Zero Hedge

"Deport Criminals Who Steal Or Kill": Spanish Model Blasts Barcelona's Immigration Crisis

"Deport Criminals Who Steal Or Kill": Spanish Model Blasts Barcelona's Immigration Crisis

Via Remix News,

Influencer and model Jessica Goicoechea has posted a video on her social media channels in which she openly criticizes the insecurity she believes plagues Barcelona and details the personal measures she has taken to protect herself. In the clip, Goicoechea displays several security items she recently bought in Andorra, including 4 bottles of pepper sprays and a taser gun, which she describes as her "new essentials."



The video ends with a direct message: "Now, I can go calmly through Barcelona."

The publication quickly sparked intense debate across social platforms. While some users criticized her for publicly showcasing self-defense weapons, many others - particularly women - expressed support and inquired about where similar products could be purchased. In response, Goicoechea stated that she is receiving "infinite messages" from women seeking ways to protect themselves. She defended her actions by saying that, given the current situation, she believes "if you don't protect yourself, no one will."

Following the video's viral spread, Goicoechea followed up with a written statement. She explained that she had never wanted to enter debates about safety or immigration but felt compelled to speak out because conditions have deteriorated.

"I'm never going to shut up again," she declared. The model described living in fear while walking the streets of Barcelona and highlighted what she called a daily increase in stabbings and shootings that she becomes aware of almost constantly.

In the same statement, Goicoechea emphasized that her concerns are not aimed at immigration in general but specifically at individuals who commit crimes. She pointed to recidivism, impunity, and insufficient controls on people with serious criminal records as the core issues.

"The problem is not where someone comes from, but how they behave," she maintained.

Addressing comments under her video, Goicoechea responded to one follower who linked Barcelona's rising crime to immigration by saying she "100% agrees."

"It all stems from political mistakes, regardless of the party's political color, due to poor immigration planning," read the comment she agreed with.

She later clarified that this agreement applied only to those who engage in criminal activity. She argued that "if you come to steal or kill, I prefer you be deported."

Goicoechea reiterated that her goal is to call for improved street safety and a firmer response to crime. "I believe that demanding safe streets and firm laws against those who come to commit crimes is essential and common sense," she concluded in the statement shared on her profiles.

Her comments arrive amid a series of violent incidents recorded across Catalonia in recent weeks, including approximately thirty firearms-related events, many concentrated in the Barcelona metropolitan area. These have been accompanied by frequent robberies and assaults that continue to affect both local residents and tourists, often generating significant public attention.

Other European models have delivered similar messages about crime concerns in the past, including Polish-American supermodel Joanna Krupa.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/15/2026 - 02:00

Iran War 3.0: Where Did This All Go Wrong?

Iran War 3.0: Where Did This All Go Wrong?

Authored by Alastair Crooke

When the US Navy, in co-ordination with Qatar and Oman, tried to slip a convoy of four vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, via Omani waters, last Tuesday night – rather than pass via Iran’s officially approved route – Trump may have imagined (or been told) that with the massive funeral for the late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei under way, that Iran would not react as the US Navy attempted to force open an American corridor. Trump however, misread the Iranian jibe – Hormuz is its “atomic weapon.” Iran will not relinquish it.

Trump insists – in clear contradiction to the terms set out in paragraph five of the MoU – that Iran has no right to interfere with any ship trying to transit the Strait of Hormuz. Iran nonetheless is acting within the terms of the agreed de-escalation framework, and has warned repeatedly that it would strike any vessel circumventing the Iranian control mechanism.

Iran responded directly to Trump’s challenge to Iranian control of the Strait by striking two vessels with missiles and a third with an armed drone. A forth Qatari-owned tanker, laden with liquefied natural gas, was set ablaze, forcing its crew to abandon the stricken vessel.

These Iranian ripostes provoked Trump to order American air strikes against Iranian targets; to reimpose sanctions on the Islamic Republic’s oil exports; and to revoke the MoU framework he had signed with what he called the “Iranian scum” – thus ending the ceasefire. “We hit them hard last night,” Trump said at the NATO summit in Ankara. “We will probably hit them hard again tonight.”

Trump did hit Iran again Wednesday night – even though Iran had not attacked another vessel seeking to by-pass the Iranian corridor. In response, Iran launched ballistic missiles and drones at US bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE and Muwaffaq Al-Salti airbase in Jordan.

Vice-President Vance is saying to Iran, “If you try to close the Strait of Hormuz, the American military will respond. It’s that simple” – i.e. Iran either keeps the Strait fully open to all, or the US will keep hitting it, as it did on Tuesday night.

Iran insists that it is the US that has violated the MoU and (via the spokesman for Iran’s Parliamentary National Security Committee) warns that further attacks by the US on Iran will be met by a comprehensive all-out surprise offensive by Iran – and potentially by other options too, such as an Iranian withdrawal from the NPT, changing the country’s nuclear doctrine, and closing the Bab al-Mandab Strait alongside the Strait of Hormuz.

So, Vice-President Vance is saying if Iran restricts Hormuz (i.e. it stays open to friendly states’ vessels) the US will escalate. And Iran is responding to this threat by warning that it will escalate militarily – two strikes for every one American strike – and that they may also turn to new doctrines of warfare.

Essentially, Trump has plunged into an escalatory trap, seemingly in part out of pique at his collapsing polls at home. He did, however, directly put himself in this situation by trying to “act cute” during the Khamenei funeral pre-occupations in order to try to gain a “quick win.”

How long will this escalatory episode last? Certainly, it will not lead to the opening of the Strait; nor bring a return of the status quo ante that preceded the war. As long as Iran maintains its ability to exert control over Hormuz, there is no basis to assume that the situation will return to what it was.

On the contrary, and more likely, the crisis will accelerate the onset of looming global economic crisis that could last until the economic pain becomes acute, as the drawdown on sour crude continues – and as the effects on the real economy in the West become visible.

With shortages of munitions and the drawdown on air assets from the Middle East already beginning, Trump probably lacks the wherewithal to go full “Iran War 3.0.”

The timeline to this new bout of low-intensity tit-for-tat therefore, is likely dictated by refinery inventories in the US; but also by the extent of the “hurt” being experienced by Trump back home in the context of his fading political prospects, but also by his dislike for any personal humiliation.

Where did this all go wrong? Possibly the crux of it derives from the moment that Iran’s new Supreme Leader, Sayyed Mojtaba, issued his statement that he had held a different view on the MoU to that of the negotiating team, but had agreed to proceed with it after receiving an assurance from the Iranian President that he would ensure and take into account Iran’s overarching principles in respect to relations with the US.

The Supreme Leader Mujtaba Khamenei’s statement put on notice both the US – and the Iranian negotiators – that Iran’s approval of the MoU was no open mandate, but rather closely tied to the 10 principles originally enunciated by the new Supreme Leader.

At some point, the Iranian leadership seemingly came to the conclusion that Iran was being played by the US; that the MoU was a deception –

…and that the entirety of events since the announcement of the MoU reflected a US strategy based on the view that in the previous round of the war against Iran – [that the US and Israel] failed to achieve their objectives – necessitating a halt to the confrontation, albeit temporarily, in order to regroup and prepare “more thoroughly” for a new round when the right conditions arise.

This led to the Iranian reassessment that the Hormuz and Lebanon components constituted the vital leverage to engage in a new war as the West ramps up pressure as a holding strategy – whilst the US and Israel prepare for the next round of war.

The interim US strategy is no change to US-Israeli objectives, but rather an adjustment to their operational mechanisms to provide for certain compromises that Washington considers necessary (i.e. closer working with Turkey and via Erdogan to engage Syria’s Jolani) to reshuffle the Lebanon deck, and then to “assess how the cards lie,” as Vance outlined.

It is not certain that this new US policy will work. The world is changing rapidly. Their expected triumph of Israel over the Middle East has resulted in failure. Trump’s MoU ploy to open Hormuz likely will fail, too.

The connected war on Russia and the siege of China are faltering too – and Israel’s (until now unassailable) hold over the US is in question too. A senior US democrat, Rahm Emanuel, and potential 2028 US Democratic presidential candidate, spoke in Israel yesterday; he warned in no uncertain terms that Israel “has lost the world’s support, become a ‘regional pariah,’ [and that its] alliance with the US is ‘at a crossroads’.”

And finally, a “black swan” now can be observed swimming in increasingly sunlit waters – Eric Katz writing in Notus writes that, “a draft report inside the US Treasury Department is set to warn of the risks posed by the artificial intelligence market, likening key aspects of it to the dotcom bubble that upended the US economy when it burst in the early 2000s.”

Treasury analysts wrote –

Career Treasury analysts found that AI firms are more deeply entrenched in the US economy than their dotcom predecessors and pose significant risk to the entire system if financial conditions change, productivity goals are missed or various choke points stymie growth.

A downturn in the AI market would send shockwaves throughout the entire economic ecosystem.

A market downturn in the US – exacerbated by an energy crisis – could spell disaster for Trump’s midterm hopes.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 23:25

China's Mass Production Of Dual-Use Drone Engines Fuels A Global Proliferation Crisis

China's Mass Production Of Dual-Use Drone Engines Fuels A Global Proliferation Crisis

China's greatest military advantage may be its ability to convert its massive civilian manufacturing base into wartime production of low-cost, one-way attack drones modeled after Iran's Shahed-136.

This is especially alarming because the U.S. defense industrial base is only beginning (read here) to prepare for a transition to wartime output, even as a global drone procurement race accelerates. Nation-states are set to stockpile millions of autonomous, low-cost weapons in the years ahead.

We have already shown readers how Chinese firms appear to be ramping up production of Shahed-style drones, with open-source footage from social media increasingly pointing to expanding production capacity.

The latest finding centers on the drone's powerplant: the Iranian MADO MD-550 engine, which is used throughout the Shahed family and in Russia's Geran-2 variant. MD550-type engines are also being mass produced in China and widely advertised on Chinese e-commerce platforms, including Alibaba.

The problem is not that China manufactures small aviation engines; it is that commercially available, dual-use engines can be incorporated into Shahed-style drones with limited visibility into the final buyer or end use.

The United Nations has identified the Iranian MADO-550 as the engine used in the Shahed drone family, while the U.S. Treasury has said the sanctioned Oje Parvaz Mado Nafar Company (commonly known as Mado company). 

Chinese vendors on Alibaba advertise MD550-type UAV engines in large quantities, although the listings alone do not show any connection to a Chinese state weapons program.

More importantly, the Alibaba listings are evidence of commercial availability, not proof that Beijing is deliberately supplying one-way attack drone programs. However, the listings only highlight the erosion of the boundary between civilian manufacturing and weapons production.

The real threat is that long-range strike drones can increasingly be assembled from commercially produced parts at a scale traditional export-control systems were never designed to contain. This means Shahed-style systems are likely to proliferate far beyond nation-states, spreading to proxies, criminal networks, and other threat actors.

Like this: 

Latest evidence:

The question is no longer whether these drones will reach the West, but when.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 23:00

Open Borders Are A Death Sentence To Western Nations

Open Borders Are A Death Sentence To Western Nations

Authored by J.B.Shurk via AmericanThinker.com,

As simmering conflicts between Western citizens and Western governments boil over the next few years, we must never forget how we got to this point: Elected officials and irremovable bureaucrats occupying permanent administrative roles have refused to respect the wishes of the citizens whom they ostensibly represent and serve.

From the United States to the United Kingdom, citizens have demanded that their governments secure national borders and end the steady flow of illegal aliens into their communities.  From France, the Netherlands, and Germany to Australia and New Zealand, citizens have demanded that their governments arrest and remove Islamic immigrants who are guilty of rape, murder, or other violent crimes.  With the exception of President Trump’s efforts to enforce immigration law and deport illegal alien criminals (despite formidable resistance from the courts, leftist NGOs, and Establishment politicians from both the Democrat and Republican Parties) in the United States, no Western official has done anything to remedy the scourge of unlawful mass invasion in a deliberate, meaningful, and effective way.  Instead, Western governments hide from their citizens the true number of illegal immigrants living among them.  Western governments hide from their citizens a full accounting of the crimes committed by foreign nationals who should never have been permitted entry in the first place.

