing 6% sales tax. 

Del. Mark N. Fisher (R-Calvert), one of the leaders of the Maryland House Freedom Caucus, blasted the "Sleep Tax" and asked if there would be a "snoring surcharge."

Torrey Snow of WBAL Radio said this about the ridiculous tax passed on sleep...

Meanwhile...

Also, Moody's Ratings recently warned that Maryland—a state heavily dependent on the federal government—faces heightened recession risk in the era of DOGE-related cuts. The warning comes amid a twin crisis: a ballooning state deficit and a power bill crisis. 

If far-left Gov. Moore and Democrats are willing to tax Marylanders' sleep, these woke activists could easily push another bill to tax thinking. 

Maryland Dems...

It's time for common sense to re-enter Maryland politics after decades of Democrats torpedoing the state to the brink of financial crisis. Perhaps the Maryland House Freedom Caucus will be those heroes needed to rescue the imploding state.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 15:45

Rep. Masssie Pushes For Nationwide Right To Carry Firearms Without Permit

Rep. Masssie Pushes For Nationwide Right To Carry Firearms Without Permit

Authored by José Niño via Headline USA,

Earlier this week, the House Judiciary Committee passed a bill HR 38, a bill that allows licensed concealed firearm holders to carry in other states that allow concealed carry. 

However, for Rep. Thomas Massie, R-KY, this bill does not go far enough. On X, he said “ I support this bill, but there is a better option, and it is National Constitutional Carry.” 

He added, “29 states already have Constitutional (i.e. permitless) Carry. Why not extend it to all 50 states?” 

Constitutional carry is the simple concept that any lawful individual can carry a firearm without having to ask the government for permission.

Under HR 38, Massie noted that residents of constitutional carry states can carry firearms in any state that issues permits to its citizens. The recent Bruen Supreme Court decision requires all non-constitutional carry states to issue carry permits.

Massie highlighted how when HR 38 passes, residents of the 29 constitutional carry states will be able to carry in all 50 states without a permit. Though paradoxically, residents of the 21 states without constitutional carry will need permits in their own states, while visitors from constitutional carry states won’t.

In the Kentucky congressman’s view, if Congress can mandate California to allow permit-less carry for out-of-state visitors based on the Second Amendment, it only makes sense to extend this right to California residents as well. 

Massie posed the following question: “Why not pass national constitutional carry and afford everyone in the United States the right to ‘bear arms’ which is enshrined in the Constitution?”

He also called attention to how HR 38 may create a situation where a Kentucky resident could carry an AR-15 pistol with a 20-round magazine in California, while Californians themselves cannot own or carry such equipment. This appears to contradict the framework established by the Supreme Court decision in DC v. Heller.

In contrast, Massie’s proposed national constitutional carry bill stipulates that if a state allows possession of a particular firearm, it must also allow the carry of said firearm.

He introduced this bill as a substitute amendment to HR 38 in committee but withdrew it to avoid forcing his colleagues to choose between National Reciprocity and National Constitutional Carry. The current consensus is that HR 38 can pass the House, while Constitutional Carry may not have sufficient support.

Pro-gun organizations such as the National Association for Gun Rights are firmly behind Massie’s Constitutional Carry bill. NAGR President Dudley Brown tweeted, “Massie’s bill is INFINITELY better than *smirk* John Cornyn’s.”

Massie’s bill is INFINITELY better than *smirk* John Cornyn’s.

Headline USA reached out to Brown, who said the following about Massie’s bill: 

“Massie’s Real Constitutional Carry law skips all the big-brother-may-I requirements and assumes citizens are law-abiding.  National reciprocity is a half measure compromise, as evidenced by the Senate sponsor, Sen John Cornyn.”

HR 38 was introduced by Rep. Richard Hudson, R-NC, and currently has 178 co-sponsors.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 12:50

These Are The Best States For House Flipping

These Are The Best States For House Flipping

A new study ranks the best states for house flipping, using data on sale prices, remodeling costs, sales volume, and time on market. By standardizing these metrics into a single House Flipping Score, the study identifies where flipping is most profitable—higher scores mean better conditions for flippers.

Vermont tops the list of best states for house flipping with a score of 99, thanks to fast sales (32 days on market) and high transaction volume. Maine follows with a score of 95, offering the lowest remodeling costs ($27,486) among top states and similarly quick sales, the study from Badeloft shows.

New Hampshire ranks third (score: 93), combining low renovation costs with high average sale prices ($462,492). Delaware takes fourth (score: 86) with moderate remodeling expenses and solid sales volume.

Rhode Island (score: 85) has the second-fastest market (under 28 days) and low renovation expenses. Hawaii places sixth (score: 83), driven by the highest sale prices nationwide ($829,941).

Connecticut (score: 79) has the shortest time on market—just 27 days—and solid resale value. Virginia (score: 76) offers decent profits with moderate remodeling costs. North Carolina (score: 74) boasts the most active housing market among top states.

Massachusetts rounds out the top ten (score: 71) with high property values ($605,614) and a market time of 36 days.

Virginia is ranked eighth for house flipping potential, achieving a score of 76. Home improvement projects here generally require an investment of $39,215, with investors able to sell properties for an average of $382,930.

Finally, North Carolina is positioned ninth on the list of best states for house flipping, achieving a score of 74. The state features the most active housing market among the top-ranking states, with 6,649 houses sold per 100,000 residents.

A Badeloft study spokesperson said: “House flipping proves to be a profitable endeavor in many states, particularly those where the cost of remodeling is relatively low, and the potential for high sale prices is strong. It’s important to consider that prioritizing premium quality renovations is essential to maximizing the property’s value and securing a profitable return."

"Carefully selected and stylish furnishings that complement these renovations can further enhance the home’s appeal, making it even more marketable and increasing its overall value”.

The full study data can be found here. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 12:15

Trump Puts The System On Trial

Trump Puts The System On Trial

Authored by Waters and Ellwanger via RealClearWorld,

President Trump’s supporters have denounced the federal judges seeking to stall or stop this administration’s government overhaul. But there is at least one person who, despite a show of outrage and condemnation, is neither surprised nor intimidated: Trump himself.

The politically appointed judges have ordered, among other actions, that federal agencies reinstate thousands of fired probationary employees; that billions of taxpayer dollars be paid to questionable USAID projects and contractors; and that foreign-born criminals deported to their native countries be returned and granted due process. Regardless of the legal merits, the American people recognize these orders as obstructions to what Trump said he would do if elected, and what voters elected him to do. Yet the judges’ resistance is expected—they’re bound up in and rewarded by the system Trump seeks to reform.

Two-thirds of Americans believe the “system” is broken, but for years progressive politicians and their mouthpieces posited that the system couldn’t be fixed. Intellectuals on the Left, including New York Times columnist David Brooks, said America’s flaws were “systemic” in nature: systemic racism, systemic sexism, and systemic injustice. They whined and preached but offered no solutions for the millions of Americans of all races and both genders struggling and failing to unlock their potential to succeed.

When Trump announced his candidacy for president in 2015, he too claimed the system was broken, but not because we are racist or sexist by nature, but because the system itself is old, soft, and corrupt, with leaders grown unresponsive to the people they are supposed to serve. That core belief guided his first term and remains unchanged at the start of his second.    

For decades, politicians failed to respond to real problems because their agendas, even their identities, were phony, crafted by consultants and pollsters who aimed not for the truth, but for whichever lies or provocations were most efficacious in winning the next election. But one need not resort to craven and conspiratorial explanations of this sort, which hint that elected officials deliberately ignore the public will. The truth is simpler. They have to ignore voters, if only because they have no idea how to fix the problems we face.

*  *  *

On Sale! Grab a complete 2-day emergency survival backpack at ZH Store

Click pic... add to cart (one for each car & your go-bag storage)... be more prepared. Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.

In one sense, the elites’ ineptitude is understandable: we have a highly complex society that has undergone a recent, rapid, destabilization brought on by technological advance. But to admit that they simply don’t know how to address any contemporary issue would be to concede that it is only their mere status as “elites” that qualifies them to rule. Thus, to conceal their befuddlement, they explain their inaction by a vague demand that we address the “root causes” of every issue – which further justifies them in doing nothing.

The bad faith inherent to the “root causes” strategy was nowhere more obvious than at the border. For years, establishment voices told us that border security measures would fail without addressing the “root causes” of the problem: central American poverty and climate change. These appeals allowed the political class to avoid doing what they didn’t want to do (securing the border) and to manufacture a duty to do the things they did want to do (diverting American revenue to foreign aid “relief programs” and enacting more restrictive environmental policies). Aside from those interventions, they assured us, there was nothing we could do about the illegal immigration crisis.

But as it often happens, Trump called their bluff. Somehow, he managed to end the flood of illegal crossings within weeks of taking office. And contrary to the best wisdom of the “experts,” it didn’t require a grand congressional bargain like the betrayal that Sen. Lankford (R-OK) offered as a solution. Nor did it require a new climate deal. We didn’t have to make Honduras great again to stop the caravans. No – as it turned out, the answer was staring us in the face. The solution was one that could be intuited by any American voter: just secure the border. Only a class as feckless and clueless as our politicians couldn’t grasp this. But Trump understood it. And Americans see that.

