Zero Hedge

What Makes A Great Entrepreneur? Lessons From The Greats

What Makes A Great Entrepreneur? Lessons From The Greats

Authored by Rainer Zitelmann via RealClearMarkets,

What personality traits distinguish successful entrepreneurs? This question has occupied academic research on entrepreneurship for decades, with scholars examining the relationship between personality traits and entrepreneurial success.

When we want to understand or recognize something, we often do so by making comparisons. About 200 years after the birth of Christ, the Greco-Roman historian and philosopher Plutarch wrote a collection of parallel biographies of famous figures from Greek and Roman history. By comparing their characters, decisions, and lives, he sought to reveal similarities and differences and thereby arrive at a deeper understanding of each individual.

The American economist and entrepreneur Greg Autry has followed this model. In his book "Barons and Bros", he presents four pairs, each consisting of a living entrepreneur and an entrepreneur from the 19th century.

Many readers will be familiar with five of the names: SpaceX founder Elon Musk, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Virgin founder Richard Branson, steel magnate Andrew Carnegie, and railroad and shipping entrepreneur Cornelius Vanderbilt. In addition, Autry has chosen Monty Ward, the pioneer of mail-order retailing; Hiram Maxim, the inventor of the machine gun; and Palmer Luckey, the founder of the virtual-reality company Oculus.

Formal education played hardly any role. Only two of these eight successful entrepreneurs completed a university degree, and only one of them - Musk - studied economics, among other subjects. The inventor Hiram Maxim, who received 122 U.S. patents and 149 British patents and developed, among other things, the first automatic fire sprinkler, attended a one-room schoolhouse for only five years. Richard Branson is dyslexic and left school at the age of 16.

In my dissertation The Wealth Elite, for which I conducted in-depth interviews with 45 wealthy self-made entrepreneurs, I reached a similar conclusion: there was no correlation between performance at school or university and the level of wealth these individuals later attained. Those who had excelled at school or university were generally not among the very wealthiest later in life.

For these entrepreneurs, implicit learning - "learning by doing" - and the implicit knowledge acquired through this process played a much more important role. Six of Autry's eight heroes were already engaged in entrepreneurial activities as teenagers, learning skills that would later contribute to their success. This, too, corresponds to the findings of my dissertation: What was striking was the way the future wealthy entrepreneurs earned money while still at school or university.

Typical student jobs in which they simply worked for an hourly wage were the exception. There is little doubt that these experiences shaped the young people who later became entrepreneurs. They learned how to organize, sell, and think entrepreneurially. Without even being aware of it, they acquired the implicit knowledge that is so important for successful entrepreneurs and investors. Their early entrepreneurial experiences were the best possible preparation for becoming self-employed later in life.

Most of the entrepreneurs featured in Autry's comparisons would probably never have made careers in large corporations because they were often difficult personalities, unwilling or unable to conform and subordinate themselves to others. All of them were undoubtedly outstanding salesmen and networkers. Again and again, Autry describes his heroes making "cold calls" - contacting strangers they did not know but who were important to their plans.

How often have you tried to write to or call an important person you did not know?

All the heroes in this book suffered major setbacks. Musk's companies Tesla and SpaceX repeatedly came close to bankruptcy, and many of Branson's companies failed.

Palmer Luckey was forced out of Facebook after the company acquired his business because he was considered politically "too right-wing." Vanderbilt suffered a major defeat in the so-called Erie War and, in his unsuccessful attempt to gain control of the Erie Railroad, at one point lost around $7 million - the equivalent of perhaps $170 million today.

Andrew Carnegie experienced one of the greatest crises of his life during the bloody Homestead conflict of 1892; the confrontation permanently damaged his reputation as an employer sympathetic to workers.

Perseverance alone does not explain their success. What matters is the combination of perseverance, a willingness to experiment, and the ability to learn from mistakes. The crucial skill shared by Autry's heroes was their ability to recognize opportunities where other people saw none. This corresponds to the insights of the great economist Israel Kirzner, whose theory of entrepreneurship places the entrepreneur's "alertness" to new opportunities at its center.