Mass illegal immigration is not a new problem.  In the United States, President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act into law in 1986.  Defended by both political parties as a way of combating illegal immigration while providing long-term lawbreakers legal status, it effectively awarded millions of foreign nationals amnesty.  Politicians convinced the American people to support this trade-off: In return for citizens’ reluctantly permitting the government to reward the unlawful behavior of foreign immigrants who had no right to reside in the United States, the government would protect citizens by cracking down on future illegal immigration and punishing businesses that hired illegal immigrant workers.  The U.S. government never lived up to its side of the bargain.

Instead, U.S. officials have lied to their citizens for forty additional years.  Until President Trump entered office, U.S. borders were not secured.  Businesses were rarely punished for hiring illegal aliens.  Unbeknownst to most American citizens, State and federal welfare programs continued to add illegal aliens to their taxpayer-funded dole rolls.  School districts in both cities and small towns continued to enroll illegal alien children.  Hospital emergency rooms continued to overflow with illegal alien patients seeking “free” medical care.  American jobs — especially blue-collar jobs — continued to go to illegal aliens because employers could pay foreigners less, avoid state and federal taxes, and use the threat of deportation as exploitative leverage over their workforces.  Illegal alien workers continued to place downward pressure on hourly wages.  Illegal aliens continued to place upward pressure on the costs of housing, energy, and household necessities.  

Sometime in the ‘90s, American politicians and government bureaucrats began admitting to Americans that there were roughly eleven million illegal aliens inside the United States.  For the next thirty years, politicians and bureaucrats repeated the same “eleven million” figure as if no net-increase in immigration had occurred.  Anybody living in small-town America knew this to be a demonstrable lie.  In the nineties, local school classrooms were made up almost entirely of American kids who grew up speaking English in households whose families had been living in the United States for generations.  As each year passed, those same classrooms were increasingly filled with kids whose parents had come from all over the world, and even small school districts were forced to hire staff who could attend to the needs of an increasingly foreign student body unfamiliar with basic English.  

Former Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino has said repeatedly that there are more than one hundred million illegal aliens residing in the United States.  In other words, roughly one out of every three people living inside the borders of the U.S. is a foreign national unlawfully here.  If those foreign nationals are employed, then they are likely guilty of identity fraud and committing a number of additional state and federal crimes.  Of those committing identity fraud, many are using social security numbers stolen from American citizens.  Illegal aliens who steal Americans’ identities adversely affect citizens’ credit scores, tax obligations with the IRS, and background checks.  Illegal aliens who fraudulently vote by claiming to be American citizens steal votes from actual American citizens.  Foreign nationals who illegally vote in American elections deny American citizens legitimate representation and undermine Americans’ constitutional form of self-government.

In 1986, lawmakers from both parties promised an end to illegal immigration.  Instead, tens of millions of new illegal aliens have continued to arrive.  In return for grudgingly acceding to the government’s desire to provide a one-time gift of amnesty to those foreigners whose first act in the country was to break our immigration laws, Americans continued to lose jobs, pay more for everything, and be defrauded by identity theft.  Even worse, they were forced to watch as foreign cultures transformed their schools and towns.  They were forced to watch as foreigners successfully ran for political office and pushed foreign policies and beliefs upon American citizens.  

New York City has a Muslim mayor from Uganda who has been a naturalized U.S. citizen for only eight years.  Minneapolis has a Muslim member of Congress from Somalia who became a naturalized U.S. citizen at the age of seventeen.  Roughly 4% of Congress are foreign-born naturalized citizens, while 15% of Congress have at least one immigrant parent.  A third of the judges occupying prestigious and powerful positions on the D.C. District Courts were born in foreign nations.  

These numbers are going in one direction — up!

When President Barack Obama spoke enthusiastically about “fundamentally transforming” the United States, this is what he had in mind.  If you invite third-world communists to break into your country, pretty soon your government will be filled with third-world communists, too.  Americans were never consulted about this “fundamental transformation.”  Politicians and bureaucrats steamrolled American citizens with tall tales of foreign immigrants fleeing violence in their home countries and seeking safety in the United States.  Nobody tried to explain why all the foreigners fleeing persecution in their home countries still wave their national flags in American neighborhoods and at American sporting events.  Nobody tried to explain why foreigners from all over the world couldn’t obtain asylum in countries closer to home.  Nobody tried to explain why so many foreigners claiming asylum in the United States continue to visit their friends and families in their native countries. 

No American ever voted for this radical transformation.  No politician or government bureaucrat respected American citizens enough to seek their consent.  Nevertheless, politicians and bureaucrats continue to lie to the American people by pretending that foreign nationals are not taking over their society.  Because they despise American citizens, government officials tell obvious lies without shame.

Where is all this shameless and callous disregard for the will of American citizens headed?  It is headed toward the same dead end already appearing in other Western nations such as the United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, and France: Increasingly, Western peoples are electing political representatives who promise to end divisive and deadly mass immigration policies.  The more that government officials undermine their citizens’ electoral will, the more that citizens are turning to the streets to be heard.  

Peaceful forms of civil disobedience are evolving into violent altercations with police. 

Instead of listening to their citizens, Western governments call them racists and censor their online speech.  At some point, citizens will conclude that their governments have become threats to their security and way of life.  Governments will lose their legitimacy.  Western countries will become battlefields.  Open borders guarantee that Western nations will die.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 22:35

Fast Food Giant Under Investigation Over Explosive Diarrhea Outbreak: Report

Fast Food Giant Under Investigation Over Explosive Diarrhea Outbreak: Report

Federal and state health officials are reportedly zeroing in on Taco Bell restaurants as a possible culprit in one of the biggest parasite outbreaks to slam the U.S. in years, a nasty bug that turns your guts into a nonstop disaster zone of explosive diarrhea and misery.

More than 4,000 people have already been sickened, the vast majority of them in Michigan, where victims are enduring days of gut-wrenching, bathroom-racing hell that has hospitalized at least 80 people so far.

The Washington Post reports that officials are probing whether contaminated fresh produce at the fast-food chain helped spread the Cyclospora parasite, which hitches a ride in feces-tainted veggies. No smoking gun has nailed Taco Bell or any single supplier yet, but the chain has yanked lettuce, cilantro, onions, pico de gallo, and guacamole from some Detroit-area locations after a nationwide recall notice surfaced last week.

Taco Bell insists it is playing it safe and putting customers first.

"The health and safety of our guests is our top priority," the company said in a statement obtained by the Post. "Public health officials have not confirmed a link to Taco Bell or any specific ingredient, so we have voluntarily pulled some items at select spots as a precaution while authorities continue their review."

Michigan is ground zero for the outbreak and is getting absolutely hammered, with a staggering 3,300-plus cases and hundreds more piling up daily as state health officials repeatedly flag leafy lettuce and salad greens as the leading suspect after interviewing more than 1,000 sick patients.

"Current results point to lettuce or salad greens as a potential source," Michigan's health department warned Monday. Meanwhile, federal officials at the CDC and FDA are being far more cautious, insisting there is no confirmed single multistate outbreak and that the numbers are not yet definitively unusual even as they log 145 cases across 17 states outside Michigan, along with 20 hospitalizations.

As we previously noted, Cyclospora cayetanensis is a microscopic parasite that loves hitching rides on fresh produce. Once it gets inside you it unleashes watery diarrhea, vicious cramps, vomiting, nausea, exhaustion, and fever that can drag on for days or even weeks if left untreated.

One victim, Cristy Cooper, recently spoke from her hospital bed to the New York Post about the nightmare that started June 25.

"This is worse than any flu I have ever gotten. It is just so miserable," she said. "I am worn out from it. I really am."

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 22:10

New Women's Athletics Guidelines Crack Down On 'Sexualizing' Camera Angles

New Women's Athletics Guidelines Crack Down On 'Sexualizing' Camera Angles

Authored by Calum Patterson via Dexerto,

New broadcasting guidelines have been introduced in Europe to prevent women athletes from being sexualized through camera angles and slow-motion replays.

The European Broadcasting Union partnered with European Athletics to release new guidance for women's athletics coverage, with broadcasters urged to focus on performance and technical ability.

The guidelines warn against lingering shots of athletes' bodies, low camera angles that capture revealing views, and slow-motion replays that offer little technical or storytelling value.

"The sexualization of women athletes through selective camera angles and editing choices continues to be a significant concern across many sports broadcasts," said Glen Killane, Executive Director of EBU Sports.

"Lingering shots on bodies, low-angle cameras that capture revealing views, and excessive slow-motion replays that serve no technical or storytelling purpose are among the issues observed in the media coverage of women's athletics competitions today."

Broadcasters urged to avoid 'compromising' shots

The 23-page Raising the Bar document uses examples from real broadcasts to highlight potentially "compromising" shots across high jump, pole vault, long jump, and running events.

Broadcasters are advised to avoid tight shots from behind athletes, low cameras underneath competitors, and certain slow-motion replays. Instead, wider angles showing run-ups, take-offs, and technique are encouraged.

British Olympic pole vaulter Holly Bradshaw said some athletes have even become distracted by camera positions during competitions.

"Many athletes, myself included have been in competitive scenarios where they are more focused on the cameras instead of their own performance," she said.

Bradshaw also revealed she has received social media abuse and seen "inappropriate videos" of herself and fellow athletes created from slow-motion competition footage.

The guidelines are now available to broadcasters covering women's athletics, with the EBU saying coverage should focus on athletes' "technical ability and compelling storytelling."

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 21:45

Israeli Officials Try To Push US Refueling Tankers Out Of Ben Gurion Airport Amid Disruptions

Israeli Officials Try To Push US Refueling Tankers Out Of Ben Gurion Airport Amid Disruptions

Immense controversy has remained centered on Ben Gurion International Airport as dozens of giant US Air Force refueling tankers have essentially taken over the main Israeli flight hub for many months, since the start of Trump's Operation Epic Fury. Reports also say it has cost the airport hundreds of millions of dollars at this point.

The Israeli government itself seems to be divided, and there's been outrage among the general public as the presence of the American tankers has blocked and slowed regular commercial flights, leading to the recent cancelations of many passengers' tickets, but with an expected tens of thousands more cancelations to come.

On Tuesday the simmering controversy erupted again, and has even raised the possibility of introducing fresh tensions with Washington, after Israeli Transportation Minister Miri Regev announced that the government will not allow more than 20 US refueling tankers to be parked at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport at any given time.

Regev specifically addressed the domestic public's concerns over air travel. "Hundreds of thousands of plane tickets were bought by Israelis to fly and enjoy their summer vacation," the official said. "We promised that we will enable commercial flights and we will not cancel a single ticket because of American refueling planes."

Haaretz had already by June tallied that "Some 75 U.S. refueling planes occupy more than half of Ben-Gurion Airport's parking spots and fill up takeoff and landing slots" and cites airport officials who warn: "For lack of a solution, 1.5 million passengers may have their flights canceled this summer."

Anadolu Agency

"Therefore I have given instructions that we will not allow any US refueling tankers to land at Ben Gurion Airport beyond the agreed number of 20 planes and the remaining planes will land at Air Force bases," Regev adds.

Israeli media notes that the crisis has been building:

The directive comes after the Israel Airports Authority warned that unless more US aircraft are removed from the country’s main international air gateway, as many as 50,000 flight tickets could be at risk of cancellation in the coming weeks.

The monthslong presence of US military aircraft at Ben Gurion Airport amid the Iran war has been preventing a full return to normal commercial flight operations, while also driving up operational costs for local airlines.

It's a deep irony that Israelis are increasingly complaining the United States military has effectively taken over Israel's international travel hub.

Media reports have been going so far as to call Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport a "US military base" - as the prominent local newspaper Haaretz does:

The US refueling aircraft and other military assets, which have been stationed at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport for months, are causing congestion and may result in flight cancellations, Israeli officials and media reports have said, calling the facility a "US military base."

That prior report complained that "U.S. Air Force refueling aircraft have been stationed at Ben Gurion International Airport for three months, occupying parking spots, taking up takeoff and landing slots and worsening congestion at Israel's main international gateway since the war with Iran erupted in late February, officials say."