Barring any real action to improve the lot of regular Americans, the lost and divided Democrats cast about for a “message” and a “messenger” to improve their chances in the next election. They believe a magic word or slogan (“nazis,” “oligarchs,” “authoritarians,” and “autocrats” all have been tried and failed), rather than concrete beliefs and plans, will “meet this moment” and win over American voters. But voters know the Democratic Party lacks anything affirmative or real.

Politicians will never make America great again, Trump said at his campaign kick-off in 2015. “They’re controlled fully by the lobbyists, by the donors, and by the special interests. “[And] it’s destroying our country.” Unlike Bush, Obama, and Biden, Trump spoke to what people felt in the Rust Belt and the Bible Belt and the Farm Belt. He looked into the vast interior of the country and understood what many Americans knew all too well: that working hard and playing by the rules no longer guaranteed their children would be better off than they had been. 

Speaking about politicians in 2015, Trump said: “I hear their speeches. They don’t talk jobs. [They] have no competence. [They] don’t know what’s happening.” His message of “America First” was clear and authentic, and it implied real action and solid outcomes: protect jobs, livelihoods, and futures of Americans. The hapless politicians had nothing to counter.

“The Resistance” to the first Trump administration was advanced by the machinations of bureaucrats in the vast regulatory state. But with the president rapidly dismantling that apparatus, a new strategy was needed. For the Resistance 2.0, it seems the establishment will depend on the courts to thwart the democratically-expressed will of the people. But there is a higher court in this land, where American voters serve as judge, jury, and executor.

Earlier this month at the Department of Justice, Trump warned of the “violent, vicious lawyers” who persecute the president and bully the American public to get their way. Expect these lawyers to “play the ref,” Trump said, weaving in a story about former Indiana University basketball coach Bobby Knight, who once threw a chair across the court and screamed like a madman at the referees for a call to be overturned. The referee wasn’t going to change the first call, Trump said of Knight’s rationale for throwing the tantrum. “But he’s going to change for the next play. And sure as hell, he did.” Trump understands that activist lawyers and progressive pundits will put heat on the judiciary, and that, on occasion, they’ll get their way.

For 10 years, Trump has confronted the political class, calling out their incompetence and dishonesty, and the voters continue to reward him. Federal judges, egged on by the politically-motivated legal establishment, may try to frustrate the president in his pursuit of long-held promises to build a better country. But Trump is building his case outside the courts – and he’s betting on a sympathetic hearing with the American people, who will note the overt evidence of bias, corruption, and incompetence, whether it occurs in the media, executive branch, or the judiciary. Judges will rule on procedure and technicalities, but the people will evaluate the legitimacy of our institutions and credibility of our leaders.

In 2028, the jury will render its verdict.

John J. Waters is a lawyer. He served as a deputy assistant secretary of Homeland Security from 2020-21. Follow him at @JohnJWaters1 on X. 

Adam Ellwanger is a professor at University of Houston – Downtown, where he teaches rhetoric and writing. Follow him at @1HereticalTruth on X.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 11:40

Scott Jennings To CNN Panel: Democrats Morphed Into Angry Mob Cheering Violence & Chaos

Scott Jennings To CNN Panel: Democrats Morphed Into Angry Mob Cheering Violence & Chaos

Following sleazy Democratic Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett's disheartening remarks about the Texas Governor's wheelchair-bound condition, GOP analyst Scott Jennings offered some words of advice to the far-left-leaning panel during Tuesday's edition of CNN NewsNight: 

I don't know how Democrats appointed Jasmine Crockett as the unquestioned leader of your party, but thank God.

And I think what she should do is go on TV twice as much - maybe three times as much - because everytime she appears - makes these mistakes - says something radical - it only further divides her party from the other 80% of America who can't stand this - but the problem is - there's an audience for this.

I heard Jimmy Kimmel's audience cheering on Tesla vandalism; I hear that The Daily Show's audience on a tax on Elon Musk; I hear the Human Right's audience cheering on an attack on a man in a wheelchair.

And I realize this is what the left has become: an angry mob of people who are cheering on attacks on a guy in a wheelchair and vandalism against people who bought a Tesla ... it's pathetic.

On X, Jennings wrote that Crockett "will learn no lessons from the "Hot Wheels" episode because the Left's angry mobs eat this stuff up," adding, "Trust me: the unquestioned head of the Democratic Party thinks is a winning vector." 

Jennings is entirely correct: The far-left has chosen the path of hate and violence, while the latest polling data from NBC News and CNN shows the party has hit its lowest approval ratings on record: 27% and 29%, respectively.

Democrats believe communist revolutionary tactics of firebombing Tesla showrooms and cars are socially acceptable in the era of Trump's law and order to win back votes - yet the imploding party is oblivious and tone deaf that the Overton Window shifted last year - and BLM-style color revolutions are no longer socially acceptable.

*  *  *

Are you Colostrum-pilled yet? Make sure you have the highest IgG (Immunoglobulin) % available...

Click pic, add to cart - grab 2 for 5% off and free shipping, 3 for 10% off

Colostrum and its benefits: a review (Science Direct)

Bovine Colostrum and Its Potential for Human Health and Nutrition (NCBI)

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 11:05

Ultra-Processed Life

Ultra-Processed Life

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Consuming more of this Ultra-Processed World is not a path to "the good life," it's a path to the destruction and derangement of an Ultra-Processed Life.

The digital realm, finance, and junk food have something in common: they're all ultra-processed, synthetic versions of Nature that have been designed to be compellingly addictive, to the detriment of our health and quality of life.

In focusing on the digital realm, money (i.e. finance, "growth," consuming more as the measure of all that is good) and eating more of what tastes good, we now have an Ultra-Processed Life. All three-- the digital realm, money in all its manifestations and junk food--are all consumed: they all taste good, i.e. generate endorphin hits, and so they draw us into their synthetic Ultra-Processed World.

We're so busy consuming that we don't realize they're consuming us: in focusing on producing and consuming more goods and services as the sole measure of "the good life," it's never enough: if we pile up $1 million, we focus on piling up $2 million. If we pile up $2 million, we focus on accumulating $3 million. And so on, in every manifestation of money and consumption.

The digital realm consumes our lives one minute and one hour at a time, for every minute spent focusing on a screen is a minute taken from the real world, which is the only true measure of the quality of our life.

Ultra-processed food is edible, but it isn't nutritious. It tastes good, but it harms us in complex ways we don't fully understand.

This is the core dynamic of the synthetic "products and services" that dominate modern life: the harm they unleash is hidden beneath a constant flow of endorphin hits, distractions, addictive media and unfilled hunger for all that is lacking in our synthetic Ultra-Processed World: a sense of security, a sense of control, a sense of being grounded, and the absence of a hunger to find synthetic comforts in a world stripped of natural comforts.

In effect, we're hungry ghosts in this Ultra-Processed World, unable to satisfy our authentic needs in a synthetic world of artifice and inauthenticity. The more we consume, the hungrier we become for what is unavailable in an Ultra-Processed Life.

We're told there's no upper limit on "growth" of GDP, wealth, abundance, finance or consumption, but this is a form of insanity, for none of this "growth" addresses what's lacking and what's broken in our lives, the derangements generated by consuming (and being consumed by) highly profitable synthetic versions of the real world.

Insanity is often described as doing the same thing and expecting a different result. So our financial system inflates yet another credit-asset bubble and we expect that this bubble won't pop, laying waste to everyone who believed that doing the same thing would magically generate a different result.

But there is another form of insanity that's easily confused with denial: we are blind to the artificial nature of this Ultra-Processed World and blind to its causal mechanisms: there is only one possible output of this synthetic version of Nature, and that output is a complex tangle of derangements that we seek to resolve by dulling the pain of living a deranged life.

We're not in denial; we literally don't see our Ultra-Processed World for what it is: a manufactured mirror world of commoditized derangements and distortions that have consumed us so completely that we've lost the ability to see what's been lost.

Ultra-processed snacks offer the perfect metaphor. We can't stop consuming more, yet the more we consume the greater the damage to our health. The worse we feel, the more we eat to distract ourselves, to get that comforting endorphin hit. It's a feedback loop that ends in the destruction of our health and life.

Once we've been consumed by money, the digital realm and ultra-processed foods, we've lost the taste for the real world. A fresh raw carrot is sweet, but once we're consuming a diet of sugary cold cereals and other equivalents of candy, we no longer taste the natural sweetness of a carrot; it's been lost in the rush of synthetic extremes of salt, sugar and fat that make ultra-processed foods so addictive. To recover the taste of real food, we first have to completely abandon ultra-processed foods-- Go Cold Turkey.

The idea that we can consume junk food and maintain the taste for real food in some sort of balance is delusional, for the reasons stated above: junk food destroys our taste for real food and its artificially generated addictive qualities will overwhelm our plan to "eat healthy" half the time.

Just as there is no "balance" between ultra-processed food and real food, there is no balance between the synthetic Ultra-Processed World and the real world. We choose one or the other, either by default or by design.

Credit--borrowing money created out of thin air--is the financial equivalent of ultra-processed food. The machinery that spews out the addictive glop is complicated: in the "food" factory, real ingredients are processed into addictive snacks. In finance, reverse repos, swaps, derivatives, mortgages, etc. generate a highly addictive financial product: credit.