In his definition, the "pure entrepreneur" is a decision-maker whose entire role consists of discovering previously unnoticed opportunities.

When it comes to the personalities of Autry's heroes, one thing stands out: they were all nonconformists - in the sense described by the economist Joseph Schumpeter. According to Schumpeter, the entrepreneurial type does not regard the fact that something has never been done before as an argument against doing it. Inhibitions that constitute firm boundaries for the behavior of others do not constrain him in the same way.

He draws different conclusions from the circumstances around him than the mass of static economic actors. He does not care much how others judge his enterprise - and often even takes pleasure in swimming against the current. All of this applies without qualification to the people portrayed in this book.

And there is something else that stands out: Autry's entrepreneurs think very, very long term. Not in months, and not even in years, but in decades. This sets them apart from the overwhelming majority of people.

There is almost no theory in Autry's book, and that is a good thing. His accounts are vivid, entertaining, and full of anecdotes. "The thing I have noticed is when the anecdotes and the data disagree, the anecdotes are usually right." This statement would drive most academics to despair, but it comes from Jeff Bezos, one of the richest people in the world. The entrepreneur's knowledge is different from the academic's knowledge - something intellectuals will never understand.

This book could only have been written by an author who is both a scholar and an entrepreneur himself, and who therefore possesses a kind of knowledge superior to that of the pure academic.

Autry has met all of the entrepreneurs featured in the book who are still alive - some only briefly, others more closely. I have read many biographies of Musk, Bezos, and Branson, and of course I was already familiar with Vanderbilt and Carnegie. Nevertheless, I learned a great deal from this book and read it in one sitting. As a reader, I am already looking forward to Autry's next parallel biographies, since he announces that he intends to write more.

Anyone interested in entrepreneurship will learn more from this book than from many years spent studying business administration.

In June, Skyhorse Publishing will release Rainer Zitelmann's book "New Space Capitalism."

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 17:30

Trump Accuses BBC Of Turning Defamation Case Into 'Jan 6' Investigation

Trump Accuses BBC Of Turning Defamation Case Into 'Jan 6' Investigation

Authored by Tom Gantert via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump is asking a federal judge to reject the BBC's attempt to subpoena three members of his family as part of discovery in his defamation lawsuit against the British broadcaster.

Trump's attorneys filed a memorandum Aug. 21 opposing the BBC's request for permission to use alternative methods to serve subpoenas on Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Jared Kushner.

Trump's lawyers accused the BBC of attempting to transform what they described as a narrow defamation case into a broad investigation of the events surrounding Jan. 6, 2021.

The lawsuit concerns a BBC documentary in which the BBC spliced together portions of the president's Jan. 6 speech, delivered nearly 55 minutes apart, while omitting his statement that supporters should march "peacefully and patriotically" to the U.S. Capitol.

The BBC apologized for the editing but said it was an unintentional error and does not meet the legal threshold for defamation.

Trump's filing says the BBC chairman acknowledged that the editing created a "mistaken impression."

According to Trump's attorneys, the BBC sought 126 document requests and approximately 150 requests for admission from Trump, and issued subpoenas to 47 family members, former officials, political associates, and federal agencies.

The court ruled Aug. 6 that the lawsuit did not permit the BBC to "relitigate and discover every aspect" of Jan. 6 or seek discovery from "any and all individuals" with knowledge of the events. The judge directed the parties to conduct a meaningful conference to resolve remaining discovery disputes.

Trump's attorneys argue the BBC filed its latest motion eight days later, without following that process.

They also contend the BBC is seeking authorization to serve subpoenas that have not been presented to the court. The filing says the BBC has not submitted revised document subpoenas or proposed deposition subpoenas detailing what the three family members would be required to provide or testify about.

Trump's attorneys also argued that additional depositions would be redundant because all three were previously interviewed by the House committee investigating Jan. 6. Those interviews totaled 585 pages and addressed subjects the BBC says it wants to explore, according to the filing.