Again, a central irony here is that it has largely been US military assets protecting Israel the whole time, going all the way back from last year's June war, from Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks.

The Netanyahu government is perceived by many to be a prime reason the US and Iran are at war in the first place, and so the Pentagon might argue that it's only fair that Israel host its large fleet of military planes and refueling aircraft.

Iran's large retaliatory strikes on US airbases in the Gulf region during the opening weeks of the conflict essentially forced the Pentagon to move its expensive, large aerial assets much further back from the front lines of the war. Previously several parked tankers at Gulf facilities were destroyed or damaged.

It still remains unclear whether the Transportation Minister's directive is approved by Netanyahu's office. Likely all it will take is one angry phone call from President Trump and the order could be reversed.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 21:20

The Lockdown Disaster Must Not Be Forgiven

The Lockdown Disaster Must Not Be Forgiven

Authored by Ian Miller via The Brownstone Institute,

Six years since “15 Days to Slow the Spread", data shows why our policies didn't work...

That policy has to have been one of the most disastrous in world history, created by “experts” who took all established pre-pandemic planning documents and tossed them out the window at the first opportunity.

It was a policy based on inaccurate reports out of China, which claimed that their lockdowns effectively stamped out transmission of Covid-19 within a matter of days.

It was a policy that ignored solid research – from established epidemiologists like Dr. Jay Bhattacharya – which found that the coronavirus had already spread much more widely than previously realized.

It must be noted forever that lockdowns and the associated mask mandates, vaccine passports, and school closures continued in some places for several years. The ramifications of those wretched policies will be quite literally endless. It’s not an exaggeration to say that lockdowns, our policies, and responses have quite literally changed the course of world history.

One would think that there would definitely be a concerted effort to understand whether such policies were effective or not. Whether approaching respiratory viruses with authoritarian crackdowns on businesses and schools was necessary to save lives.

Yet six years later, there’s unfortunately very little interest in examining those questions. And when you understand the data from Sweden, you will see exactly why.

Study on Swedish Approach to Covid Shows Lockdowns Didn’t Work

A study published in PubMed examined the Swedish approach to Covid policy, relative to its European counterparts, primarily because Sweden did not rely on lockdowns in response to the pandemic, but instead used “voluntary and sustainable mitigation recommendations,” the study says.

Despite a “majority of Swedes” supporting those policies, “this approach faced rapid and continuous criticism.”

That criticism came primarily from public health figures such as, surprise, surprise, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who criticized Sweden repeatedly for going against the herd.

“You’ve compared us to Sweden, and there are a lot of differences,” he said during a Senate Committee hearing in September 2020. “But compare Sweden’s death rate to other comparable Scandinavian countries. It’s worse. So I don’t think it’s appropriate to compare Sweden with us.”

“If you look at Sweden, they are in some trouble,” Fauci claimed on Good Morning America in late 2020. “They are starting to see that their death rate is much higher than the surrounding countries of Norway, Denmark, and Finland…They’re starting to see now that they’re having to rethink some of the things they did.”

This was, of course, not true. They did not “rethink” their strategy of light touch recommendations over lockdowns. And comparing Sweden exclusively to its neighbors is an absurd misdirection that no other country was subjected to. But Fauci, obviously never one for honesty or intellectual integrity, represented many public health figures who were anxious to see Sweden fail.

Yet as this research shows, reality was precisely the opposite.

The study explains that Sweden received criticism for “not legally enforcing mask-wearing in public spaces,” as well as keeping schools open and “being too permissive” with its policies. All the things that we were told were necessary to stop Covid and save lives. The researchers tested these statements using excess mortality data and stringency indices to compare Sweden across the whole of Europe, not just its neighbors.

They chose excess mortality because, unlike Covid specific measurements, it’s less subject to bias, differences in testing, and counting, and individual definitions of Covid-caused outcomes. It also accounts for deaths that “could potentially be indirectly attributed to the negative effects of strict lockdown measures and the overall strain on healthcare systems, leading to reduced access to healthcare for other diseases, among other factors.”

Turns out that what they discovered was that Sweden vastly outperformed the rest of Europe from 2020-2022, with outcomes that were remarkably similar to the other Nordic countries.

“Among 42 European countries, the cumulative excess all-cause mortality from January 2020 to December 2022 ranged from 46 (Luxembourg) to 1,080 (Bulgaria) deaths per 100,000 inhabitants, with a median of 351/100,000,” they write. “In Sweden, the excess mortality rate of 158/100,000 was among the lowest, ranked 37th among 42 countries, and not very different from other Nordic countries: Norway (129), Denmark (97), and Finland (228).”

So why did Sweden underperform in 2020 relative to their neighbors? Likely due, as the study explains, to “mortality displacement due to low all-cause mortality in 2019,” as well as “poorly organized older adult care structures.”

What does this mean? Essentially, there were significantly fewer deaths from all causes in Sweden in 2019, meaning there were more extremely elderly people alive in 2020 that were susceptible to severe outcomes from Covid. This is reflected in the massive age gradient with Covid-associated deaths. In Sweden, “~40% of the COVID-19-associated deaths were among patients in nursing homes,” the study says, “and 67% of all COVID-19 deaths were among individuals above 80 years of age, representing 10% of all deaths in that age group.”

For younger age groups, Covid was mostly a non-issue. “COVID-19 deaths below 50 years of age represented only 1.2% of all COVID deaths, including 21 individuals below 20 years of age, mostly with underlying co-morbidities, representing 1% of all deaths in that age group.”

Effectively, Covid ravaged extremely elderly people, while those under 50, despite the lack of mask mandates and lockdowns, saw very limited impact.

Sweden’s Lack of Lockdowns Led to Better Outcomes

Equally important, they examined the “stringency index” for countries across Europe, then made a data table comparing that stringency to excess mortality from 2020-2022. Effectively, how strict were a country’s policies, and how much did that matter to reducing excess mortality?

Turns out, there’s a definitive, resounding answer which this chart demonstrates perfectly. Countries are plotted based on their stringency index, the x-axis, and excess mortality, the y-axis. The line demonstrates the trend in mortality rates, and there’s virtually no relationship between the severity of policy and preventing excess mortality.

The R-squared, effectively the relationship between stringency index and excess mortality, is just 0.14. The closer to 1, the more related stringency is to outcomes. This is 0.14.

Countries like Italy and Spain were some of the strictest when it came to lockdowns and mandates, yet ranked near the top in excess mortality rates. The UK, Portugal, the Netherlands and others were significantly more stringent and also had demonstrably worse outcomes. Denmark was the second least strict country and had the best outcomes, at least in this examination.

What does this tell us? Well, put simply, Fauci was wrong. Sweden did not underperform relative to its neighbors. It did significantly better than the rest of Europe, and of course, the United States. Lockdowns and stringency were not related, whatsoever, to reducing excess mortality. They never mandated masks, one of his chief policy recommendations, and outperformed other countries like Germany which imposed N95-level mandates for months on end.

This is a clear repudiation of the lockdown model. Which is precisely why Sweden’s example is deliberately being ignored today.

Because learning the actual results of these historically bad policies requires humility, accountability, and honesty, all qualities that many in public health are truly incapable of possessing.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 20:55

New York's Millionaire Exodus Is Costing Billions In Lost Revenue

New York's Millionaire Exodus Is Costing Billions In Lost Revenue

Mayor Zohran Mamdani stood outside Ken Griffin's $238 million Manhattan penthouse in April and declared victory. "When I ran for mayor, I said I was going to tax the rich. Well, today we're taxing the rich," he said in a social media video marking the debut of New York City's first pied-à-terre tax, an annual fee on luxury properties worth more than $5 million whose owners do not live in the city full time. He promised the tax would raise "at least $500 million directly for the city," money he said would fund free child care, cleaner streets, and safer neighborhoods. "This is a fundamentally unfair system that hurts working New Yorkers," Mamdani said. "Now it's coming to an end."

Three months later, a new study suggests the mayor picked an odd moment to celebrate.

The Citizen Budget Commission published an analysis Monday, finding that New York's shrinking share of the nation's millionaires cost the state an estimated $10.7 billion in lost personal income tax revenue in 2022 alone. New York's share of the country's millionaires fell from 12.7 percent in 2010 to 8.7 percent in 2022, the steepest decline of any state over that period. Had New York simply held its 2010 share, the Commission concluded, the state would have collected roughly $10.7 billion more in personal income tax that year.

So Mamdani, who took office in January, had inherited a tax base already showing signs of flight. His pied-à-terre push targets exactly the kind of high earners the CBC says have been leaving in growing numbers, and critics view the timing as more provocation than plan. Gov. Kathy Hochul, who is running for reelection in November, has stopped short of backing an outright tax increase on wealthy New Yorkers this year, though she supports the pied-à-terre concept for luxury second homes in the city.

"In New York, the top 1% of earners pay about 45% of all state income taxes in any given year, so New York's revenue is very reliant on high earners to stay in New York, and that has been a challenge in recent years," said Jared Walczak, an economist and senior fellow at the Tax Foundation think tank, told the New York Post.

Walczak said city-level measures like Mamdani's cannot fix the underlying problem, since any meaningful tax change requires action in Albany. He also warned that continued hikes combined with more competitive alternatives elsewhere could accelerate departures.

Abir Mandel, senior state policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, said New York currently ranks last in the nation for tax competitiveness. She pointed to Elon Musk relocating his companies from California to Texas as the kind of decision New York risks inviting without reform, cautioning that the state will otherwise struggle to attract both population and business. Of Wall Street's outsized role in propping up state revenue, Mandel offered a blunt assessment. "Wall Street is the golden goose," she said. "But for how long?"

The CBC report traces the stagnation back well before Mamdani ever took office. Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo raised income taxes on high earners during the COVID pandemic, and Hochul now oversees Medicaid spending, which is on pace to reach $58 billion by the end of the decade. Ken Girardin, a research fellow at the Manhattan Institute, pointed to the state's 2019 rent-control overhaul and its green-energy mandate as a one-two punch that reduced housing supply and raised energy costs. "Albany is directly responsible for the stagnation," he said.

New York has lost more residents to every other state than it has gained from any of them, with Florida and Texas among the top destinations for departing New Yorkers, and that's a huge problem.

Justin Wilcox, executive director of Upstate United, called the study's findings hard to ignore. "It's difficult to not be alarmed by this data," he said. "With this CBC tool, Upstate New Yorkers can see for themselves the devastating impacts of Albany's policies - businesses failing to grow, population decline, and the loss of revenue. NYS needs to course correct now before it's too late and we become permanently entrenched in a cycle of fewer people."

Asked about the study on Monday during an unrelated event, Mamdani dismissed concerns that higher earners will flee the city, arguing that New York gained millionaires after past tax increases by Albany. He defended his broader philosophy without addressing the CBC's specific findings. "I've been very clear about the fact that we live in the wealthiest city in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, and it's unacceptable that one in four New Yorkers are living in poverty, and I believe that the wealthiest can do a little bit more to ensure that everyone can afford to live here," he said.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 18:00

Offload Risks Onto The Bottom 90% And Immiseration Follows

Offload Risks Onto The Bottom 90% And Immiseration Follows

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

The underlying story of the past 50 years has been the offloading of risk onto workers and consumers.

On my map of how the world works, we start with structures of control that distribute the good stuff--resources, assets, income and power--and the bad stuff: costs, losses and risks. As I explained in The US Economy In a Nutshell: Privatize the Gains, Socialize the Costs, the current arrangement distributes the gains to the top 10% and the costs and risks to the bottom 90% via privatizing the gains and socializing--i.e. dumping them onto the biosphere and the public--the costs and losses.

This follows a power-law distribution: the few at the top reap most of the gains, and the leftovers, scraps and crumbs are distributed in descending order, with most of what's left going to the top 9.5% and a diminishing dribble is scattered over the lower 90%, so that by the time we get to the bottom half of households, 170 million people own a grand total of 2.5% of the nation's financial assets, while the top 0.1% own 16.6%--6.6X the bottom 50%.