Just as with ultra-processed food, the more credit we consume, the more it consumes us. I owe, I owe, so off to work I go.

The derangements of synthetic food, digital realms and finance have yet to fully play out. Consuming more of this Ultra-Processed World is not a path to "the good life," it's a path to the destruction and derangement of an Ultra-Processed Life.

*  *  *

Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com.  Subscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 10:30

"Content Agnostic": EU Official Denies Anti-Free Speech Policies In Bizarre Letter To Congress

"Content Agnostic": EU Official Denies Anti-Free Speech Policies In Bizarre Letter To Congress

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

After returning recently from speaking at the World Forum in Berlin, I testified in the Senate Judiciary Committee and warned about the building threat to free speech from the use of the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA). House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan has taken up the issue and received a letter from the EU’s Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Henna Virkkunen. The letter is both evasive and deceptive.

In my book, The Indispensable Right, I detail how the DSA has been used to allow for sweeping speech investigations and prosecutions. In direct contradiction to past statements by the EU, Virkkunen denied any effort to regulate speech or enforce the DSA outside of Europe.

What is particularly maddening is the false claim that the EU remains “deeply committed to protecting and promoting free speech.” Many in the free speech community view the EU and the DSA as the greatest threats to free speech in the West.

In his letter, Jordan correctly raised the concern that the DSA could “limit or restrict Americans” constitutionally protected speech in the United States by compelling platforms to crack down on what the EU considers “misleading or deceptive” speech.

In her response, Virkkunen bizarrely describes the DSA as “content-agnostic” while insisting that the DSA “applies exclusively within the European Union.”

That is not what EU officials previously said or what the law itself allows. Articles 34 and 35 of the DSA require all sites to identify, assess, and mitigate “systemic risks” posed by content, including any threats to “civic discourse”, “electoral processes,” and “public health.” It is up to the EU to define and judge such categories in terms of compliance.

The act bars speech that is viewed as “disinformation” or “incitement.” European Commission Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager celebrated its passage by declaring that it is “not a slogan anymore, that what is illegal offline should also be seen and dealt with as illegal online. Now it is a real thing. Democracy’s back.”

Some in this country have turned to the EU to force the censorship of their fellow citizens. After Elon Musk bought Twitter and dismantled most of the company’s censorship program, many on the left went bonkers. That fury only increased when Musk released the “Twitter files,” confirming the long-denied coordination and support by the government in targeting and suppressing speech.

In response, Hillary Clinton and other Democratic figures turned to Europe and called upon them to use their Digital Services Act to force censorship against Americans. (Clinton spoke at the World Forum and lashed out at the failure to control disinformation).

The EU immediately responded by threatening Musk with confiscatory penalties against not just his company but himself. He would have to resume massive censorship or else face ruin.

This campaign recently came to a head when Musk had the audacity to interview former president Donald Trump. In anticipation of the interview, one of the world’s most notorious anti-free speech figures went ballistic.

Former European Commissioner for Internal Markets and Services Thierry Breton issued a threatening message to Musk, “We are monitoring the potential risks in the EU associated with the dissemination of content that may incite violence, hate and racism in conjunction with major political — or societal — events around the world, including debates and interviews in the context of elections.”

The EU has long been one of the most aggressively anti-free speech bodies in the world. It has actively supported the evisceration of free speech among its 27 member states. The EU is not “agnostic” when it comes to free speech; it has long championed a type of free-speech atheism.

We have faced EU officials engaging in Orwellian doublespeak for years. Nevertheless, Virkkunen’s letter to Jordan stands out for its sheer mendacity.

*  *  *

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

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 09:20

Russia Says UK & France Behind Latest Attack On Its Energy Infrastructure

Russia Says UK & France Behind Latest Attack On Its Energy Infrastructure

There's been another reported attack on the Sudzha pipeline infrastructure in Russia’s Kursk Region on Friday. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova conveyed to journalists a Russian military assessment saying a metering facility was "de facto destroyed" in a Ukrainian HIMARS attack. 

But unlike some of the prior Ukrainian attacks on the area, the Kremlin is directly blaming the West, going to far as to say that orders for the new strike came directly from European capitals.

The Sudzha gas metering station in the Kursk region, via Russian Defense Ministry

We "have reasons to believe that targeting and navigation were facilitated through French satellites and British specialists input [target] coordinates and launched [the missiles]," Zakharova said, as cited in national media.

"The command came from London," she emphasized, describing it as part of a West-backed "terror" campaign meant to degrade and destroy Russia's energy infrastructure. 

The Kremlin has concluded this demonstrates that Kiev is "impossible to negotiate with," she explained. The Ukrainians have done nothing to actually uphold the energy ceasefire put forward by Trump, despite that Zelensky "publicly supported" it, she said, suggesting it was all an empty game.

"Over the past 24 hours, the Kyiv regime continued its attacks on Russian energy infrastructure using various types of drones and HIMARS multiple rocket launchers," the Russian military had also described.

Russia has alleged Ukraine launched rockets on the Sudzha facility, which had already been damaged in an earlier attack this week, along with nearly 20 drones launched at an oil refinery in the southern Saratov region.

Ukraine is meanwhile denying the Russian allegations, instead suggesting it's a false flag orchestrated by Moscow:

On Friday, Ukraine denied claims that its forces fired on the gas metering station Sudzha and accused Russia's military of striking the facility.

"Russia has again attacked the Sudzha gas transmission system in the Kursk region, which they do not control," Andriy Kovalenko, an official who is responsible for countering disinformation, said on social media.

The two sides have traded blame for violating the energy ceasefire on basically a daily basis since it was proclaimed. It seems to have barely held, if at all, despite ongoing pledges from both sides to uphold it.

Large fire at the scene of the metering station attack...

The US has claimed that it is not providing intelligence for long-range attacks inside Russia by Ukraine, but only intelligence which is defensive in nature. However, Europe is still in maximum support mode, as President Macron and Prime Minister Starmer put together a 'coalition of the willing' to defend Ukraine.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 08:45

Car Wars: The EU (Probably) Strikes Back

Car Wars: The EU (Probably) Strikes Back

By Stefan Koopman, Senior Macro Strategist at Rabobank

The Trump administration’s decision to slap a 25% tariff on imported cars and parts is yet another move in America’s ongoing trade battles. Following the global steel and aluminum tariffs, this latest escalation puts pressure on the EU to respond. As we noted in a special report released yesterday, we believe the European Union prefers to make a deal and prevent a full-blown trade war. However, we argue that Brussels’ decision-making procedures are designed in such a way that escalation is ‘technically’ the path of least resistance. Therefore, absent an agreement, or a clear prospect thereof, European leaders will most likely strike back to any tariffs imposed by the US, even if not fully and with some delay.

We also show in this report that the use of the EU’s (so far never used) Anti-Coercion Instrument is an option open to the European Commission, especially if the US tops up this week’s measures with its already infamous reciprocal tariffs on April 2. This approach, however, would take more time, face more internal hurdles in the EU, and could provoke an even more severe counter-response from the US, one that may extend beyond economic statecraft to political or military actions. This complicates an already complex situation. Therefore, at least initially, we expect the EU to bundle its response in rebalancing measures, i.e., rebalancing tariffs. This enables the EU to react as quickly as possible. Additional countermeasures, such as quotas, will only be considered if the US implements tariffs so high that the EU cannot match the economic impact.

In our baseline scenario for the economy, we have long included a 5% tariff hike on all US imports. The current measures announced still fall within this range, so there is no immediate reason to adjust our projections for growth and inflation. However, as Trump’s tariffs continue to accumulate, and as other countries retaliate, the risk of a more significant stagflationary shock has increased. A plausible scenario for such a backdrop would be if Trump follows through on his threat of an additional 25% tariff on other selected goods, such as pharmaceuticals and chips, or, even worse (but less likely), a 25% universal tariff.

Fittingly, the US reported another astonishingly high trade deficit number for February. The deficit in goods amounted to USD 147.9 billion, on top of January’s USD 155 billion deficit. This averages to a whopping USD 1.8 trillion annualized, over 6% of US GDP. The widening deficit reflects efforts by US companies to secure goods and materials in advance of higher tariffs. In fact, much of the widening in the deficit since December 2024 can be traced to imports of gold bars, predominantly from Switzerland and the UK. The (advanced) February data suggests strong imports of industrial supplies – which not only includes gold, but also steel and aluminum – were still a key driver. But even if industrial supplies are excluded, the trade deficit would be at record levels.

Obviously, this front-running of tariffs caused quite a scare earlier in March when the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model plummeted to -2.8% annualized for 25Q1. This prompted the modelers to introduce a “gold-adjusted” version. After all, given that substantial portions of these industrial metals are likely being invested in inventories, the direct impact on GDP should be relatively neutral. However, even with gold excluded, net exports remain a considerable drag on GDP. The gold-adjusted estimate currently stands at +0.2% q/q annualized, which is not pretty.