The filing particularly challenges the effort to depose Kushner, saying that he was outside the country during Trump's speech and the subsequent riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Trump's attorneys asked the court to deny the BBC's motion, arguing the broadcaster has failed to justify its proposed ways to deliver the subpoenas and failed to comply with the court's Aug. 6 discovery order.

The BBC declined to comment in response to an email from The Epoch Times seeking comment.

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 16:20

Temporary Protected Status Ends For 13 Nationalities

Temporary Protected Status Ends For 13 Nationalities

Authored by Troy Myers via The Epoch Times,

A court on Aug. 18 effectively ended Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for the last of 13 nationalities that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) targeted during President Donald Trump's second term.

In total, more than a million foreign nationals living in the United States with such deportation protections are now up for removal.

The 13 countries included Haiti, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Cameroon, Nepal, Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela, South Sudan, Burma, Somalia, and Ethiopia.

In June, the Supreme Court allowed Trump to end the status for Syrians and Haitians and did so with reasoning that applied to cases involving other nationalities as well. Some lower courts initially resisted Trump's revocations, but by Aug. 18, each of those judicial blocks had fallen.

Here's what we know about what this means and what's next.

Are Mass Deportations Coming?

DHS and legal experts say the more than one million foreign nationals previously covered by TPS are now, technically, illegal aliens.

The first deportation flight to Haiti since the Supreme Court ruling departed on Aug. 20, carrying more than 160 individuals. Among those removed were former TPS holders and Haitians who served prison sentences in the United States, according to Haitian officials.

Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor who worked on immigration issues, told The Epoch Times that few options remained for the foreign nationals to challenge their deportations.

"That designation is gone. That protection disappears," Rahmani said. "Now, that doesn't mean a million people get deported. ... They still have to go through the normal removal proceeding."

He said that some could self-deport or be removed under orders that were in place before they received protected status.

DHS did not respond to requests for more information on enforcement of the TPS revocations for more than a million foreign nationals.

After the Aug. 18 decision, DHS urged foreign nationals to self-deport - take a free flight home and a $2,600 check - or be removed.

"For decades, TEMPORARY Protected Status was used as a [de facto] amnesty program. Those days are OVER. Those with terminated TPS are now in our nation ILLEGALLY. They must leave now or be swiftly DEPORTED," said the DHS on X.

Court Battles

The DHS secretary has authority to decide when a country merits a TPS designation.

The secretary is also required to periodically review and extend or revoke the status, which is meant to be granted for countries affected by armed conflict, environmental disasters, or other extraordinary or temporary dangerous conditions. If the DHS secretary finds that conditions in a designated country no longer warrant protected status, they can terminate it.

Lawsuits seeking to block the terminations, which were done under then-DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, alleged the administration failed to follow proper procedures, including reviewing conditions in these countries, before terminating the protections.

Some judges agreed, before the Supreme Court issued a decision over protections for Syrians and Haitians in which a majority of justices agreed with the administration's argument that federal judges lacked authority to review the department's TPS determinations. They noted a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act that bars judicial review and clarified that it applied even to procedural challenges, like those brought under the Administrative Procedure Act.

While some countries' terminations were already in effect, others were still blocked when the Supreme Court ruled.

Some of the lower court judges overseeing those remaining cases were accused by DHS of dragging their feet in issuing orders that comply with the high court's ruling.

DHS special counsel James Percival began posting on X a daily reminder of each judge who had not followed the Supreme Court precedent. He singled out District Judge Brian Murphy, who oversaw Ethiopia's case, for waiting more than 50 days to lift his administrative stay on the country's TPS termination.

Although the final judicial block fell on Aug. 18, appearing to be the last breath of the legal challenges against TPS terminations, there remains a small chance that at least one case could be revived.