A key mechanism in this wildly asymmetric distribution of gains and costs is the system favors capital over wages. As the charts below illustrate, the financial gains go to the owners of capital, and since ownership of capital is highly concentrated, these few owners siphon up the vast majority of the gains.

One way to understand how the current arrangement favors capital over wages is to reverse the tax liabilities of capital and wages. Employers and employees pay 15.3% of every dollar of wages in Social Security / Medicare taxes, plus income taxes that quickly rise to 22%, for a total tax rate of 37.3% on wages. (Note self-employed people like myself pay the full 15.3% ourselves, as we're both employer and employee.)

Capital gains are taxed at 20%, but only when the asset is sold, so the wealthy borrow against their unrealized gains and live off this borrowed money to avoid selling and having to pay tax on capital gains. And since the system depends on debt to survive, the interest on debt is deductible, giving the wealthy borrowers a tax deduction for avoiding capital gains.

Now imagine all capital gains, realized or unrealized, were taxed at 37% and the first $80,000 of wages were tax-free. The median wage is around $80,000, hence my picking that number. As for the hue and cry about unrealized capital gains being taxed, that's easily addressed: unrealized gains in primary-residence owner-occupied homes and retirement accounts would be exempted. Every other gain made playing in the casino would be taxed.

Reversing the asymmetry of tax liabilities would dramatically alter the distribution of gains and costs. Wages have lost ground for 50+ years, and the favoring of capital is a key driver of this decline in the share of the economy that's distributed to wage earners.

Half the nation's households--170 million people own a grand total of 2.5% of the nation's financial assets:

The winner-take-most arrangement favoring capital:

Another key driver is the offloading of risk from owners to consumers and workers, a perverse process that has been obscured by incremental degradation. Risk is a strange phenomenon that defies easy definition. Risk isn't a direct loss or cost; it's the probability of losses and costs arising in what appears on the surface to be a stable arrangement.

Consider the stunning decline in the quality of durable goods such as appliances, and global industry adopting a laughably valueless one-year warranty across the board. Appliances that routinely lasted 30 years before "Progress" took the reins now routinely fail in 3+ years.

In the good old days before "Progress" took the reins, manufacturers absorbed the risk of premature failure of the goods they produced. Now this risk has been offloaded onto consumers, who are now forced to buy "extended warranties" as the only means of mitigating the risk they now carry of premature failure.

This is in effect a form of extortion: "nice refrigerator you got there, too bad it's at risk of breaking." Well, if current manufacturers had the same standards as previous generations, we wouldn't need "extended warranties." Welcome to the Mafia Economy: low quality goods and services force "upgrades," i.e. extortion.

Consider the offloading of risk onto workers. Employment other than casual labor once included healthcare insurance and other basic benefits. In the "gig economy" of contract employment and gigs, the worker is now responsible for paying their Social Security / Medicare taxes, healthcare insurance and retirement contributions.

The decline of hourly wages is another offloading of risk onto the worker. The percentage of workers paid by the hour has declined in favor of salaried positions with open-ended demands on workers: where hourly workers get paid for hours on the job, salaried workers are now on the hook for work beyond a conventional 8-hour work shift.

Then there's the immense mass of risk and labor that's been offloaded onto consumers and workers as shadow work, often the result of having to fix failures in goods and services that were once the responsibility of the provider or employer and have been dumped on consumers and workers. This is a topic I've often addressed.

This Is Why You're Drowning in Busywork: We have been told that A.I. will take people's jobs. What no one mentions is that many of those jobs are landing on us. The A.I. revolution involves a huge transfer of labor-- not from worker to machine but from worker to consumer. (nytimes.com, paywalled)

Another source of risk is the dependence on debt to fund the lifestyles we deserve: as the purchasing power of wages has declined, the easy "solution" is to fill the gap between what earnings can buy and what we want / need / expect / deserve with borrowed money.

As we all know, debt comes with risk, as falling behind greases the slide to default, bankruptcy and ruin. 27% interest rates on credit cards steepen the slide into a cliff: one missed payment can trigger a cascade of events that cannot be reversed. This is why I often observe that fewer bad things can happen if you have no debt.

Last but far from least, is the current arrangement's dependence on serial credit-asset bubbles as the sole driver of "growth", a dependence that has led to a casino economy in which wage earners lose ground and in desperation turn to gambling as their last-ditch hope of gaining ground.

But despite 24/7 assurances that "this isn't a bubble," all bubbles pop with devastating consequences for those who believed the assurances of those operating the casino.

The underlying story of the past 50 years has been the offloading of risk onto workers and consumers, with the inevitable consequences being higher costs and losses leading to impoverishment and immiseration. We're frogs in water that's getting measurably hotter, and it's getting harder to muster the means to jump out of the simmering pot.

*  *  *

My book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition). Introduction (free). Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com. Subscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 16:20

Venezuela's Oil Revival Faces A Critical Services Bottleneck

Venezuela's Oil Revival Faces A Critical Services Bottleneck

Authored by Rystad Energy via OilPrice.com,

  • Venezuela could increase crude production by about 194,000 bpd by late 2028, with most growth coming from existing producing fields rather than new discoveries.

  • International oil companies led by Chevron are expected to deliver nearly two-thirds of the forecast production increase through brownfield investments.

  • The biggest obstacles are operational, including drilling rigs, diluent supplies, infrastructure upgrades, and a competitive fiscal regime capable of attracting long-term investment.

Venezuela's upstream industry has entered a new phase. Following sweeping hydrocarbon reforms and broader geopolitical developments in early 2026, the conversation has shifted from whether the country can reopen its oil sector to whether it can successfully execute a meaningful production recovery. The country's resource potential has never been in doubt. The greater challenge now lies in converting policy momentum into sustained operational growth.

Rystad Energy estimates Venezuela's crude production could increase by approximately 17%, or around 194,000 barrels per day (bpd), between the fourth quarter of 2025 and the fourth quarter of 2028. Importantly, this growth is expected to come primarily from existing producing assets rather than large-scale new discoveries, highlighting that operational execution, not resource availability, will determine the pace of recovery.

Near-term production growth will be dominated by heavier crude grades. Around three-quarters of Venezuela's output through 2028 is expected to come from heavy, extra-heavy crude and bitumen, with the Orinoco Oil Belt accounting for roughly 60% of total production. This makes access to diluents, workover activity, infill drilling, and mature field management considerably more important than reserve additions over the next several years.

Venezuela upstream figure 1

International operators are driving the recovery

International oil companies (IOCs) are expected to contribute nearly two-thirds of Venezuela's forecast production increase through 2028. Chevron remains the largest contributor, followed by Repsol, Eni, Maha Energy and Maurel & Prom. Most of this growth is expected to come from expanding production at existing joint ventures, reflecting renewed investment following regulatory changes and sanctions relief rather than greenfield developments.

Chevron continues to occupy a particularly strategic position. Recent portfolio adjustments have strengthened its exposure to the Orinoco Oil Belt, while future production growth is expected to rely on brownfield optimization, infill drilling and the phased development of Ayacucho 8. Beyond Chevron, companies such as Eni and Repsol continue to play a dual role in both Venezuela's crude and natural gas sectors through assets including the Cardón IV block and the giant Perla gas field.

However, international participation remains highly selective. Companies continue to balance the opportunity presented by Venezuela's vast resource base against fiscal uncertainty, operational complexity and long-term investment risk.

Execution, not geology, remains the key constraint

While policy reforms have improved the investment outlook, they do not eliminate the operational bottlenecks that have constrained production for years.

Sustained production growth will require continuous access to diluents, higher drilling activity, extensive workover campaigns, improved infrastructure and significantly greater rig availability. These operational requirements represent the critical link between resource potential and realized production.

Fiscal competitiveness also remains an important consideration. International operators have indicated that future capital commitments will depend on further improvements to Venezuela's fiscal framework, particularly around royalty rates and taxation. Lower project breakeven costs through more competitive fiscal terms could materially improve investment economics and encourage broader participation across the sector.

Oilfield services could become the industry's defining bottleneck

Perhaps the greatest challenge facing Venezuela's recovery lies beyond the upstream operators themselves. The Venezuelan Oil Ministry has identified a requirement for 93 active drilling rigs by 2028, a significant increase from current activity levels. Achieving this target would require a phased expansion involving reactivating domestic rigs, refurbishing idle equipment, and eventually importing additional rigs from international markets.

This creates substantial opportunities for drilling contractors and oilfield service providers but also highlights the scale of the execution challenge. Companies must balance equipment mobilization costs, contract duration requirements, and country risk before committing capital.

Local contractors have begun reactivating existing fleets, while international service providers remain more cautious, waiting for greater evidence that recent policy reforms will translate into a stable, commercially attractive operating environment. As a result, rebuilding operational capacity may ultimately prove just as important as attracting upstream investment.

Venezuela upstream figure 2

The next phase depends on implementation

The 2026 Hydrocarbons Law represents one of the most significant structural reforms to Venezuela's upstream sector in decades. By expanding opportunities for private participation and introducing greater fiscal flexibility, the legislation has created a more attractive framework for future investment.

Yet legislation alone cannot restore production. The speed of implementation, the stability of fiscal policy, continued sanctions relief, and the industry's ability to rebuild operational capacity will ultimately determine whether Venezuela can translate ambition into sustained output growth.

For investors and operators alike, the opportunity is considerable. But the country's upstream revival will depend less on the size of its resource base than on its ability to consistently execute across drilling, infrastructure, services, and investment policy. That execution gap, not geology, is likely to define Venezuela's production trajectory over the remainder of the decade.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:45

Lucid Calls Bankruptcy Report "Completely False" As Shares Stage V-Shaped Recovery

Lucid Calls Bankruptcy Report "Completely False" As Shares Stage V-Shaped Recovery

Summary: 

  • Lucid Exec Calls Bankruptcy Report 'Fake News' 
  • Lucid Reponds, Denies AlixPartners Has Recommended Bankruptcy Route  
  • Lucid Crashes On Report It's Weighing A Take-Private Or Bankruptcy
Lucid PR Head Calls Report "Completely False" 

Nick Twork, Lucid's chief communications officer, took to X in late-afternoon trading to deny Electric-Vehicles.com's report about a potential bankruptcy, stating that the "company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special board committee to explore the scenarios reported today."

Twork stated:

The rumors are completely false. The company has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year, as recently published in its last quarterly filings, and it has not formed any special Board committee to explore the scenarios reported today.  Our focus is on improving execution, strengthening operations, and positioning Lucid to realize the full potential of its technology, products, and innovation. AlixPartners is assisting us in that and nothing else and has not recommended bankruptcy to management or the Board. We

Shares crashed nearly 50% at one point today and, in the final hour of trading, staged a V-shaped recovery. 

Bloomberg data show Lucid is heavily shorted, with 37.22% short, or about 63.6 million shares.

One can only assume that short sellers used the crash to cover some of their bearish positions.

Lucid Denies Report 

Lucid responded to Electric-Vehicles.com's report, stating that restructuring adviser AlixPartners has not recommended bankruptcy.

Bloomberg headline:

  • LUCID SAYS ALIXPARTNERS HAS NOT RECOMMENDED BANKRUPTCY

Electric-Vehicles.com's report did mention that another strategic option would be a take-private transaction.

Here are Lucid's top shareholders:

Lucid Crashes On Report It's Weighing A Take-Private Or Bankruptcy

Shares of struggling EV maker Lucid plunged as much as 49% after auto-industry news website Electric-Vehicles.com reported that the company is working with restructuring adviser AlixPartners to evaluate strategic options, including a potential take-private transaction or a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing.

Lucid EV

Here's more from the report:

According to the sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because the review is strictly confidential, AlixPartners is urging the board to run one more round of restructuring in the United States and Europe, and to narrow the company's focus onto its Gravity SUV.

. . .

One person close to the matter told EV that the two starker questions, whether Lucid should be taken private or seek Chapter 11 protection, are among the scenarios the adviser has been asked to weigh.

Neither, the person stressed, is a decision the board has taken.

Shares were halved in late-afternoon trading in New York... Multiple trading halts were seen. 

How long until Lucid denies the report?