Across the border, Banxico cut the policy rate 50bp to 9.00%, in line with our expectations. Notably, in its statement, Banxico said that “looking ahead it could continue calibrating the monetary policy stance and consider adjusting it in similar magnitudes.” As such, we now expect a 50bp cut at the next meeting in May and have added an additional 25bp cut to our forecasts. This brings us to five more cuts in 2025 to a terminal rate of 7.50%. Interestingly, Banxico notes that the risks to its inflation outlook remain skewed to the upside. However, the risk of persistence in underlying core inflation has been downgraded, now ranking below the risks of peso depreciation and tariff uncertainty. So, tariffs are leading to rate cuts.

It is worth noting that on Wednesday, the Bank of Canada also revealed in its deliberations that it would have maintained its policy rate at 3.00% instead of cutting it to 2.75%, if not for tariff uncertainty and the perceived need to alleviate concerns among consumers and businesses as the trade war impacts the economy. So here too: tariffs -> rate cuts. Of course, an extra cut here or there doesn’t address the bigger problem. Canada’s caretaker PM Mark Carney, who faces a federal election next month and has flipped the polling landscape by pushing back against Trump, has just said: “The old relationship we had with the US –based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperation– is over.” That said, Canada hasn’t retaliated on the auto tariffs yet, as the US says if Canada joins up with the EU, both will see far higher tariffs.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/29/2025 - 08:10

US Office Focused On Shipbuilding Aims To Counter China's Maritime Dominance

US Office Focused On Shipbuilding Aims To Counter China's Maritime Dominance

Authored by Mike Fredenburg via The Epoch Times,

Creating an office of U.S. shipbuilding to facilitate America’s return to being a true maritime power is long overdue and is necessary to counter China’s growing maritime dominance.

At the end of World War II, the United States had over 100 shipyards, and its flagged fleet, the largest in the world, carried  57 percent of U.S. trade, while the majority of world trade was carried in U.S.-built ships.

Today, only about 0.2 percent of global commercial tonnage is being carried in ships built in the United States. Collectively, China, South Korea, and Japan build over 90 percent of the world’s large commercial ships. And with China building over 50 percent of the world’s gross shipping tonnage, it is by far and away the world’s largest shipbuilder, with 232 times more shipbuilding capacity than the United States.

While the lack of commercial shipbuilding capacity is not the only reason we have seen the U.S. Navy decline in size and capability, it has created an environment that makes correcting the issues plaguing the Navy very difficult. Indeed, the lack of commercial shipbuilding is arguably the root cause of our Navy’s decline in readiness, its exploding ship costs, and its inability to hold vendors accountable when they deliver underperforming ships overbudget and years behind schedule.

Examples of underperforming, overbudget ships include the Constellation-class frigate, the Littoral combat ship, the Ford-class carriers, and the massive Zumwalt destroyer. It is the failures in these key shipbuilding  programs that has led to the decline of the U.S. Navy’s size and readiness. Moreover, the vendors associated with these failed and or grossly underperforming programs have at worst received a slap on the wrist and are collectively lined up to receive many hundreds of billions more in U.S. Defense contracts over the coming decades.

Shipbuilders have been able to underdeliver with near impunity, in part due to the fact that they are the only game in town, i.e., if you cancel major defense contracts then the government-dependent companies will go out of business and there will be no shipbuilding capacity. For example, there is currently only one shipbuilder that can build and execute the Refueling and Complex Overhaul work on U.S. nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. While there are two firms that can build U.S. nuclear submarines, they are suffering from a lack of skilled labor. In the vast majority of cases, the prime contractors who build the Navy’s ships are almost wholly reliant on military contracts to survive. 

All this means that when contracts are put in place, they are not just put in place to deliver the most powerful ships at the best price, they are put in place to ensure that the company executing the contract can keep its people employed from contract to contract. Thus, contracts are strung out for many years. This makes sense, as having enough people trained up in the skills to rapidly deliver a ship or a number of ships, only to have to let them go when the ships are completed, is not a sustainable business model. Obviously, the Pentagon needs to structure contracts in such a way that defense contractors can stay in business.

However, this leads to the previously mentioned situation where is it well-nigh impossible to hold the defense contractors accountable. This brings us back to the value of having a more robust shipbuilding industry in which major shipbuilders that do business with the Pentagon, also have a robust commercial shipbuilding business. This is the way things were prior to World War II, and for a number of years after the war. For example, while Newport News Shipbuilding has long been the leading vendor when it comes to building U.S aircraft carriers, it also used to also build commercial ships.

But just as important, when the United States had a robust commercial shipbuilding industry, the pool of workers with the skills necessary to build both commercial and military vessels was much larger. This larger pool of skilled workers created a much more resilient shipbuilding environment that benefited the U.S. Navy when it came to negotiating contracts and holding shipbuilders/ship designers accountable. 

Currently, China is the world’s largest commercial and military ship shipbuilder. This means China has a whole bunch of shipyards that can build both military and commercial ships. Its massive shipbuilding industry also ensures China has a huge base of workers with the diverse sets of skills and trades necessary to build ships. The U.S. Navy used to be able to count on a large, robust shipbuilding industry that could build both commercial and military ships, but that has not been case since the 1970s.

Today, according to a Congressional Research Service report, three of the 10 commercial oil tankers selected to ship fuel for the Department of Defense (DOD) as part of the newly enacted Tanker Security Program are Chinese-built. As for dry cargo supplies for the DOD, seven of the 12 most recently built ships in the Maritime Security Fleet are Chinese-built. So, the U.S. Navy, along with the U.S. economy, is now highly dependent on ships built in in other countries, including China. This means that not only is the United States no longer a commercial maritime power, but our military is dependent on Chinese-built ships for logistical support. This is not a good state of affairs.

The new office of shipbuilding announced by President Trump earlier this month aims to correct this national security concern, but how?  Well, that is a rather complex question, but it will require streamlining of existing regulations, beefing up our steel industry, and yes, it will require government subsidies to be able to compete with China, South Korea, and Japan who all heavily subsidize their own shipping industries.

But if the United States wants to address a serious security concern, and regain its status as a true maritime superpower, taking such actions are not optional.

*  *  *

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

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 23:25

Judge Upholds California Law Restricting 18- to 20-Year-Olds' Access To Guns

Judge Upholds California Law Restricting 18- to 20-Year-Olds' Access To Guns

A federal judge has upheld a California law that restricts young adults from buying guns, finding the statute fits within the nation’s historical tradition of gun regulations.

California penal code Section 27510 bars federal gun dealers from selling or otherwise giving possession of guns to people younger than 21. The law does allow 18- to 20-year-olds to buy certain types of guns if they obtain a hunting license, are serving in the military, or were honorably discharged from the armed forces.

Some young adults and gun rights groups challenged the law, arguing it violated the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.

As Zachary Stieber reports for The Epoch Times, the case has been proceeding through the court system for years. U.S. District Judge James Lorenz said in 2020 that the law did not violate the Constitution, then an appeals court panel said it did. The appeals court later remanded the case back to Lorenz for renewed consideration following the U.S. Supreme Court ordering lower courts to figure out if gun regulations were based on the nation’s history of gun restrictions when deciding whether they are constitutional.

Lorenz on March 26 sided with California Attorney General Rob Bonta, concluding that even though 18- to 20-year-olds are part of “the people” mentioned in the Second Amendment, the young adults have faced gun restrictions throughout much of American history.

The law “is consistent with the Founding Era common law that curtailed commercial firearm purchases by individuals aged 18 to 20,” Lorenz wrote in a 23-page decision.

He also said the law is constitutional because the young adults can buy guns that are not handguns or semiautomatic centerfire rifles if they receive a hunting license or are in the U.S. military. Tens of thousands of young adults have obtained guns under the exceptions in recent years, including 5,431 in 2022.

The young adults can also acquire guns as gifts from family members, the ruling noted.

“Defendants’ evidence supports a reasonable inference that Section 27510 is a commercial restriction that does not meaningfully impair 18-to-20-year-olds’ access to firearms and is therefore not covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text,” the judge said.

The summary judgment ruling means the case is over, unless the plaintiffs appeal.

The Second Amendment Foundation, one of the plaintiffs, said on social media platform X that it is reviewing the opinion.

Bonta, a Democrat, said in a statement that the ruling represents a victory in the fight against gun violence.

“This commonsense regulation will continue to protect our young and vulnerable communities from preventable gun violence,“ he said. ”I am proud of the countless hours my team has put in to defend this law and we know the fight is not over. We will continue to lead efforts to defend commonsense gun-safety laws and protect our communities from senseless violence.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 23:00

Researchers Identify Diets In Mid-Life Linked To Healthy Aging

Researchers Identify Diets In Mid-Life Linked To Healthy Aging

Authored by George Citroner via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A 30-year study finds a primarily plant-based diet, with minimal ultra-processed food and low to moderate amounts of animal-based foods like fish and dairy, could raise our chances of reaching 70 without developing chronic disease, according to a new study from Harvard researchers.

Creative Cat Studio/Shutterstock

Healthy aging, as defined by the researchers, means reaching age 70 free of major chronic diseases, with good cognitive, physical, and mental health.

“Our findings suggest that dietary patterns rich in plant-based foods, with moderate inclusion of healthy animal-based foods, may promote overall healthy aging and help shape future dietary guidelines,” senior study author Marta Guasch-Ferré said in a press release.