Lawyers jointly representing Nepalese, Honduran, and Nicaraguan former TPS holders are attempting to amend their initial lawsuit with a new bare animus claim alleging that the Trump administration's efforts to end protected status were unconstitutional "because they were motivated by explicit animosity and a desire to harm TPS holders," an Aug. 20 court filing said.

Lawyers for the federal government argued in their own court filing that the plaintiffs "do not have any prospect of victory."

They pointed to an Aug. 7 decision in Burma's TPS lawsuit that rejected a similar attempt to amend the challenge with a bare animus claim.

"There is a distinction between bare desire to harm TPS holders and animus against TPS policy," wrote District Judge Matthew Kennelly of the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. "The Supreme Court's reasoning in [the Syria and Haiti case] points to the latter, not the former."

District Judge Trina Thompson for the Northern District of California, overseeing the Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua case, had not ruled on the matter at the time of this publication.

Judge Murphy, overseeing Ethiopia's case, denied the plaintiff's motion to postpone termination of TPS but granted their motion to amend their complaint with a new ultra vires claim, arguing then-Secretary Noem acted beyond her authority in ending protected status.

Regardless, Rahmani said he believed any further challenges or appeals would likely have very little success considering the Supreme Court's decision.

"They can sue, but they're probably gonna lose," he said. "It's been pretty clear the executive branch can remove these protections."

How TPS Was Granted

Protected status can be designated for six, 12, or 18 months at a time and must be periodically reviewed by the DHS secretary to ensure a country is still experiencing armed conflict, environmental disasters, or other extraordinary or temporary conditions.

Some of the 13 countries were initially granted TPS due to armed conflict, like a bloody civil war in Syria that prompted the United States to grant its citizens protected status in March 2012.

Other countries were designated under TPS after devastating natural disasters, including a 7.0-magnitude earthquake in Haiti in 2010, a 7.8-magnitude earthquake in Nepal in 2015, and Hurricane Mitch that ravaged Honduras and Nicaragua in 1998.

Somalia remained under protected status the longest out of these 13 countries - since September 1991. Three decades of armed conflict and instability warranted extensions of TPS across multiple U.S. administrations.

About 170,000 Salvadorans living in the United States are set to become the 14th nationality to lose their deportation protections on Sept. 9. The country has remained under TPS since March 2001 after catastrophic earthquakes.

The Debate

Advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers have criticized the Trump administration's efforts, arguing that some of the 13 countries remain war-torn and unsafe for their nationals to return to. Some judges who oversaw TPS cases wrote words critical of the policy changes in new orders to overturn their previous blocks.

District Judge Allison Burroughs, overseeing Somalia's case, noted in her order lifting her previous block that Somalis once under TPS face a humanitarian crisis in their home country. She described the foreign nationals as "productive members of our communities who have lived here for years, built a life here, worked here and raised their families here."

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul wrote a letter to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin, urging him to reinstate protected status. She said the deportation of foreign nationals from the state's workforce will have a "heavy impact" on a myriad of industries.

"By knowingly and cruelly forcing thousands of families to leave our country and return to their home countries, regardless of any ongoing or worsening humanitarian crises, the White House is committing a reckless and inhumane act," Hochul wrote.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) demanded that the Senate return to session to pass a bill that would extend TPS specifically for Haiti, where she said, in an Aug. 21 post on X, has an "ongoing humanitarian crisis."

The lower chamber already passed the legislation earlier this year in a 224-204 vote.

Meanwhile, federal officials have said TPS is meant to be temporary and has never been designed as a pathway to obtaining permanent U.S. citizenship.

Foreign nationals could attempt to claim asylum, Rahmani noted, which is very difficult to do now in the United States.

Asylum claims are designated for foreign nationals with a well-founded fear of persecution or torture in their home countries.

Rahmani said some foreign nationals could fight their deportation on the grounds that they are married to an American citizen - as long as it's a "bona fide marriage" and not fraudulent.

Marriage is the quickest and easiest way for a foreign national to gain status, he said.