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:41

IRGC Vows 'Not A Drop Of Oil & Gas Will Be Exported' From Region Amid Sustained Cross-Gulf Fighting

IRGC Vows 'Not A Drop Of Oil & Gas Will Be Exported' From Region Amid Sustained Cross-Gulf Fighting Summary:
  • Iran-US fighting is sustained but in tit-for-tat pace, with new reported strikes across the Gulf.
  • Trump declares FULL blockade on Iranian ports, while IRGC asserts 'wartime control' of Hormuz.
  • Trump drops 20% transit fee plan; oil prices ease.
  • Multiple tanker attacks over past day again disrupt shipping & cause casualties.
  • Regional conflict expands with reported Houthi missiles on Saudi Arabia.
//--> //--> //--> Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal by August 31?
Yes 12% · No 89%
View full market & trade on Polymarket

*  *  *

IRGC: Iran to 'Control Entire Strait in Wartime'

Amid ongoing cross-Gulf attacks today between Iranian and US forces, the IRGC says they targeted enemy weapons and parts storages in Bahrain and Kuwait. This after the US appeared to attack some critical Iranian infrastructure on coastal islands.

The IRGC has issued a fresh statement via state media on Tuesday, saying that "as long as the US evil stays in the region, not a drop of oil and gas will be exported from the region." It said further, per the press release:

  • US aggression will have no result other than delaying the opening of the Strait of Hormuz.
  • Targeted drone ramp in Kuwait's Ali Al Salem air base; today's attacks in response to US attacks on Iran.

ABC is meanwhile reporting during the mid-afternoon (US time) that American airstrikes on Iran have been underway for the last couple of course. And yet still, Iran's IRIB has said that the Islamic Republic "must control the entire Hormuz Strait in wartime". The region is being plunged back into full-fledged war, also as fighting between the Saudis and Houthis in Yemen appears to be breaking out.

Morning warnings from Tehran late Tuesday: Iran's deputy foreign minister says if the US thinks its military attacks and blockade will force them to request negotiations, it's making a mistake.

Trump Backs Off 20% Fee Plan For Hormuz, Asserts 'FULL Blockade' 

It's the return of another TACO Tuesday as President Trump in a lengthy Truth Social missive appears to have reversed his plan to collect a 20% of cargo fee for international vessels wishing to transit the Strait of Hormuz.

"Oil is flowing like never before," he began (except it's not...), before writing, "Based on highly productive conversations with Middle East leadership, I have decided to replace the 20% United States Reimbursement Fee with Trade and Investment Deals that the various Gulf States will be making into the United States. Those Investments will be MASSIVE but, at the same time, extraordinarily good for them, and their future." He echoed the same in follow-up with reporters at the White House:

So Gulf allies, and likely officials within his own cabinet, have talked Trump out of the 20% collection scheme idea, which would have likely in the end just shifted leverage back over to Iran, given its own much cheaper passage protocol scheme.

US OIL PARES GAINS, WTI TRADES NEAR $78/BBL

Oil prices decline on the stated reversal in plans:

...amid emerging reports of fresh Iranian attacks on Kuwait:

The battle for Hormuz has ramped up after the United States has undertaken three consecutive nights of major bombing raids against Iranian targets.

All the while President Trump is said to be "very serious" about his plan to impose a 20% toll on cargo transiting through the Strait of Hormuz, a Semafor report says, citing a White House official who says the president has desired such a plan for months. Both warring sides are insisting that it is their side alone which will be 'guardian' over the strait.

AFP/Getty Images Iran FM Trolls Trump Toll Scheme

Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi took some jabs at the proposed US plan soon after Trump unveiled it on Truth Social.

"POTUS is absolutely right. Whoever provides secure and safe passage of commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz should be compensated for this service," Araghchi wrote on X. "20% is of course too much. We will be fair," he added.

Below: ongoing reports that the Houthis are entering the war after Monday missile attacks on the kingdom:

The same day, a clip of Secretary of State Marco Rubio from late June insisting that "no country" can extract tolls went viral. "That's the law. It's an international waterway. No country is allowed to charge tolls or fees on an international waterway," Rubio said.

"That's existing international law. That's the way it is in international waterways all over the world and that's the way we'll expect it'll be here." He added: "I think all the countries in this region would agree."

Meanwhile Iranian sources continue to warn the West, also with dramatic images of tankers exploding:

Gulf Air Defenses Active Night & Morning

German shipping company Hapag-Lloyd says also agrees that charging fees for what is in reality international waters and thus under the control of no single nation "would be fundamentally wrong".

Even amid a relentless bombing campaign, Iranian forces have not shown signs of backing off their enforcement of their navigation protocol.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has on Tuesday newly "targeted and disabled" two supertankers for switching off navigation systems which involved "ignoring warnings and endangering navigation," according to Tasnim.

Al Jazeera reports early Tuesday, "It's been an active night and morning for air defense systems in several countries in this region because of missiles and projectiles fired from Iran."

"This has affected the ship traffic passing through the Strait of Hormuz. Yesterday, we saw the lowest number of ships passing in five weeks," it continues, adding: "There were only six ships. The day before that, there were 14."

Multiple Tankers Attacked Over Past Day, Casualties

At least three tankers have been struck overnight into Tuesday, with among them:

The tanker Stolt Magnesium has caught ⁠fire after the “explosion of an unidentified external device” as it was ⁠sailing in the Arabian Sea off Oman, its ⁠manager, Stolt Tankers, says.

The incident occurred at 12:40am (20:40 GMT on Monday) and caused a fire in the ‌vessel’s engine room, the company said in a statement.

The UAE and Gulf allies have strongly condemned the 'brazen' attacks on international shipping.

Source: CNN

There are growing deaths among seafarers in what's obviously the world's most dangerous and volatile energy transit water way. India has formally summoned Iran's deputy ambassador after an Indian sailor was killed.

According to the UAE defense ministry, the casualty occurred when two Iranian cruise missiles targeted two UAE vessels in the crucial shipping lane, leaving one Indian national dead and eight others wounded.

More latest developments

via Newsquawk...

  • US President Trump reiterated that Iran has no air force, no navy and no military, while he said they will hit Iran very hard on Monday night and on Tuesday. Trump said they had a deal yesterday and that Iran breaks deals, as well as commented that the MoU was built to test Iran and that Iran didn't honour it. Trump also stated that they will hit 'Pickaxe Mountain' pretty soon and have their eyes on the site all the time, which is a good potential target
  • US Central Command announced that it conducted and completed a third consecutive night of strikes against Iran, with US strikes reported in Bushehr, Bandar Abbas and Bandar Kangan, while explosions were also reported in Iran's Qeshm Island and Kish Island. More recently, there have been reports of explosions have been heard near Bandar Abbas, Bushehr and Choghadak.
  • Details of US President Trump’s proposed Strait of Hormuz toll plan are still being finalised, according to Semafor, saying Trump is 'very serious about the tolls.
  • Iran's armed forces have begun targeting US naval vessels in the Strait of Hormuz with cruise missiles, Al Mayadeen reported.
  • Iranian Army Spokesperson said the Strait of Hormuz will not be open with US aggressions and war, SNN reported.
  • IRGC said it targeted weapons warehouses, satellite communications centres, and US forces' housing building at Bahrain's Juffair base. Iran's army also targeted US military facilities and equipment in Kuwait with drones, as well as targeted a 'hostile' US vessel with cruise missiles, while it was separately reported that a US military base in Jordan was hit by a missile attack and that a missile attack hit an Iranian Kurdish opposition group site east of Iraq's Erbil.
  • UKMTO received a report that a tanker was hit by an unknown projectile 40NM northeast of Qalhat, Oman. UKMTO reports of an incident 13NM southeast of Lima, Oman, the tanker was reportedly hit by a missile transiting outbound on the southern route
  • The UAE Defence Ministry reported that two national tankers were targeted by Iranian cruise missiles in the southern Strait of Hormuz, with the incident occurring in Omani territorial waters, although the fires on both tankers were brought under control, and it reserved the right to respond to the escalation.
  • ADNOC confirmed tankers "Al Bahyah" and "Mombasa B" were hit in the Strait of Hormuz.
  • Oman’s Foreign Minister said complex talks are under way to make a long-term arrangement to guarantee freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:15

De-Banked: It's Only A Matter Of Time Before It Happens To You

De-Banked: It's Only A Matter Of Time Before It Happens To You

Via InternationalMan.com,

"We are writing to inform you that we cannot continue serving you.

As a result of this decision, your account will be closed within 14 days from the date of this letter.

Any remaining account balances will be sent by check to the address we have on file."

Sooner or later, expect your bank to send you a letter like this.

They won't even tell you why they are closing your account, and you will probably have trouble opening accounts at other banks.

De-banking is a disturbing and growing trend.

In short, the ruling elite - parasites, more accurately - have weaponized the banking system to enforce conformity to their preferred narrative.

If you don't lap up their lies about Covid, climate, elections, wars, rising crime, or whatever the media is hyping as the "current thing," expect the financial hammer to come down on you without warning.

You could lose your ability to take payment from your customers and pay your bills at the drop of a hat.

We've seen banks close the accounts of prominent doctors critical of the Covid mass hysteria and politicians opposed to schemes to centralize power on a global level (globalism).

However, for every example of a bank closing a high-profile person's account, hundreds - or thousands - of other ordinary people likely receive the same despicable treatment but are never heard from.

Every day people are losing their ability to interact in the economy because the elite have determined they committed a thought crime.

Interestingly, the banks never canceled the accounts of the warmongers who spread the lies about WMD in Iraq or the liars that led to the toppling of the Ghadafi government in Libya and the liars that fueled the Syrian conflict.

All of their bank accounts are in good standing, even though they contributed to the unnecessary deaths of countless innocents.

Nor did the banks close the accounts of those who, for years, peddled the Russiagate lies that tore the country apart or those who claimed the Hunter Biden laptop story was phony when it was, in fact, real and probably affected the outcome of an election.

All of their bank accounts are in good standing too.

The banks also did not close Jeffrey Epstein's accounts, even though they were likely aware of what he was up to.

These are just a few examples of the blatant double standard.

If you are skeptical about whether men can get pregnant or if cow farts will destroy the planet, you should expect very different treatment than Jeffrey Epstein or people whose lies align with the military-industrial complex.

De-banking is another example of how formerly free societies are rapidly descending into high-tech totalitarianism.

It's only prudent to expect de-banking to worsen as governments fall deeper into bankruptcy and become more desperate to maintain control. Controlling the narrative - partly by de-banking anyone with opposing views - is crucial for them to try to hold on to their power.

Today you can be de-banked for having the wrong opinion. Tomorrow you could be de-banked for even more trivial reasons.

For example, even if you loyally follow whatever the TV tells you to think, the banks may notice you are purchasing "too much" meat or gas and are therefore exceeding your monthly carbon allowance. In the name of saving the planet and maintaining their ESG scores, they'll close your account.

Think that's far-fetched?

Consider that already, today, Bank of America shares all gun purchases from its clients with the FBI. It would be naive to assume they and other banks don't automatically share additional data.

Or that PayPal recently floated the idea of charging people $2,500 for promoting so-called "misinformation" - a vague propaganda term that really means "information the people in charge don't want you to know because they're afraid you will come to a conclusion they don't like."

It's not hard to see where the de-banking train is going.

We're only a few stops away from a full-blown social credit system.

There Is No Free Market in Money and Banking

Money is simply supposed to be something useful for storing and exchanging value.

Banks are simply supposed to be money warehouses.

However, that is not how it works today.

Governments have perverted money and banking into tools to control the population.

An unconvincing argument you may hear is that banks are private companies exercising discretion on their clients. They are within their right to de-bank whoever they want.

They say it is no different from a baker having the right to refuse to bake a cake for someone they don't like.

You could make that argument if only there was a totally free market in money and banking... but there isn't. Not even close.

Here's a more accurate analogy.

Imagine a situation where the only bread available on the market is government bread, and the only way you could obtain such bread is through government-approved bakeries. Independent bakeries would not exist.