Two Diets Linked to Optimal Aging

The study, recently published in Nature Medicine, examined the midlife diets and health outcomes of more than 105,000 middle-aged women and men aged 39 to 69 over 30 years.

The team evaluated how effectively the participants adhered to eight different largely-plant-based diets: the Alternative Health Eating Index (AHEI), the Alternative Mediterranean Diet (aMED), the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension diet (DASH), the MIND diet, the Healthful Plant-Based Diet, the Planetary Health Diet Index, the Empirically Inflammatory Dietary Pattern, and the Empirical Dietary Index for Hyperinsulinemia.

Of the participants, 10 percent were identified as aging healthfully and followed the eight diets. Those who closely followed the AEHI and PHDI diets were linked with optimal healthy aging patterns.

The AHEI diet was found to be especially beneficial. It was developed to prevent chronic disease and emphasizes fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts, legumes, and healthy fats while limiting red meat, refined grains, and sugar.

Participants scoring highest on this diet were found to have an 86 percent greater likelihood of healthy aging by age 70 and a 2.2-fold higher likelihood by age 75 compared to those with the lowest scores. The PHDI diet also emphasizes plant-based foods and reduces animal-based food intake.

Other diets researchers looked at that were linked to healthy aging were the aMED which follows the Mediterranean model and the DASH diet. The aMED diet prioritizes olive oil, nuts, whole grains, and moderate fish intake. DASH is known for lowering blood pressure and focuses on fruits, vegetables, and low-fat dairy.

“Maintaining a healthy diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, unsaturated fats, nuts, and legumes during mid-life is linked to a higher likelihood of healthy aging along with better cognitive, physical, and mental health,” Guasch-Ferré told The Epoch Times.

Conversely, higher consumption of ultra-processed foods, particularly processed meats and sugary beverages, was linked to a decreased chance of aging healthfully.

No ‘One Size Fits All’ Diet

The findings also suggest that there isn’t a one-size-fits-all diet.

“Healthy diets can be adapted to fit individual needs and preferences,” lead author Anne-Julie Tessier, assistant professor at the University of Montreal, stated in the press release.

Shelley Balls, registered dietitian nutritionist for Flawless Bloom in Western Wyoming, told The Epoch Times that ultra-processed foods include many convenience snack foods such as potato chips, candy, cookies, and crackers, as well as sweetened beverages such as soda, sweetened tea, and sugar-laden coffees.

“I’m not saying you should never have these types of foods and beverages, but I would highly recommend limiting their intake in order to promote overall health,” she said.

However, certain ultra-processed foods are healthier than others, she said. Potato chips are high on fats and sodium, making them good once-in-awhile, but sugar sweetened beverage quickly adds up when it comes to sugar and calorie intake.

“Even certain diet drinks, although they might not have the calories, could negatively affect digestive health, which is linked to obesity,” she said.

Healthy animal-based food also should not be avoided.

“Healthy animal-based foods such as Greek yogurt, kefir, salmon, eggs, and other lean cuts of meat provide an abundance of healthful nutrients your body needs to function optimally,” Balls said. “When it comes to promoting overall health, variety is key so excluding certain foods out entirely can make it harder.”

Adequate protein intake is also key to promoting healthy aging as “it’s essential in maintaining muscle mass, strength, and function as you age.”

The study had some limitations, including that the participants were exclusively health professionals. Researchers suggest that replicating the study among more diverse populations could provide deeper insights into the findings’ broader relevance.

However, Guasch-Ferré said that while there may be some differences in overall health, such as access to health care and other factors, “we believe that the biological mechanisms underlying the associations between dietary patterns and healthy aging would be similar in other populations.”

According to Balls, “the earlier, the better” when it comes to disease prevention.

“One piece of advice I give to even younger kids is what you’re eating today, can affect how you age,” she added. “So moderation and variety are key at all stages of life!”

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 22:35

'Indirect Negotiations' On Nuclear Issue Possible: Iran Finally Replies In Letter To Trump

'Indirect Negotiations' On Nuclear Issue Possible: Iran Finally Replies In Letter To Trump

Iran has finally issued a formal response to US President Donald Trump's letter unveiled early this month which was addressed to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. The Trump letter had urged fresh nuclear negotiations, but was coupled with statements from the White House threatening attack if Tehran pursues atomic weapons.

The Islamic Republic in a formal letter issued to the White House in response says it is willing to enter "indirect" negotiations with Washington.

"Iran’s formal response to the letter from US President Donald Trump has been duly sent via Oman," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told IRNA on Thursday. "The official response comprises a letter wherein our viewpoints regarding the status quo and Mr. Trump’s letter have been fully laid out and relayed to the other side."

Getty Images

The FM said that while no direct official talks can be held so long as Trump keeps his "maximum pressure" sanctions regimen in place, it remains that "Indirect negotiations, though, can continue, as they existed in the past." 

"In circumstances where there is ‘maximum pressure,’ no one in their sound mind would enter into direct talks. The format of negotiations is always relevant in diplomatic relations … For now, our tactic is to have indirect negotiations," Araghchi explained.

In early March, Trump had unveiled before reporters that he had written Iran a letter, saying "I hope you're going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it's going to be a terrible thing for them. There are two ways in which Iran can be handled – militarily, or you make a deal."

According to Axios, the US has lately built up military assets in the Mideast region with an eye toward Iran:

  • In recent days, the U.S. military sent several B-2 stealth bombers to the Diego Garcia military base in the Indian Ocean in a deployment a U.S. official said was "not disconnected" from Trump's two-month deadline.
  • The B-2 bombers can carry huge bunker buster bombs that would be a key element in any possible military action against Iran's underground nuclear facilities.
  • A spokesperson for U.S. Strategic Command confirmed the deployment to Axios and said Stratcom "routinely conducts global operations in coordination with other combatant commands, services, and participating U.S. government agencies to deter, detect and, if necessary, defeat strategic attacks against the United States and its allies."

Just last week Ayatollah Khamenei warned that the US would "a severe slap" and "crushing blow" if it dared carry out any attacks against the Iran.

Iran has long complained that it can't take US commitments seriously anymore, after the prior Trump White House unilaterally pulled the US out of the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 22:10

China Is Taking War To Earth Orbits: A 'Space Pearl Harbor' Is On The Way

China Is Taking War To Earth Orbits: A 'Space Pearl Harbor' Is On The Way

Authored by Gordon Chang via The Gatestone Institute,

"With our commercial assets, we have observed five different objects in space maneuvering in and out and around each other in synchronicity and in control," the U.S. Space Force's Vice Chief of Space Operations Gen. Michael Guetlein told the 16th annual McAleese Defense Programs conference in Arlington, Virginia on March 18. 

"That's what we call dogfighting in space. They are practicing tactics, techniques and procedures to do on-orbit space operations from one satellite to another."

Guetlein's stark comment about China signals a break with the past. "This marks the end of the Western-American-liberal dream of nations leaving wars on Earth so they can cooperate in space to advance humanity," Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center told Gatestone after the general's widely publicized remarks. "Communist China has now taken war to the heavens, to low earth orbit, and very likely, will take war to the moon, Mars, and beyond. The heavens are no longer safe for the democracies."

Space is now a highly contested domain, but it wasn't always this way. "We told ourselves we would be the dominant power forever," Brandon Weichert, author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, said to Gatestone. "We coasted on that notion for far too long. Rising powers, notably China and Russia, saw how reliant we were on space—and how poorly defended our systems were. Our access to the strategic high ground is now more threatened than ever before."

As Weichert points out, "bureaucratic inertia and a lack of visionary leadership from both political parties" allowed China and Russia to develop the capabilities to threaten America in space.

There was another party at fault: The U.S. military failed to protest when it could see there was an obvious threat. "There was a gentlemen's agreement until recent that we didn't mess with each other's space systems," Guetlein said. "We didn't jam them, we didn't spoof them, we didn't lase them, we just kept them safe."

Why was the U.S. so gentlemanly? Presidents believed that because the U.S. had more space assets than others, it was not in America's interest to trigger a race to build weapons to destroy those assets. Yet this view, appearing commonsense at first glance, was naïve: It was apparent even then that neither China nor Russia could be enticed into good behavior. Generals and admirals should have sounded the warning.

There was a lot to warn about. On January 11, 2007, for instance, China demonstrated its intentions by launching a modified ground-based DF-21 missile to destroy an old Chinese weather satellite.

In 2022, a Chinese satellite "grappled" a defunct Chinese satellite and towed it to a "graveyard orbit."

Moreover, as Fisher notes, China had already configured its one large orbiting platform, the Tiangong Space Station, for military missions as well as civilian ones. One of its modules can launch either very small satellites that can perform interception missions or satellites carrying powerful laser and microwave weapons that can destroy satellites in multiple orbits.

What was the American response to the obvious Chinese advances in space-warfare capabilities? Vice President Kamala Harris in April 2022 announced a unilateral moratorium on ground-launched anti-satellite missile tests, in the hopes that other nations would follow suit.

With this posture, it is no wonder why America's lead in space warfare—if it exists—is narrowing.