Some may self-deport, taking DHS's offer of a free flight and a $2,600 check, Rahmani said, but others may continue living in the United States "under the radar," as enforcing the end of TPS for more than a million foreign nationals will take time.

"I expect that a lot of people who don't have legal status to be here, they'll continue to remain here, live in the United States unlawfully," Rahmani said. "It'll be up to DHS to find them, apprehend them, and remove them."

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 15:10

Karmelo Anthony Request For New Trial Denied After Disturbing Revelations

Karmelo Anthony Request For New Trial Denied After Disturbing Revelations

The narrative of the innocent black kid standing up to "white bullies" is falling apart.  Karmelo Anthony, age 19, was convicted in June 2026 of murdering 17-year-old Austin Metcalf (who was also 17 at the time) by fatally stabbing him in the chest during a confrontation at a high school track meet in April 2025.  A Collin County jury sentenced him to 35 years in prison. Anthony claimed self-defense; arguing that Metcalf "shoved him" and that he was protecting himself.

Anthony's family raised $634,000 from gullible liberals on claims self defense and racism, but their story started to fall apart early in the trial.  His conviction was met with outrage by progressive commentators and Democrat politician who continue to assert that Anthony should be freed from prison.  Efforts were immediately launched for a new trial.

However, Kaufman County Judge Michael Chitty (appointed after the original trial judge was recused) denied the motion in a brief order after a two-day hearing, stating he had reviewed the motion, record, evidence, arguments, briefs, and case law.

  

During the new-trial hearing, previously excluded character evidence was discussed that was kept out of the original trial.  Under an informal “gentleman’s agreement” between prosecutors and defense, this evidence was omitted and focus was limited to the day of the incident in order to avoid "inflaming racial tensions".  

This new evidence included text messages and notes from Karmelo Anthony expressing extreme violence.  Examples included messages about stabbing someone and “licking the blood off the blade.”  There were threats toward an ex-girlfriend, including a photo of a knife and Anthony saying he was “low key on the verge” the day he murdered Austin Metcalf. 

There were also reports of Anthony stalking his ex-girlfriends, other threats of violence, school disciplinary issues involving fights, jokes about school shootings, and related content.

These revelations help to paint a picture of a warped individual that seemed to be looking for an opportunity for a violent encounter.  This helps to explain why Anthony invaded the tent of an opposing high school team and refused to leave - He may have wanted someone to confront him, and that person just happened to be Austin Metcalf.  Had it not been Metcalf it's likely that Anthony would have simply killed someone else down the road.

Defense lawyers say they plan to appeal the case to the 5th Court of Appeals in Dallas.

  

The incident became a flashpoint for racial tension in the US, with leftists and black activists celebrating the murder of Metcalf as "payback" for the "crimes of white America."  It's a trend which has been gestating for many years due to woke ideology and the concept of social and financial "reparations" in the name of righting the wrongs of the past by punishing white people today.  

The case also brought many misconceptions about self defense law to the surface and proved that, sadly, far too many people are ignorant of how these laws work.  Deadly force cannot be used without a legitimate threat to life and limb.  Feeling insulted because someone call you out for bad behavior, or being shoved out of a tent, is not legal grounds to murder that person.

Ultimately, the Karmelo Anthony case once again exposed a dangerous disconnect between black culture and the rest of America.  Their seething obsession with "respect" that they have not earned is leading the black community down a path to disaster.    

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 14:35

WHO Says Pandemic Determinations Can Be Made Without 'Evidence Of Illness'

WHO Says Pandemic Determinations Can Be Made Without 'Evidence Of Illness'

Authored by Jon Fleetwood via Modernity News,

The World Health Organization (WHO) says evidence that a person is actually sick is not required for a "laboratory-confirmed" human influenza infection with "the potential to cause a pandemic" to trigger mandatory international reporting.

"Evidence of illness is not required for this report," WHO states in its latest Influenza at the Human-Animal Interface assessment, which covered July 8 through August 7, 2026.