The government could then exert overt and subtle pressure on the bakeries to ensure they aligned with their preferred narrative by removing their permission to operate or threatening to. They could also impose fines, start invasive investigations, or add more regulations.

There would be no shortage of ways a bureaucrat could find to make things unpleasant for the bakeries.

The bakeries' owners know such a dynamic exists, so they enthusiastically fall in line with the "current thing" to avoid problems.

Then, suppose it became known to the bakery that one of their customers had committed a thought crime. They wouldn't hesitate to throw him to the curb, even if he had been a loyal customer for many years. It simply wouldn't be worth the potential problems. Word would spread to other bakeries that he was trouble, and they'd avoid his business too.

Since the only bread on the market is government bread, which is only available from government-licensed bakeries, he would be unable to obtain bread.

A similar situation exists today in money and banking.

In Marx's Communist Manifesto, the 5th plank calls for the "centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly."

That perfectly describes fiat currency and the Federal Reserve, which oversees the banking system.

The free market wouldn't choose easy-to-produce government confetti as money without laws forcing their use.

Here's another way to think of it.

Imagine if Tony Soprano forced his neighborhood to use pieces of paper with his signature as money and threatened violence against anyone who disobeyed. That's what governments are doing with their currencies today.

It's a far cry from when people used gold - a politically neutral, hard-to-produce asset voluntarily chosen on the market - as money.

That's why the notion of a free market in money is laughable.

We don't have free market money; we have communist money forced upon us with violence and threats of violence. Further, for most practical purposes, the banking system is needed to use this lousy "money."

Similarly, modern banks are not creatures of the free market like the independent money warehouses of the past. Today banks exist at the pleasure and service of the state - and obtain special privileges as a result.

Perhaps the most obvious observation is that there would be zero government bailouts in a free market and certainly no such thing as "too big to fail" banks. Incidentally, it's no coincidence that the most egregious de-bankers are the "too big to fail" banks.

Further, modern banks resemble government-sanctioned Ponzi Schemes, as they rely on the false belief that depositors' (fake) money is readily available when, in fact, it isn't because of fractional reserve banking. If only a tiny portion of depositors demanded their money back, most banks would be in big trouble.

Governments allow banks to commit this fraud that would be illegal in any other industry.

For example, imagine a fractional reserve car dealership or jewelry store where the car salesman and jewelry store owner could create 10x more claims for cars and pieces of jewelry than what actually exists in their inventories. They would be selling claims for goods that don't exist.

Not only would such a practice be fraudulent, but it would also not be sustainable.

If even a few people who purchased fractional reserve claims on the nonexistent cars and jewelry asked for delivery, it would blow the whole scam up.

The government and the banks understand this dangerous dynamic, which is one reason they created the so-called "lender of last resort," the Federal Reserve. When the banks get in trouble, the Fed can create new currency units out of thin air to bail them out.

Let me translate it into plain English.

A "lender of last resort" means legalized counterfeiting of the currency to backstop a legalized Ponzi Scheme.

Such blatant fraud would have no place in a free market for money and banking. However, because it is institutionalized and has the government's blessing, most people thoughtlessly accept the situation as normal.

In a truly free market for money, people would voluntarily choose whatever was most suitable for storing and exchanging value. Historically, that meant gold because it was the one physical commodity that was hardest to produce and most resistant to debasement. Tomorrow it might be Bitcoin.

In a truly free market, banks would cease to be government-sanctioned Ponzi Schemes and revert to their historical role as independent money warehouses. Further, anyone could enter the banking business in a free market; you wouldn't need the approval of the Federal Reserve cartel, as banks do today.

That's why the argument that de-banking is simply private companies rightfully exercising discretion is disingenuous.

The Solution

The ideal solution is to get the government entirely out of banking and money and have a totally free market. But that's probably not going to happen anytime soon.

So what can you do about de-banking?

First, don't expect to use physical cash as a solution for long.

The elites have long had nefarious plans to eliminate cash. Today they're

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 15:05

Billionaire Ken Griffin Has Spent $40 Million To Keep The Senate Red, But Snubs Trump's Favorite Texan

Billionaire Ken Griffin Has Spent $40 Million To Keep The Senate Red, But Snubs Trump's Favorite Texan

Ken Griffin has put roughly $40 million into Republican midterm efforts this year and could double that by November, according to the Wall Street Journal. The money runs through nearly every competitive Senate race in the country - except for one... Ken Paxton's run for a seat in Texas, which won't see a dime of it.

According to the report, the Citadel founder has no plans to help the Texas Republican nominee - the candidate President Trump pushed onto the ballot by helping end John Cornyn's Senate career. The Journal notes that donors rarely broadcast who they're refusing to fund. When one does - a day before super PACs file their quarterly reports, and eight days before Senate Majority Leader John Thune headlines a Washington fundraiser for Paxton - it's fair to assume other donors are meant to hear it.

The refusal lands in the middle of an argument Republicans have been having since late May, sometimes privately and increasingly on the record: who pays for the candidates Trump forced on the party? The president's own political action committee, MAGA Inc., was sitting on roughly $382 million as of last month, the Boston Globe reported, and hasn't said what the money is for. Cornyn, asked about funding the man who beat him, told Semafor: "I think he can spend his money."

Where Ken Is Spending

Griffin's biggest check this cycle, $10 million, went to the Senate Leadership Fund, the super PAC aligned with Thune, according to the Journal. He gave $2.5 million apiece to groups backing Sen. Dan Sullivan in Alaska and Sen. Susan Collins in Maine, and $1.5 million to one supporting Rep. Ashley Hinson in Iowa's open-seat race. The Cook Political Report rates Alaska and Maine as tossups, while Iowa leans Republican - a state Trump carried by double digits in 2024. On the House side, he gave $5 million in May to the Congressional Leadership Fund and $5.5 million split between two other groups, including one that backs veterans running as Republicans. "I am able to fully fund these races because of his steady investment cycle over cycle," said Chris Winkelman, the Congressional Leadership Fund's president.

The people familiar with his giving told the Journal that Griffin is focused on the Senate because six-year terms give his money the longest reach into the party's future after Trump, whose term ends in January 2029. A senator elected this fall serves until January 2033. Whoever wins the White House in 2028 will be confirmed, funded and investigated by the class Griffin is paying to elect right now.

He has already said which 2028 candidate he'd rather see. At the Allen & Company conference in Sun Valley on July 8, interviewer Andrew Ross Sorkin asked Griffin to pick between Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance in a hypothetical primary. Griffin said he'd be "predisposed" toward Rubio, whose 2016 campaign he backed with $5 million to a supporting super PAC, Axios reported. (The Journal notes the question offered only those two names.) According to Revenge, Axios reporter Alex Isenstadt's book on the 2024 campaign, Griffin urged Trump not to put Vance on the ticket at all. Vance has said he'll decide on a presidential run after the midterms.

Griffin's distance from Trump goes back years. Worth an estimated $50 billion-plus, he was the country's fifth-biggest political donor in 2024, giving $108 million by OpenSecrets' count - about 37 percent of what top donor Elon Musk spent that cycle - and none of it went to Trump, whose campaigns he has never funded. He spent $5 million that cycle keeping Nikki Haley's primary bid alive. He voted for Trump - "not with a smile on my face," he said afterward - gave $1 million to the inaugural committee, and has since praised the administration's border enforcement while criticizing its tariffs and its pressure on the Federal Reserve. If his giving doubles as projected, Griffin would join the cycle's top tier of donors, which a New York Times analysis this spring put at Andreessen Horowitz ($115.5 million), George Soros ($102.9 million) and Elon Musk ($85 million).

Then There's Texas

Paxton, the state attorney general, launched his challenge in April 2025, and Senate Republican leadership spent heavily to stop him. Cornyn and his allies put more than $90 million into the primary, according to the Texas Tribune, including $11 million from One Nation, the nonprofit arm of Thune's political operation; pro-Cornyn groups outspent Paxton's side by roughly nine to one. Cornyn finished a point ahead in the March 3 first round but short of a majority. A week before the runoff, Trump endorsed Paxton, calling him "a true MAGA warrior." Cornyn became the first Republican senator in Texas history to lose his party's nomination, in a spring when Trump-backed challengers also took out Sen. Bill Cassidy in Louisiana and Rep. Thomas Massie in Kentucky.

Democratic nominee James Talarico, an Austin state representative, had raised more than $40 million through his primary and took in $600,000 in the two hours after Paxton won, his campaign said. Paxton had raised $7.6 million and had $2.3 million left as of early May, per FEC records cited by NBC News. Republican operatives told the network that holding the state, with its roughly 20 media markets, could cost outside groups $100 million. Meanwhile, anti-Paxton Republicans handed Democrats their script: a 2023 impeachment on corruption charges by the Republican-led Texas House (the state Senate acquitted him) and years of legal and ethics controversies besides.

That history, the people familiar with Griffin's giving told the Journal, is why he's staying out.

The $10 million question

There's a catch to Griffin's ghosting of Paxton - The Senate Leadership Fund hasn't ruled Texas out. If the group goes in this fall, Griffin's $10 million goes in with it; money doesn't stay in labeled jars. So either "no plans to help Paxton" has some give in it, or the leadership PAC's most prominent donor has effectively told it where not to spend. Neither Griffin's office nor Latcham has answered that question on the record.

The backdrop: Republicans hold the Senate 53-47, Democrats need to net four seats, and Griffin's side of the ledger has strengthened without him lifting a finger. In Maine, Democrat Graham Platner - who won the June 9 primary with about 70 percent of the vote - formally quit the race July 10 over a sexual assault allegation he denies, leaving the party to pick a replacement at a 601-delegate convention on July 25, two days ahead of the ballot deadline. Collins, backed by Griffin's $2.5 million and $42 million in SLF reservations, currently has no opponent at all.

The quarterly filings land Wednesday, and the Paxton fundraiser is a week later.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 14:45

Sheriff Says Somali Youth Gangs Are Running Wild In Minneapolis

Sheriff Says Somali Youth Gangs Are Running Wild In Minneapolis

Authored by Joe Schaeffer via Liberty Nation,

A Minneapolis sheriff has triggered an uncomfortable conversation by saying out loud what you are not supposed to talk about in Minnesota. "Out of control" gangs of Somali youths are terrorizing the city, and the mayhem is poised to get worse.

(Photo by Christopher Mark Juhn/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher released a livestream video on July 6 decrying widespread violence by Somali gang members over the Fourth of July weekend. He also took the opportunity to criticize media outlets in the Twin Cities and the state for refusing to cover the problem.

Fletcher "stated that the Somali gangs are responsible for at least 14 murders in the last two years as well as over 100 shootings - many of them at high-profile events like graduations and the State Fair. Fletcher also said in his promo video that he heard from a Minneapolis police officer who said that 20 percent of their homicides are now Somalis," local news site Alpha News reports.

The situation is blowing up right in front of the public eye.

'It's All About Ego for 99% of It'

"Investigators say Somali gang violence is growing quickly and now spans the metro [area], with 12 Somali gangs tracked from Minneapolis and St. Paul to St. Cloud, Apple Valley and Burnsville. Most of the violence involves guns, according to the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office," Fox-9 TV in Minneapolis reports. "Authorities say the gangs are still young and growing, with about 300 people involved right now."

Ramsey County Deputy Ben Seidel said the Somali youth gangs don't operate like traditional inner-city gangs in the sense of being motivated by money. "From what I've seen... it's all about showboating. It's all about ego for 99% of it. They aren't selling narcotics. It's all about just gloating," Seidel states in the video.

There's a history to Somali gang violence in Minneapolis that explains the seeming novelty of these officers' remarks. In blue-dominated Minnesota, criticizing the Somali community in any way is immediately defined as racist. The "R card" has been so weaponized in the state that health-care fraud was allowed to flourish for years, which may have cost American taxpayers up to $9 billion.

There is nothing new about Somali gangs in Minnesota. They have been identified as a growing problem for 20 years or more. And it has never sounded like child's play. Every few years, the issue is ventilated, only to recede amid de rigueur pressure from "anti-racist" organizations and personalities.