Now, China is making fast progress in building space weapons. "The Chinese ISR"—intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance—"capabilities are become very capable," said Guetlein. "They have gone from what we used to call a 'Kill Chain' to a 'Kill Mesh.'" A Kill Mesh combines ISR satellites with an array of weapons systems.

The Chinese array appears impressive. As Fisher points out, the People's Liberation Army has developed ground-based ASAT—anti-satellite—interceptors to destroy satellites in both low earth orbit and much higher medium earth orbits. At the same time, China, as Guetlein's comments make clear, is working on "co-orbital" interceptors, satellites that can follow, approach, dock with, or use robotic arms to grapple other satellites into useless orbits.

For the future, Fisher reports, China is developing large, unmanned space planes that can re-enter the atmosphere to maneuver toward a new orbit and then relaunch into space to deploy energy and missile weapons. The PLA also appears to be working on large combat platforms that can attack satellite targets in multiple orbits. Expect the Chinese military also to deploy clusters of combat satellites to attack the Lunar and Martian satellite networks of the future.

"The recent demonstration of Chinese 'dogfighting' capabilities in space is an indicator that Beijing means to use force on earth," says Weichert. "By targeting sensitive U.S. military satellites, the People's Liberation Army can render us deaf, dumb, and blind, long before it strikes."

The Chinese are evidently planning to blind not only America's military but also America's civilian society, which is heavily dependent on space assets. Almost nothing modern in America will work when the Chinese are finished attacking in the heavens.

As Weichert said, "A space Pearl Harbor is at hand."

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 21:45

Another Soldier Confesses: IDF Used Palestinians As Human Shields, Committed Other War Crimes

Another Soldier Confesses: IDF Used Palestinians As Human Shields, Committed Other War Crimes

Another Israeli soldier and veteran of Israel's ongoing war in Gaza has admitted that he was a party to war crimes -- and says his commander ordered him and other soldiers to continue perpetrating those crimes even after they'd raised objections. This latest of many such accounts was given to CBS News by an Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) soldier who agreed to speak on the condition that his identity wouldn't be revealed. The experience that troubled him the most was his unit's practice of forcing Palestinian civilians to probe buildings for improvised explosive devices.  

"They were Palestinian," he said. "We sent them in first to see if the building was clear and check for booby traps…They were trembling and shaking." So apparently common is the practice of using Palestinians in such a manner that it has a name of its own: the "Mosquito Protocol," where Palestinians civilians are equated with the hated insects.  

The soldier told CBS that he objected to that abusive treatment of civilians, to the point that he took his concern to the chain of command -- where it fell on deaf ears. "We talked to our commander, and we asked him to stop doing it," he said, but said the unconscionable orders continued to be issued.  

Screen shot from a video said to show a bound Palestinian detainee being forced to walk ahead of IDF soldiers as they clear a building (Al Jazeera)

The whistleblowing soldier who spoke to CBS says he continues to be troubled by what he personally did in Gaza. "I'm morally wounded. It's fucked up, you know, to use citizens as your human shield like a dog." The term "moral injury" describes psychological problems that spring from having observed, perpetrated, or failed to prevent actions that violate one's sense of right and wrong. 

Of course, the people on the other end of the depraved practice battle their own psychological demons. CBS spoke to a 14-year-old Palestinian in the West Bank, where the IDF is accused of the same form of abuse. He claims he and his nine-year-old cousin were forced at gunpoint to search a four-story apartment building. "I was so scared. Then they started beating us," he said. The IDF told CBS it prohibits this behavior.  

The soldier said he was witness to other IDF evils: "We've burned down buildings for no reasons, which is violating the international law, of course." That confession should come as little surprise to even the most casual observer of the war, given the IDF's astonishingly thorough and plainly visible destruction of neighborhoods, towns and cities throughout Gaza -- and IDF soldiers' enthusiastic use of personal social media accounts to share videos of themselves joyfully demolishing entire housing complexes. A January before-and-after analysis of Gaza using satellite imagery concluded that between 50% and 61% of buildings in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed. 

A 2024 investigation by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which interviewed soldiers, concluded the IDF has indeed used Palestinian civilians to probe Gaza tunnels which were feared to have been booby-trapped, with soldiers told, "Our lives are more important than their lives." The soldiers ridiculed the Israel government's official denials of the practice:

"I saw the IDF's response [to posted videos said to show human shields at work], which totally doesn't reflect reality. It's done with the knowledge of the brigade commander, at the least... [Soldiers] know it's not a one-time incident of a young and stupid company commander who decides on his own to take somebody."

According to accounts from soldiers and those who claim to have been their victims, Palestinians are often detained, dressed in uniforms and flak jackets, mounted with cameras, and sent into buildings with their hands zip-tied behind them. Sometimes, they're said to be simply stripped to their underwear and their hands tied before being coerced into the potentially lethal situation.    

As ugly as the Mosquito Protocol allegations are, they're far from the worst claims about the IDF's conduct. As we covered last summer, a team of 20 humanitarian US doctors who volunteered to work Gaza hospitals were stunned by the volume of civilian harm, and particularly by how frequently they had to treat children with headshot wounds. A doctor who normally works in gunfire-heavy Chicago described the horrific conclusion he reached as the pattern emerged on the treatment tables in front of him: 

"I thought these kids were in the wrong place at the wrong time, like sadly, some of the kids we treat in Chicago. But after the third or fourth time, I realized it was intentional; bullets were being put in these kids on purpose."

On the other hand, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly said the IDF is "the most moral army in the world." We'll give Netanyahu the last word...while President Trump gives the IDF another $4 billion in weapons and ammunition.  

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 21:20

Want To Fix The Birth Dearth? Make Marriage Matter

Want To Fix The Birth Dearth? Make Marriage Matter

Authored by Melanie Israel via The Daily Signal, a publication of The Heritage Foundation,

A new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about birth data for 2023 is out. For everyone concerned about the long-term decline in America’s birth rate, the report doesn’t show strong signs that much has changed.

Why should we care about declining birth rates, and what’s driving the trend? As a recent Heritage Foundation report warns, U.S. fertility is now below replacement. Fewer births and our historic low fertility rate will affect the future economy. It will affect programs like Social Security. Don’t forget the military. What about caregiving as the elderly age? A declining population will affect our nation’s future in more ways than we can count.

If you ask 10 people why the number of births keeps going down, you’ll probably get 10 different answers, from housing and child care costs to economic anxiety to student loan debt. While there’s not one sole reason (and therefore not one single policy solution,) at the heart of the issue is marriage—fewer marriages, specifically.

Fewer Americans are getting married, and those who do are getting married later, which in turn delays having kids (and how many they eventually have). My colleagues recently published a Special Report analyzing trends in marriage, childbearing, and other important factors of American family life. In it, they note:

“Today, married couples make up less than half (47 percent) of U.S. households, 40 percent of children are born outside marriage, and the birth rate has reached its lowest recorded level. 

The age of first marriage has increased by about seven years for both sexes. 

More adults ages 18 to 44 have cohabited (59 percent) than have been married (50 percent). 

Marriage itself has been legally redefined nationwide with the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision in a way that rejects the fundamental link between marriage and childbearing.

In fact, for a growing and influential segment of the country, even defining ‘man’ and ‘woman’ seems to be an impossible task."

Healthy marriages help establish stable families and a thriving civil society. (And no, cohabitation does not provide the same stability and benefits for adults and children as marriage.) Separating marriage + having children has changed the structure of family formation for the worse.

For all the attention that solving the “birth dearth” gets, pronatalism is not enough. It is not enough to look for policies and technology (some with serious ethical concerns) that encourages or assists people to reproduce. Addressing healthy marriages has to be front and center of policy proposals.

There’s no one-size policy to help people enter a healthy marriage and keep it that way. One way to help is using (and building on) existing funding and programing at the state and federal level. But government programs can’t fix decades of cultural forces that have minimized or dismissed the importance of coupling sex, marriage, and childbearing together. The decline in marriage rates didn’t happen overnight just as the decline in births didn’t happen overnight.

Put frankly, it took a long time to make the mess we’re in and it’ll take time to clean it up, too. We can debate the merits of things like student loan “forgiveness,” housing benefits, child care subsidies, and tax credits. But the most meaningful, effective way to address declining births is to reorient society to value family formation within stable, healthy marriages. Want to address the birth dearth? Let’s show our fellow Americans that marriage matters.

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

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 20:55

PA Municipalities Crying Poor After COVID Relief Funds Finally Dry Up

PA Municipalities Crying Poor After COVID Relief Funds Finally Dry Up

It was a good run, but they had to know it was going to end at some point. Now that the federal government funding gravy train that began with COVID is finally starting to come to an end, suddenly Pennsylvania is crying poor. 

PA Governor Josh Shapiro's administration has said it is bracing for some Pennsylvania towns to fall into financial distress as federal COVID stimulus money runs out, according to ABC 27.

During the pandemic, state and local governments leaned heavily on federal aid to stay afloat. But with that support ending, cracks are starting to show.

Now the Department of Community and Economic Development is asking for a $10 million boost to the state’s emergency fund for struggling municipalities in its 2025-26 budget—just 2.3% of Gov. Josh Shapiro’s $430 million request for the agency.