WHO says countries must "immediately notify WHO of any laboratory-confirmed case of a recent human infection caused by an influenza A virus with the potential to cause a pandemic."

Then, immediately afterward:

"Evidence of illness is not required for this report."

The statement raises an obvious question: If evidence of illness is not required to set off a chain of events that could trigger authoritarian international pandemic response, what evidence is required?

WHO points to a "laboratory-confirmed" finding.

But WHO's own influenza laboratory manual shows that such determinations are made using real-time RT-PCR tests.

But PCR does not directly observe a virus.

It measures fluorescence (the amount of light emitted) from test chemicals mixed with a sample.

WHO describes PCR methods using fluorescent dyes and probes carrying a fluorescent reporter and quencher.

But fluorescence can also increase through unintended pathways, potentially contributing to a false-positive reading.

Those pathways include reagent cross-reactions, probe cleavage or degradation, reporter or quencher detachment or degradation, optical cross-talk, and changes in reporter - quencher behavior caused by heat - which PCR intentionally applies to the sample over and over during testing.

WHO's manual confirms that PCR repeatedly heats the test material, including to 95°C, and that real-time PCR results are evaluated by whether fluorescence rises above a threshold.

It also explicitly acknowledges background signal, contamination, and false-positive results.

The implications are difficult to ignore.

WHO is saying evidence of illness is not required at the gateway to its pandemic-potential reporting system, while the "laboratory-confirmed" evidence that can substitute for illness may itself rest on light readings susceptible to false-positive signals.

Bottom Line

The world saw what can follow a pandemic determination during COVID-19: lockdowns, business and school closures, masking and distancing mandates, travel restrictions, and vaccination requirements.

WHO now says "Evidence of illness is not required" for certain "laboratory-confirmed" infections with pandemic potential to trigger international reporting.

If nobody has to be sick, and "laboratory confirmation" can ultimately rest on a fluorescence reading, what evidence of actual disease must exist before governments begin exercising pandemic powers?

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 14:00

Tehran At The Crossroads: Iran's Civilian Leaders Call For Peace Amid Crippling U.S. Blockade

Tehran At The Crossroads: Iran's Civilian Leaders Call For Peace Amid Crippling U.S. Blockade

Iran's top civilian officials are publicly urging an end to the ongoing conflict with the United States, exposing a deepening internal rift as they attempt to rein in hardliners who champion continued resistance.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian speaks during a visit to the shrine of the leader of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in southern Tehran, Iran, January 31, 2026

The financial and social toll of the U.S. blockade is proving too severe to ignore - as Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian recently declared that the country cannot endure a state of perpetual limbo, though he cautioned against making concessions that would appear humiliating on the global stage.

"The war must come to an end at some point," Pezeshkian stated in a Friday address, according to state media. "It is better that we demonstrate our strength and dignity today and tell the world that we have won and that we are ending the war."

President Donald Trump has maintained a relentless blockade on the Islamic Republic after a previous memorandum of understanding imploded - effectively severing the regime's ability to export oil - its primary source of income. This has plunged Iran into a domestic crisis characterized by skyrocketing inflation and an increasingly desperate cost-of-living crisis. The pressure is expected to intensify further this week, as U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent prepares to unveil what President Trump has characterized as an "economic D-Day."

While the exact nature of these punitive measures remains classified, Bessent has strongly signaled the implementation of sweeping secondary sanctions targeting any nation that continues to do business with Tehran.

A Regime Divided

The push for diplomacy from Iran's civilian government stands in stark contrast to the shifting power dynamics among its clerics and military elite. Pezeshkian claims his diplomatic push aligns with the broader goals of the regime, referencing past speeches by Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei - who has conspicuously vanished from the public eye since the conflict escalated.

"I was in the presence of the Supreme Leader, and in his speeches as well, he openly stated that we must move beyond this state of 'neither war nor peace,'" Pezeshkian noted. "We are not going to humiliatingly back down before the enemy or bow our heads. We can sit down with strength, but also with logic, and resolve our problems."