The City of Minneapolis commissioned a study in 2007 after a series of robberies by Somali teens in 2005. As Minnesota Public Radio detailed at the time:

"The report's author, consultant Shukri Adan, presented her findings to members of the city council.

"Adan says at first it was thought the Somali youth were involved in loosely organized groups of 'troublemakers.' However, Adan says as these young people ended up in jail, they met established gang members and learned from them how to organize.

"'They're very sophisticated and they've adapted some of that into the Somali gang structure. But for the Somali gangs that I've identified, they were specifically Somalis and all their membership were Somalis, even though they had associations with other gangs.'"

Yet leftist MPR made sure to point out that "[t]he report says gang activity is relatively small. Statistics from the Minnesota Gang Strike Force identifies 52 Somali gang members - less than one percent of all known gang members in Minnesota."

Three years later, the Somali youth had moved on to serious organized criminal activity.

Somali Gangs Trafficking African American Girls

A "federal indictment unsealed in November [2010] in Tennessee charges 29 people with crimes from sex trafficking to credit card fraud to witness intimidation. It said the accused were members or associates of three Somali gangs - often acting as one larger gang - bent on forcing girls into prostitution for their own profit," the Associated Press reported in 2011. The gangs were trafficking girls from Minneapolis to Nashville and Columbus, Ohio - three cities with significant Somali populations.

The article featured a harrowing account of the brutalization of a 12-year-old girl. And there was a further revelation that the professional "anti-racists" would rather you not hear about.

"The indictment details several instances in which young Somali or African American girls were taken from place to place and forced to engage in sex acts with multiple people. One girl was under 13 when she was first prostituted. Another girl was 18 when she was raped by multiple men in a hotel room," the AP reported in November 2010.

Whereas much of the violence perpetrated by Somali youth gangs is targeted at their fellow East African immigrant communities, underage native-born American black girls were among those being sexually exploited by this ring, as well. Where was the outrage from the Congressional Black Caucus?

Just as with MPR, the AP seemed to downplay the number of Somali gang members in 2011. "There are seven Somali gangs in Minneapolis, and a total of about 200 documented Somali gang members and associates, [Minneapolis police officer and Somali community liaison Jeanine Brudenell] said - about 10 percent of the roughly 2,100 documented active gang members in the Minneapolis Police Department's system. The gang members are a small fraction of the Somali population," the AP stressed.

Fast forward to 2026 and we're up to 300 gang members (and who knows how many more yet to be identified?). Even Sheriff Fletcher, while calling out the problem nobody wants to talk about, treads carefully.

"Fletcher was careful not to castigate the entire Somali community or even all of their youth in his comments," Alpha News noted of the livestream video. "Rather, he said that the violence is stemming from a small number of misguided, mostly male youth, which he later clarified is about 300 young people participating in about 12 gangs across the metro [area] and Minnesota."

There's one final element we should emphasize. As Somalis moved en masse to states like Minnesota, they retained their fiercely held tribal identities.

"[C]lan rivalry is often the most important reason for gang violence" within the Somali community, Viktor Marsai at the Center for Immigration Studies wrote in March. "Clan violence is fueled not only in the offline space. More and more Somali TikTokers and Youtubers are using online platforms to glorify their own clan tradition and savage rival groups. In many cases, tens of thousands of people are following these accounts and add hundreds of comments. The inflammatory effects spill over from the online... these influencers utilize their clout to support violence in their country of residence and in Somalia."

Americans may not be able to comprehend the meaning behind what Deputy Seidel refers to as "showboating" among Somali gang members. How much of this comes from lingering clan identification dating back to the old country? How much is fueled by a foreign culture wholly incompatible with the American way of life?

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 14:25

Watch: Yet Another Shocking Video Of UK's Two-Tier Policing Drops

Watch: Yet Another Shocking Video Of UK's Two-Tier Policing Drops

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

Fresh footage from Northern Ireland captures police sprinting past a group of knife- and stick-wielding feral youths to cuff a local man who had grabbed a stick to protect the native women and children in his street.

The scene in Dungannon underscores a now-familiar pattern: authorities appear quicker to restrain locals standing up for their communities than to neutralise imported threats.

The video, shared widely on X, shows a large group of youths described as "foreigners" arriving armed in a Protestant area of the town. One man, who also appears to be of foreign descent, picks up a stick in response. A police officer runs straight past the armed mob and detains the defender instead.

Official police accounts confirm serious disorder in the area yesterday evening.

District Commander Superintendent Peter Stevenson stated: "At approximately 7.45pm police received a report of altercation involving approximately 10 men armed with knives and bats at a property in the Killyman Road area. The men smashed the windows and caused damage to the front door of a property. Officers attended and a 32-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of criminal damage. Two other men, aged 32 and 35, were arrested on suspicion of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. They remain in police custody at this time."

The Superintendent continued, "At approximately 11pm, officers on patrol came across a large group of males gathered in the Newell Road area. Further reports had also been received of a number of males in the area carrying knives and bats. One man had been assaulted and sustained cuts to his hands and face. He attended hospital for treatment for his injuries. An 18-year old man was arrested on suspicion of grievous bodily harm and possession of an offensive weapon with intent to commit an indictable offence. He remains in police custody."

DUP MLA Deborah Erskine voiced growing local frustration: "There is no place for violence, intimidation or criminality on the streets of Dungannon. Criminality is criminality, regardless of who is involved or which section of the community they come from. It must be called out and condemned consistently."

"There can be no selective condemnation when it comes to lawlessness and public disorder," Erskine continued, adding "People have a right to feel safe in their own homes and neighbourhoods, and any allegations of violence or intimidation must be thoroughly investigated. Too often, when residents raise such legitimate concerns, or when I raise those concerns in the Assembly Chamber, elements of the Assembly are quick to dismiss them with accusations of racism or bigotry."

"That approach does nothing to solve problems or build community confidence. It is time for people to listen to genuine concerns, stop applying labels, and start taking meaningful action," Erskine further urged.

Dungannon hosts a substantial migrant population, including a large East Timorese community drawn to local meat-processing plants, making up a significant share of the town's non-national residents.

Social media reports tied to the footage describe the armed group as foreigners, many from East Timor, turning up in a Protestant area, while some official framing casts the clashes as internal community matters.

Regardless, the video evidence reveals the two-tier reality on the ground: the defender gets the cuffs while the knife-and-stick mob receives the pass.

This latest episode fits a lengthening list of migrant-linked violence and uneven policing responses across Northern Ireland. Last month, north Belfast saw a brutal street attack in which an African migrant repeatedly stabbed and attempted to saw off a victim's head with a Stanley knife-style blade.

Bystanders had to drag the attacker off and beat him back until police arrived. The victim suffered life-altering injuries. Official and media descriptions initially softened the horror to a generic "stabbing incident," sparking fury over downplaying and delayed accountability.

Patterns of sex crimes and grooming scandals in parts of Northern Ireland have also continually triggered nights of anti-immigration unrest, with locals expressing fury at perceived failures to protect communities or deport offenders. The same complaints of selective enforcement keep surfacing.

The Dungannon footage now joins a wider catalogue of two-tier policing examples stretching across the United Kingdom. In one recent case, officers were captured shielding three black aggressors who had assaulted a white British teenager in Birmingham, then manhandling and swearing at the victim while forcing him into a police vehicle the wrong way. Bystanders trying to explain the situation were ignored as more officers piled in.

Other documented incidents include South Yorkshire Police officers using batons, shoves and Tasers on teenage girls during dispersal operations, with the force later admitting the clip looked "nothing short of shocking."

Separate footage showed officers manhandling a five-year-old boy, smashing a man's head into a bollard before dragging him, and slamming an elderly woman, Siobhan Whyte, to the ground during protests linked to the murder of her daughter by an illegal migrant.

A 50-year-old military veteran was struck with riot shields and kicked in the head multiple times while sitting on a wall filming.

The inquest into the death of 18-year-old Henry Nowak continues to examine whether police handcuffing contributed to his fate after he was stabbed five times in Southampton. Reports indicated officers initially focused on restraining the victim rather than immediately addressing his wounds, while the attacker was not promptly secured.

Bodycam and witness accounts have raised questions about training priorities that appear to emphasize ideological considerations over straightforward protection of the vulnerable.

These cases share a common thread: native residents or victims frequently encounter swift, heavy-handed intervention, while threats tied to mass migration and certain imported communities receive softer or delayed responses until public outrage forces attention.

Bodycam footage and civilian videos repeatedly contradict official narratives that downplay risks or deflect criticism by labeling concerns as bigotry. The result is eroding public trust, with communities left feeling that law enforcement operates under different rules depending on who is involved.

Northern Ireland's recent history shows what happens when these pressures build without resolution. Local people have watched graphic attacks, heard excuses, and seen footage of defenders being targeted while armed groups operate with apparent impunity. The same dynamic now plays out in towns like Dungannon, where long-standing Protestant areas face new tensions from rapid demographic change and selective policing.

Britain's experiment with open borders and ideological policing has produced predictable outcomes: rising disorder, native communities on the defensive, and officers caught between political directives and the basic duty to protect everyone equally.

The Dungannon video is not an isolated clip. It is the latest confirmation that two-tier standards are actively undermining safety and consent on the streets.

The solution is straightforward. Policing must return to equal application of the law, without regard to background, migration status, or political fashion. Communities deserve the right to defend themselves when authorities hesitate, and they deserve officers who prioritise stopping armed threats over everyday people trying to defend their families.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 14:05

Whose-muz?

Whose-muz?

By Michael Every of Rabobank

Whose-muz?

Oil leaped 9%, the largest move since 2020. Today, it’s up another 2.5% to $85 at time of writing. It’s a good job we also have the Cleveland Fed’s trimmed-mean inflation measure out as well, right? Obviously, oil was driven by developments in Hormuz - or rather Whose-muz? There, besides reimposing the naval blockade of Iran, President Trump stated those using the waterway will now pay 20% of the value of cargo as compensation to the US, the strait’s new guardian. While the proposed Iranian toll the US rejected was $2m per tanker, or $1 per barrel of oil and $22 per tonne of LNG, Bloomberg estimates Trump fees at $30m per supertanker, the equivalent of $8 on oil and $177 on LNG. Naturally, the UN shipping agency is opposed to any fees for any strait and wants details on that Trump tariff – as if that will stop it.

More bluntly, Iran responded with missile attacks on tankers, with two from the UAE hit, as well as more strikes against the GCC and US military bases, the latter so far avoiding both energy and critical infrastructure. As we noted in ‘Comfortably Bomb’ yesterday, Iran can’t destroy such facilities and build bridges to the GCC if it sees itself defeating the US and gaining regional leadership. By contrast, the US is again in ‘take it down’ mode: Trump is reportedly weighing taking out Iran’s Pickaxe Mountain nuclear site, requiring a phenomenal explosion to neutralise.

Keeping out of the fight so far is Israel: the 2026 headline there from the New York Times is Mossad trying to recruit former Iranian President Ahmadinejad as an agent, and potential front man, in a failed plan for regime change. However, the Yemeni government, OK’d by the Saudis after Trump approval, bombed a runway in Houthi-occupied Sanaa to try to prevent an Iranian plane landing; now the Houthis are firing at the Saudis again for the first time in years, potentially endangering vital east-west oil flows via Yanbu on the Red Sea.

The realpolitik take is more evidence of a new (old) Mahan world disorder where countries use force to impose or restrict maritime trade flows: first Iran, now the US; the devastating Ukrainian attacks on Russian ships in the Sea of Azov is another concurrent example; and note the Hong Kong press asks, ‘Will Manila and Hanoi’s maritime deal challenge Beijing in the South China Sea?’

It’s also the US underlining that it’s fighting for a region, and world economy, that benefits from an open Hormuz but will no longer do it for free. Indeed, there’s a US message to the GCC and NATO/Europe/US allies – help us win this fight rather than saying ‘Not our war’ again. Don’t be surprised if anyone who aids the US now gets the 20% tariff lifted - which still implies it will have to be imposed on others to create that incentive.