Some argue the funding is too little, while others say it would be smarter to help towns before they reach crisis levels. Under Act 47, distressed municipalities can access recovery support once they officially declare financial hardship.

As billions in federal COVID relief dollars run out, Pennsylvania is preparing for a wave of municipal financial distress. The Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED) wants to add $10 million to the Act 47 fund, which supports struggling local governments. As of March 18, the fund held $17.4 million, and current participants include Harrisburg, Chester, and Newville.

The ABC report notes that DCED Secretary Rick Siger called the proposal a proactive step to prepare for “any potential impact for the ARPA cliff,” referring to the end of American Rescue Plan Act funding. Passed in 2021, ARPA sent $350 billion to governments nationwide, including $7.29 billion for Pennsylvania, $4.95 billion for large counties and cities, and $1.21 billion for smaller municipalities.

Governments had until the end of 2024 to commit ARPA funds, and must spend them by Dec. 31, 2026. Most Pennsylvania municipalities used their share to replace lost revenue—an easy reporting route under Treasury rules. Nearly two-thirds of the state’s 2,140 smallest recipients (Tier 5 entities) did exactly that.

But the relief was temporary. “This money is not going to be replaced. It was designed for an emergency. The emergency is gone,” said William Glasgall of the Volcker Alliance. He warned that limiting expenses and raising taxes will soon be “very common” for local governments. Glasgall also dismissed DCED’s proposed boost: “I mean, [$10] million will last about three seconds.”

Some towns already feel the squeeze. State College avoided tax hikes for three of the last four years thanks to ARPA funds—but a property tax increase is coming in 2025.

Still, not all municipalities are panicking. David Sanko of the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors said many local governments are “not stressed at all” because they planned ahead. His group urged members not to rely on ARPA for ongoing costs and is now pushing the state to cut expenses—like repealing prevailing wage mandates—rather than only expand aid.

Sen. Patty Kim (D-Dauphin), who represents Harrisburg, agrees prevention is better than rescue. “More needs to be done to prevent communities from becoming financially distressed instead of offering help afterward,” she said. As for the $10 million increase, she’s uncertain it will make it through the legislature. With possible federal funding cuts ahead, Kim warned, “I am bracing myself for a very, very different budget in the next couple of months.”

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 20:30

Texas Gave 15,000 More MMR Shots This Year - Now It Has More Measles Cases Than the Entire US Had In 2024

Texas Gave 15,000 More MMR Shots This Year - Now It Has More Measles Cases Than the Entire US Had In 2024

Authored by Jon Fleetwood,

Texas administered 15,000 more measles vaccinations this year compared to 2024—and now there’s a growing measles outbreak that has surpassed the total number of cases reported across the entire United States last year.

The news follows this website’s February report that measles cases in Gaines County, Texas, had jumped 242% following a health district campaign to hand out free measles vaccines.

A measles outbreak after higher vaccination rates in Texas calls into question the shot’s claimed effectiveness and underlying design.

Timeline & Numbers

Between January 1 and March 16 last year, 158,000 measles vaccines were administered in the state, according to CBS News.

During the same time this year, 173,000 measles doses were given.

There are now more measles cases in Texas than there were across the United States in all of 2024.

On Friday, the Texas Department of State Health Services reported 309 cases have been identified in the state since late January.

That’s compared to only 285 cases nationwide last year, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data.

What’s worse, measles cases in West Texas are “still on the rise” and “local public health officials say they expect the virus to keep spreading for at least several more months and that the official case number is likely an undercount,” according to CBS.

The numbers don’t lie—Texas is witnessing a record-breaking measles outbreak in the wake of increased vaccination efforts.

Measles Vaccine Virus Is Product of Gain-of-Function & Can Shed Onto Unvaccinated

U.S. military biodefense experts confirm in a May 2016 publication in The Journal of Infectious Diseases that the live virus inside the measles (MMR) vaccine is engineered using “a technique that could be considered, by current definitions, GOF research.”

GOF (gain-of-function) experiments can cause viruses to become more infectious.

The wild-type measles virus (Montefiore 89 strain) purportedly found in nature mostly uses a receptor called CD150 to gain entry to and infect immune cells.

However, the vaccine strain (Edmonston strain) is manipulated in the laboratory to acquire the ability to bind another receptor called CD46, which is more abundant in the body and expressed on most human nucleated cells.

This means the measles virus injected into the MMR-vaccinated has the potential to enter many more cells compared to the wild-type virus, due to its acquired ability to use an additional cellular receptor.

The vaccine virus also sheds.

An August 2024 study in the peer-reviewed Journal of Clinical Virology confirms the measles vaccine virus sheds in recently vaccinated children for 29 days, meaning the vaccinated can spread the virus to the unvaccinated for about a month.

A 1995 CDC study found that 83% of vaccinated children had measles virus shed in their urine.

With a genetically modified vaccine virus capable of shedding for nearly a month and entering a broader range of human cells than the wild-type strain, the question becomes harder to ignore: Is the vaccine itself playing a role in the surge?

*  *  *

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

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 20:05

USAID Officially Shuttered After Court Victory

USAID Officially Shuttered After Court Victory

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) has been officially shuttered after a federal appeals court Friday determined that the Trump administration could continue dismantling it.

The ruling nullifies a lower court ruling that found that Elon Musk and DOGE were exercising enough independent authority to require Senate confirmation under the Constitution's Appointments Clause.

"While defendants’ role and actions related to USAID are not conventional, unconventional does not necessarily equal unconstitutional," wrote US Circuit Judge Marvin Quattlebaum, a Trump appointee. "And none of this is to say that plaintiffs will not be able to develop evidence of unconstitutional conduct as the case progresses. Time will tell," he continued.

USAID was one of DOGE's first targets. In addition to finding all sorts of waste, fraud and abuse, America First Legal found last week that USAID was behind an online censorship scheme. 

A week before that, a senior USAID official ordered the agency's remaining staff to report to their now-former headquarters in Washington DC for an "all day" group effort to destroy documents, many of which contain sensitive information.

After DOGE cleaned house, 26 current and former USAID employees sued - arguing that Elon Musk and DOGE have no actual independent authority. Earlier this month, US District Judge Theodore Chuang, an Obama appointee, indefinitely blocked Musk and DOGE personnel from shutting down the agency.

*  *  *

Pick up some extremely popular IQ Biologix Colostrum!

Click pic, add to cart - grab 2 for free shipping and 5% off, 3 for 10% off

In response, the 4th Circuit panel unanimously agreed that Chuang's ruling should be nullified as the administration's appeal proceeds - though just two of the judges on Friday found that Musk was likely acting constitutionally.

"As to Musk, the evidence before us creates a strong likelihood that he functioned as an advisor to the President, carrying out the President’s policies of shrinking government and reducing spending, not as an Officer who required constitutional appointment," wrote Quattlebaum, who was joined by US Circuit Judge Paul Niemeyer, a George HW Bush appointee.

US Circuit Judge Roger Gregory said he only voted with his colleagues because the USAID workers sued the wrong defendants - and if they'd sued USAID itself, he would have sided with them.

"We may never know how many lives will be lost or cut short by the Defendants’ decision to abruptly cancel billions of dollars in congressionally appropriated foreign aid," Gregory wrote. "We may never know the lasting effect of Defendants’ actions on our national aspirations and goals. But those are not the questions before the Court today."

Rubio Shutters

Meanwhile, the US State Department on Friday announced that it is officially closing down USAID - with the formal last day set to take place before July 1, the NY Post reports.

According to ABC News, ex-DOGE official Jeremy Lewin announced USAID's shuttering in an internal memo earlier Friday.

"Foreign assistance done right can advance our national interests, protect our borders, and strengthen our partnerships with key allies," Secretary of State Marco Rubio posted to X. "Unfortunately, USAID strayed from its original mission long ago. As a result, the gains were too few and the costs were too high. Thanks to President [Donald] Trump, this misguided and fiscally irresponsible era is now over."

According to Rubio, the department is "reorienting" the agency's foreign assistance programs, and will continue its "essential lifesaving programs."

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 19:40

Modern OPSEC And Thirdworldization

Modern OPSEC And Thirdworldization

Authored by Fabian Ommar via The Organic Prepper,

Last year, International Man published an intriguing article by Jeff Thomas about American society during the Great Depression period. Duly named Duesenberg In A Barn, it opens with a story about shifts in culture and the lifestyle of wealthy individuals and families during the 1930s and beyond (Duesenberg produced luxury sport cars between 1913 and 1937).

He recounts how the riches that didn’t get snuffed out by, or even profited from, the 1929 Stock Market Crash, kept flaunting their wealth trying to outcompete each other, in an attempt to extend the 1920s Jazz Era hedonism and largesse into Depression times.

However, as the crisis aggravated, these individuals and families started to realize that such behavior amidst the rampant misery was quickly becoming a liability. 

“Whatever the psychology involved, in 1930, those who had fared well soon learned that it was unwise to be conspicuous in their continued wealth. At that point, an interesting but little-remembered development occurred. Such people put their mink coats in the closet, their jewelry in a safe place, and found barns in the countryside into which they could park their Duesenbergs, Cords, and Auburns.”

The rich toned down not from sympathy or compassion but as adaptation. Contrary to what many think, the wealthy have a sharp survival instinct.