Prior to his public absence, Khamenei had elevated hardline factions who favor military confrontation over the moderates seeking a renewed deal with Washington. Despite this, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf echoed the President's warnings, underscoring the severe national security risks of a collapsing economy.

"No matter how much military power we have, if our people are struggling and the country lacks financial circulation and economic growth, we will not achieve progress," Ghalibaf stated. "As someone who has experienced war, I understand the true value of peace."

Washington's Stance: The "Right Deal"

The Trump administration's distrust stems from the fraught history of recent negotiations, during which U.S. officials reported receiving deeply conflicting signals from Tehran. The previous agreement shattered after Iran launched a series of strikes on maritime vessels navigating the Strait of Hormuz.

For the United States, the objectives remain twofold and uncompromising: Nuclear Prevention: Ensuring Iran permanently loses the capacity to develop or acquire a nuclear weapon. Maritime Security: The full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to global trade.

Currently, the Trump administration claims it's securing the safe passage of 8 to 9 million barrels of oil through the strait daily - a steep decline from the roughly 20 million barrels that traversed the waterway before the conflict erupted.

Washington is signaling that it will dictate the terms. Addressing reporters on Friday, President Trump summarized the diplomatic standoff: "They would love to make a deal, but they're not ready to make the right deal."

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 12:00

Azerbaijan Sues CNN Over Story On Cooperation With Israel In War On Iran

Azerbaijan Sues CNN Over Story On Cooperation With Israel In War On Iran

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

There is a novel (and highly dubious) lawsuit filed in Delaware by the nation of Azerbaijan against CNN for a story claiming that it was cooperating with Israel in attacks on Iran. Republic of Azerbaijan v. CNN, Inc. borders on the legally frivolous, but it is likely politically advantageous to show Iran that it contests the allegations.

In its Complaint, Azerbaijan details the development of hostilities while maintaining neutrality:

Azerbaijan, which shares a border with Iran to the south, is not and has never been a participant in the Iran War. Azerbaijan has not supported military operations by any of the warring nations.

...Azerbaijan maintains a policy of neutrality and independence. Azerbaijan does not host any foreign military bases on its territory and, as a non-aligned state, maintains a strict official policy and legislative framework against foreign military footprints.

The basis for the lawsuit is what the country calls "CNN's reckless reporting" on June 5, 2026 in a post titled "Exclusive: Israel sent troops to Azerbaijan during Iran war, sources say." The article claiming that Azerbaijan allowed Israel to use its territory to launch attacks against Iran no doubt raised the ire of the Islamic Republic.

Indeed, the Complaint lays out how Iran threatened any countries assisting Iran and suggested that the story was putting them at risk of an Iranian attack:

Ali Larijani, a senior Iranian official, threatened: 'The countries of the region must either prevent the use of their soil by America against Iran themselves, or we will.' Similarly, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps ("IRGC") has issued a press release unambiguously stating that 'Countries that host the aggressor American military and have placed their land at the disposal of the aggressor criminals for attacks on Iran should be prepared to receive a corresponding response, and should activate their civil defence [sic] units to safeguard the lives of their citizens and move them away from likely targets.'

The complaint, however, faces even more daunting legal challenges. While the Complaint alleges that "CNN's false reporting caused reputational harm to Azerbaijan and threatens tenuous international relations," it is doubtful that a court will view this as a viable tort claim under defamation.

We have previously discussed lawsuits by countries or nationality groups that have been dismissed. The leading case on defamation, New York Times v. Sullivan, expressly states, "For good reason, "no court of last resort in this country has ever held, or even suggested, that prosecutions for libel on government have any place in the American system of jurisprudence."

In 2000, a state court dismissed Air Zimbabwe v. Chicago Tribune Co. (Cal. Super. Ct. 2000), due to the fact that Air Zimbabwe is "a government entity, is precluded under the First Amendment from pursuing a defamation claim."