If you think that’s cynical, in some see this as the US keeping Hormuz closed so it benefits as an LNG exporter. Indeed, as Dubai plans a new east-coast port for oil, LNG giant Qatar looks badly placed, Doha now looking at a project with the US (which likely won’t pay a penny?) for an Iraq-Syria pipeline. Even outside energy, the Asian press note the US has emerged as the helium winner amid the Iran war and China’s restrictions on exports of that key gas needed for chipmaking, with Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea turning to America for flows.

Which model?

Obviously not recalling all the reports on how Germany was artificially competitive within the Eurozone because of the low FX rate it was allowed to join at, Chancellor Merz just called for a dialogue with China on its monetary and FX policy, saying that the EU could not win, no matter how innovative or good the bloc may be, against a competitor that artificially manipulates its currency. He argued that CNY is 20-30% undervalued and needs to be allowed to float more freely so that it can appreciate to a fairer level. In this, listening to Europe in 2026 is like listening to the US in 2016.

To be clear, there is no world in which China will allow, or Europe is in any way able to impose, a new Plaza Accord on China: it is not going to happen. End of discussion. China could decide it wants to see CNY appreciate for its own reasons, such as to shift towards consumption as a growth driver, which is different. However, that’s a strategic theme echoed for decades by (mostly Western) economists, who are constantly surprised when it doesn’t happen and China’s trade surplus grows, and ever higher up the value-added ladder.

Yet the surging Chinese trade surplus with the EU, which is now larger than with the US and is close to doubling since 2020, must be addressed by October (by magic; or Chinese pledges of purchases of EU soybeans; or of Airbus aircraft when Beijing is also winking at Boeing?) or Europe says it will be forced to follow the US high tariff path after many years of patronising eyerolling at how disruptive such atavistic tactics are. China trade data today saw its imports up 36% y-o-y vs. 26.1% expected and exports up 27% vs. 19%: we will have to wait for the breakdown of the EU numbers, but they are unlikely to show what Brussels wants to see.

The larger point here is one repeatedly underlined in this Daily for many years: the problem is not one of FX levels, per se. Rather, it is of economic statecraft (a neomercantilist model) vs. neoclassical/neoliberal economic policy (a ‘free trade’ Merkelcantilist model), between which there is only one realpolitik winner: the former. If you dispute that fact, look at any pertinent production data, especially on the military side, or ask yourself which of the two is better placed to ride out an energy crisis. The logical trajectory on that basis is therefore to either assume the macroeconomic and market dynamic wherein:

  • (i) the latter model adapts to the former by mirroring it, as we specifically projected in the case of the US vis-à-vis China in 2017 – and here we are in 2026; or
  • (ii) the latter model doesn’t change, so continues to see ever-wider trade deficits, deindustrialisation, political polarisation, lack of strategic autonomy, and “slow agony,” as Draghi put it. And that’s before we get the fast-forward pain of who controls Hormuz.

Anyway, while we wait for Warsh’s take on the above, the Fed’s Waller has just warned of sticky inflation suggesting more rate hikes might be needed, as has the RBNZ’s Conway. Yet that all depends in large part on who wins the current battle in the Middle East, and how quickly - which is a reflection of the effectiveness of a given political-economy model.

Whocouldanooed?

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 13:45

China's Helium Export Ban Raises New Risks For Global Supply Chains

China's Helium Export Ban Raises New Risks For Global Supply Chains

Authored by Michael Zhuang via The Epoch Times,

China has imposed a temporary ban on helium exports, adding fresh uncertainty to global supplies of a gas essential to semiconductor manufacturing, aerospace, medical equipment, and other high-tech industries.

The first pilot helium production facility in Europe, located in Saint-Parize-le-Châtel, France, on Sept. 11, 2024. FREDERIC MOREAU/Hans Lucas via AFP/Getty Images

The July 10 announcement by China's Ministry of Commerce and General Administration of Customs comes as Beijing faces mounting pressure on its own helium supplies following disruptions to imports from Qatar and Russia.

Analysts who spoke to The Epoch Times say the move appears primarily aimed at safeguarding China's domestic supply rather than directly targeting the United States. However, since Chinese companies have increasingly served as intermediaries for Russian helium exports, the restriction could further disrupt global supply chains, particularly in Europe.

Beijing Announces Temporary Export Ban

The Chinese regime said the export restriction was imposed under the country's Foreign Trade Law. It took effect immediately. The regime did not specify how long the temporary measure would remain in place.

Helium is a colorless, odorless, non-toxic inert gas extracted as a byproduct of natural gas processing. Since it cannot be manufactured or replenished, it is considered a strategic resource.

The gas plays a critical role in semiconductor production, where it is used for wafer cooling, plasma etching, chemical vapor deposition, atomic layer deposition, photolithography support, and leak detection. It is also widely used in medical imaging, aerospace, scientific research, and advanced manufacturing.

Despite expanding domestic production, China still relies heavily on imported helium.

According to industry data from China Fortune Securities, approximately 84 percent of China's helium supply is dependent on foreign imports, with natural gas producers Qatar and Russia accounting together for nearly half of global helium production. The United States is the world's largest helium producer, producing more than 40 percent of global production.

China sources roughly 46 percent of its helium imports from Qatar and about 35 percent from Russia. But these import channels have come under increasing pressure this year.

According to a report on Chinese news portal Sina, maritime routes carrying Qatari helium through the Persian Gulf were disrupted amid the Iran war. In April, Russia announced temporary export controls on helium through the end of 2027, reducing export quotas to Asia to roughly 40 percent of 2025 levels. The China Liquefied Natural Gas Association estimated that those developments have created a helium supply shortfall exceeding 60 percent for China.

Cheng Cheng-ping, a professor of finance at Taiwan's National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, told The Epoch Times that Beijing's decision appears to be driven largely by domestic supply concerns rather than geopolitical retaliation.

"The timing suggests this is primarily an act of self-preservation," he said. "It is different from previous export controls on rare earths, which were more directly aimed at the United States."

Beijing has been working to expand China's domestic semiconductor industry while reducing reliance on advanced chips restricted by U.S. export controls.

"China is engaged in intense competition with the United States in high-end industries but remains behind technologically," Cheng said. "Restricting exports allows it to retain more resources to support its own advanced manufacturing."

Shen Ming-shih, a research fellow at Taiwan's Institute for National Defense and Security Research, told The Epoch Times that several factors likely influenced the decision, but domestic industrial demand appears to be the primary consideration.

"The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can still import helium from Russia for now," Shen said. "But if Russian supplies tighten further through 2027 while imports from other sources remain constrained, China's own helium resources will become increasingly scarce."

China's Role as a Russian Helium Middleman

While the export restrictions may help preserve domestic supplies, they could also tighten international markets because Chinese companies have become important intermediaries in the global helium trade.

According to a June report by U.K.-based industry intelligence firm Gasworld, Western sanctions have largely prevented Russia from exporting helium directly to Europe. Instead, Chinese companies have been importing Russian helium at relatively low prices - often in volumes exceeding China's own domestic consumption - and re-exporting part of those shipments to overseas markets, including Europe.

Russian helium exports to China averaged 38 million cubic feet per month in 2025, a 60 percent increase from the previous year, according to the report. Shipments reached 71 million cubic feet in December alone.

China's export ban could further tighten global helium supplies because of the country's growing role as a redistribution hub for Russian helium.

Cheng said the United States is unlikely to be significantly affected because of its own supplies.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the United States accounted for 44 percent of global helium production in 2024, followed by Qatar at 34 percent, Russia at 9 percent, and Algeria at 6 percent.

"The impact will be much greater for Europe and other countries that previously relied on Russian or Qatari helium but increasingly obtained those supplies through China," Cheng said.

With Russian exports constrained by sanctions and Middle Eastern supplies facing periodic disruptions, China has gained considerable leverage as an intermediary, he said.

"By restricting exports now, China is increasing risks across the global supply chain," Cheng said.

He added that Beijing has previously leveraged its position in global supply chains to exert pressure on agricultural imports from Australia, Brazil, and Taiwan.

"Now, helium has become another example," Cheng said. "China is only an intermediary, but it is using that position as a tool to influence markets and supply chains. Companies trading with authoritarian regimes need to factor these risks into their supply-chain planning."

Shen said the ultimate impact of the export restrictions will depend on how heavily individual countries rely on Chinese helium exports and whether they can secure alternative suppliers.

European countries may experience greater short-term disruptions, he said, but the move could also encourage importers to diversify their sources and reduce dependence on China.

Tang Bing, Luo Ya, and Reuters contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 13:05

Just 27.6% Of Stocks Outperform The Market While 60% Destroy Shareholder Wealth, New Study Finds

Just 27.6% Of Stocks Outperform The Market While 60% Destroy Shareholder Wealth, New Study Finds

From 1926 through 2025, just 27.6% of stocks beat the broader market. Nearly 60% actually destroyed shareholder wealth, and the median stock delivered a lifetime return of -6.9%. Yet despite those sobering odds, U.S. stocks collectively created roughly $91 trillion in wealth over the last century, with just 46 companies responsible for half of it.

Those are some of the headline findings from a new study by Hendrik Bessembinder of Arizona State University's W.P. Carey School of Business, who examined the performance of nearly 30,000 U.S. stocks over the last century. The research paints a striking picture of how wealth is actually created in the stock market: while broad market indexes have generated exceptional long-term returns, the vast majority of individual stocks have failed to keep pace.

Bessembinder analyzed 29,754 publicly traded U.S. stocks between 1926 and 2025. Over that period, the overall stock market produced an annualized return of about 10.1%, turning every dollar invested into more than $15,000, according to the study, detailed in this white paper. 

But those impressive aggregate returns mask an uncomfortable reality. The typical stock fared far worse. In fact, the median stock lost 6.9% over its lifetime, fewer than half of all stocks generated a positive lifetime return, only about 41% outperformed Treasury bills during the time they were publicly traded, and just 27.6% managed to outperform the market itself.

The reason is simple: stock market returns are incredibly uneven. While any stock can fall to zero, there is effectively no limit to how much a winner can rise. Over long periods, a tiny number of extraordinary companies generate gains so large that they more than offset the thousands of stocks that stagnate, disappoint, or disappear altogether. Those rare winners account for an outsized share of the market's overall success.

Perhaps the most surprising finding is that this concentration has become even more extreme. In Bessembinder's original research covering 1926 through 2016, 89 companies accounted for half of all shareholder wealth created by the U.S. stock market. After adding the last nine years of data, total wealth creation more than doubled to roughly $91 trillion, yet the number of companies responsible for half of it fell to just 46.

At the top of the list are many of today's biggest technology names. Apple ranks first, generating more than $5 trillion in shareholder wealth, followed by Nvidia, Microsoft, Alphabet and Amazon. Collectively, those five companies account for more than one-fifth of all net wealth created by the U.S. stock market over the past century, while Apple and Nvidia alone make up more than one-tenth of the total.

The concentration becomes even more remarkable further down the data. Out of more than 29,000 companies included in the study, just 1,082, less than 4% of the total, were responsible for all of the market's net wealth creation. Meanwhile, nearly six out of every ten companies actually reduced shareholder wealth relative to simply investing in one month Treasury bills.

The study also pushes back against the idea that market legends are built on impossible annual returns. Many of history's greatest investments didn't earn 50% or 100% per year. Instead, they compounded at annual rates in the low to mid teens over extraordinarily long periods. The lesson is that consistent returns sustained over decades are often far more powerful than eye popping gains that prove impossible to maintain.

For investors, the findings reinforce one of the strongest arguments for diversification. While the stock market as a whole has created enormous wealth over the past century, identifying the relatively small group of companies that ultimately drive those returns has always been exceptionally difficult. Missing just a handful of those long-term winners can dramatically reduce investment results, which helps explain why broad index funds have consistently outperformed most active stock pickers over long horizons.

Bessembinder concludes that the tendency for a small number of companies to drive most of the market's returns is unlikely to disappear because it is a natural consequence of how returns compound over time. The bigger question, he suggests, is whether technologies like artificial intelligence will make wealth creation even more concentrated in a handful of dominant firms, or broaden the playing field enough to create the next generation of market leaders.

You can read the full white paper here.

Tyler Durden Tue, 07/14/2026 - 12:45

Pages