That’s a crucial distinction, with the keywords being “adaptation” and “survival”, and the main takeaway an important social dynamic typical of all crises: the nail that stands out gets hammered. 

Those born and living in unstable and hostile contexts are constantly reminded of all the unwritten rules that keep us, our kin, and our stuff, safer. From criminals, sure, but also from tyrannical, greedy governments and corrupt authorities. 

I call that Thirdworldization OPSEC. It applies to criminality and government overreach mainly, but as Thirdworldization expands, it’s now applicable to other areas of social existence. Illegal immigrants, as well as political, religious, and ideological extremists from our own society, must now be added to the list of official (i.e., state) and criminal threats.

Threats are increasing and modern OPSEC is important.

There are periods in history when the number and diversity of potential enemies and hazards around us rise, and that’s the case in most of the West right now.

People are financially insecure, afraid of the future, confused, and lost. Those feelings lead to anger and revolt. Add all the leftist/woke indoctrination and brainwashing of the last years, and we get a mass of utterly discontent and unhinged folks out there. 

The majority cannot put a finger on, much less process what’s happening. Nevertheless, the sentiments are there and everyone starts lashing out at everyone else, resulting more frequent and intense episodes of violence and increased friction.

I’m talking about gratuitous, random, and now targeted and coordinated violence coming from all sides and for a variety of reasons. I warned about this in 2023, and it’s now coming to a head. 

Let’s examine some facets of this phenomenon and how to deal with this new reality.

Starting with what Thomas addressed in his Duesenberg article: lifestyle, status, and ostentation

There are many similarities between the 1920s and now. The risks of a grave economic or financial event are sky-high. Growth is abysmal, inflation is rising, and living standards are dropping. 

And critically, the concentration of wealth is growing at an accelerated pace. The haves are getting fleeced and may be outnumbered by the have-nots at some point, which is bad.

Economic disparity begets political polarization, which begets the undoing of the social fabric, which begets cultural degradation, which begets the undoing of civilization.

More people are living in the streets (I’ll return to that in an upcoming post). Drug and alcohol abuse are skyrocketing, and mental illness is exploding. Those things are happening across all demographics, which is concerning and one of the points of this post.

“Thou shall not flaunt.”

Even though we’re not yet at the stage described by Jeff Thomas, the words of late philanthropist George Peabody – “Ostentation is a target you hang on your back” – already come to mind as a survival rule in a declining society. 

Nonetheless, everybody’s trying to keep up with the Joneses, something evident in both the real world and the web. Social media is a carousel of Dubai trips, fabulous resorts, fancy restaurants, luxurious dresses, plastic surgeries, and Lamborghinis. 

That’s not the reality, but a facade. This is the age of gambling, easy money chasing, glorification of ignorance (Dunning-Kruger and “influencer culture”), fake lifestyles, and blatant ostentation. It’s a bubble, and the bill will come due.

But enough with the rant. No one has to live like a monk. Being aware, smart, contained, and disciplined always pays, only now more than ever. Besides, it only requires focus on what we can control: our profile, exposure, consumption choices, and lifestyle.

The same dynamic happens in other areas as well.

Let’s talk about political radicalization. Tesla owners and dealers are getting their vehicles and premises vandalized by Trump haters, who now have turned into Musk haters thanks to his association with the government and his role in DOGE initiatives (no need for links as both topics are all over the news).

It’s, in essence, a criminal matter, but with political and ideological motivations, things get more complex and sensitive, not to mention dangerous. 

I’ve previously expressed my view on the likelihood of a civil war 2.0 in the U.S.. I stand by everything I said in that article, including the potential for the rise of intra-terrorism and political violence, or even criminality, reaching civil-war-like levels.

Is the mass of indoctrinated and radical people ready to spread a wave of madness and violence? We’re already getting a glimpse of that. Will it fizzle out or escalate? How will government, institutions and other sectors of society respond if that happens? 

We don’t know, and that’s the point.

It’s possible, so the question is how probable? Even a few can cause great damage, physically and to the nation’s mood and institutional order. 

“Literally anyone can be a lone wolf. It’ll make the problem that much tougher to tackle, without curtailing civil liberties. Civil war or not, a wave of violence is coming.” 

That’s Max Remington on his excellent “Trouble Brewing On The Horizon”  recently in his Substack. I encourage you to read it fully as it tackles the various angles of this phenomenon and the possible outcomes in a very thorough and down-to-earth fashion. 

The left has no guardrails and is showing signs it won’t concede power, entitlements, and schemes easily or without a fight. But in truth, even peaceful people can turn radical.

So you may just be denied service in a restaurant for wearing this hat or that shirt, or get your car keyed for sporting this or that sticker. But the possibility of something worse happening cannot be ignored, now more than ever. 

Bringing this segment to a conclusion, let’s be pragmatic: Defending and expressing political views, preferences, and affiliations with excessive fervor, or trying to sway people with vehemence, has never been wise or a 100% risk-free endeavor. It’s now quickly becoming a liability, and that’s what matters to us.

Individual identity and personal expression

In a multidimensional crisis, volatility is the norm. Criminality aside, things get crazy beyond the imaginable, often involving aspects of lifestyle and politics as addressed above, but also of culture, religion, race and ethnicity, sex and gender, and more. 

Even small, seemingly innocent actions can lead to unwanted outcomes, sometimes dreadful ones. One such example is the case of the “Deadly Posts”:

“Brazilian Criminal Groups Are Allegedly Monitoring Social Media For Perceived Rivals.” [SOURCE]

People being kidnapped and assassinated by gangs and factions for posting selfies with hand signs on social media may sound like typical Third World stuff. The truth is that it’s neither new nor exclusive to banana republics and narco-states, as this ABC News article from 2013 shows. 

Since gangs and criminals exist pretty much everywhere, we must assume that stuff like that can happen anywhere, so it’s also worth reflection and consideration.

An issue in the virtual realm as well

People and businesses are being persecuted, canceled, marooned, or hacked for expressing their views and opinions on social media and internet. If they’re not, they can and the risk is now bigger than ever.

Citizens get arrested and charged in the UK and other countries for political, racial or gender-related posts, or other reason deemed contentious by the authorities. This is happening here in Brazil and other places as well, and when it makes the news (which is rare), it gets distorted.

The internet is a minefield. Here are various forms of drawing a personal SHTF onto oneself (and that’s discounting the risks presented by virtual scams and other heists). Even if you consider yourself a digital hermit, others around you (relatives, friends, etc.) may get inadvertently affected, so think about it.

The rules or grounds for those things to happen aren’t much clearer, making matters even worse. Hate speech? Misogyny? Racism? Discrimination? Anything can stick, especially if it’s the government and their acolytes (corrupt NGAs and the media). It’s better to lay low and refrain from some fights.

Do you want to be right or be safe, happy, and get things done?

“You mean I cannot talk on my phone while walking the streets? That I cannot wear my MAGA hat or shirt or stick a flag in my front yard, drive this or that car? That I cannot openly agree or disagree with this or that view, or express my dissatisfaction with how X, Y, or Z do things?”

It’s not a matter of can but should. What is to be gained versus what can be lost. The potential risks, and not only in the short term. 

In times like these, to err on the safe side is a wise strategy. Not turning paranoid, but I am considering the potential implications of some stances, decisions, and behaviors.

What about religion?

That’s a more complex and delicate issue. We all have hills on which we’re willing to die rather than surrender, and religion may be the case for some.

It’s a very intimate subject, perhaps the most personal of all being addressed here so I’ll refrain from comment and leave each to make their own reflections.

New world mindset for urbanites

The worse the crisis, the more dangerous it gets out there. It’s not just crime and violence of all kinds that go up, but other forms of uncivilized savagery as well: road rage, domestic violence, abuses against children, elders, women, minorities, and more. 

Road rage, in particular, is a big issue because when everyone is at boiling point, the risks of getting inadvertently involved in trouble simply by everyday exposure and friction increase exponentially. 

Be mindful of vigilanteism as well. It’s a complex issue with many angles and thus worth a dedicated post, so I’ll just say it also tends to rise and become critical in times of unrest. Common citizens can get caught on both sides, and the consequences can be grave.

Being 100% grey all the time and about everything is impossible. Realizing that is critical, even those living as recluses will eventually draw some attention or bump into someone the wrong way. Keep a cool head and the emotions in check is something under our control.

Final words

I acknowledge First World residents might feel these ideas represent a loss of freedom and personal agency. Unfortunately, it’s true in part, and there’s not much we can do about it. 

Just because we’ve been living relatively peacefully for the last 20 or 30 years doesn’t mean it will remain so forever. 

For the record, I’m not saying these things are happening or will happen where you live. Some phenomena are global, but they don’t happen on the same scale or intensity everywhere. 

Most important, it’s not an SHTF. The world as we know it is changing, not ending. Not everything will be fine, but it never is anyway, and that’s okay. It’s perfectly possible to live a good and normal life in a volatile world. 

Becoming paranoid isn’t the answer, much less joining the madness. Be realistic and smart: assess the situation, prepare, make the necessary adjustments, and do what you can. And as always, stay safe.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/28/2025 - 19:15

Pages