Moreover, there are elemental problems in making such a claim. A country would be treated as a public official or figure subject to the "actual malice" standard, requiring knowing falsehood or reckless disregard of the truth. CNN clearly had sources that led it to believe the accounts were true. Indeed, many countries, including those asserting neutrality, have secret agreements or accommodations in this and other wars.

Proving that no such agreement existed or that there was not a defensible basis for the story would be very difficult.

The question of harm is also intriguing. Many would view cooperating against Iran as an admirable decision for Azerbaijan. Although it clearly puts Azerbaijan at odds with Iran, it puts it in alignment with other countries such as the United States. It is difficult to see how damages would be measured in such a circumstance, even if a viable claim on the merits could be established.

This case asks a court to adjudicate global political questions with shadowy sources and factual claims. I would be surprised if any court would relish such a trial and expect that Republic of Azerbaijan v. CNN, Inc. will soon join the list of dismissed actions.

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 11:40

"Civilizational Suicide": China's Humanoids Sprint Ahead As Americans Fight Over Data Center And Socialism

"Civilizational Suicide": China's Humanoids Sprint Ahead As Americans Fight Over Data Center And Socialism

The five-day 2026 World Humanoid Robot Games at Beijing's National Speed Skating Oval are well underway, and on Saturday, an AI-powered humanoid robot reached 14.5 meters per second, or 32.5 mph.

More than 2,000 humanoid robots are participating in the World Humanoid Robot Games across 51 disciplines and more than 1,000 competitions spanning running, table tennis, and soccer.

The games opened during the same week as the 2026 World Robot Conference in Beijing, where companies displayed 3,000 products, and the blockbuster IPO of China-based Unitree. Together, the events and IPO suggest that China is pulling far ahead of the US in humanoid robotics. The main reason is that China controls much of the global supply chain for actuators, motors, optics, and other critical components required to manufacture humanoid robots.

Related:

Arthur MacWaters, who co-founded Legion Health, an AI-native telepsychiatry company, emphasized on X, "We're having debates about data centers, and China is publicly developing superhuman robot armies. What the actual hell are we doing here, guys?"

Another X user said, "We're shooting ourselves in the foot because we want to sit around and watch Netflix and eat Cheetos."

MacWaters responded, "It's civilizational suicide."

While the Trump administration is moving to reindustrialize the US and reshore critical supply chains, the Democratic Party's socialist wing and its far-left allies are advancing an agenda that risks weakening the country from within.

The timing is dangerous. As China expands its AI infrastructure, advanced-manufacturing base, and military power, DSA proposals to block new data centers and neuter US defense capabilities would undermine two pillars of national power. What may be pitched as economic or social reform increasingly carries major national-security consequences and may suggest that these movements are being influenced by subversive networks within left-wing NGO spheres (read here).

We set the narrative at the start of the year that humanoids will move beyond factory floors towards the battlefield. Ukraine confirmed this (see here). 

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 11:05

The Great Burrito Debate And The Uncomfortable Solution To Inflation

The Great Burrito Debate And The Uncomfortable Solution To Inflation

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

Recently one of the most important debates in the history of conservative discourse raged across the internet, with sides deeply divided and solutions rare or nonexistent. This debate went largely unnoticed by the rest of the country but it regards the deepest underlying foundations of our economic future.

I am speaking, of course, about the “Great Burrito Debate” of 2026.

Okay, maybe I’m exaggerating about the significance but I do think this conflict taps into the core of people’s concerns about America’s inflation problem. Not only that, but it exposes a lot of misconceptions people have about what inflation is, what’s causing it and who is to blame.

The burrito debate started as an honest discussion about the cost of living crisis and somehow ended up as dog-pile on conservative manners when it comes to economic discourse. Many conservative and libertarian commentators jumped into the fray with their two cents, though, the vast majority of them have minimal economic background, which I think added more confusion than clarity to the issue.

After two decades of macroeconomic analysis (and predicting the stagflationary crisis well in advance of the Ivy League “experts”) I thought I might offer my own perspective.

Keep in mind, those of us in the alternative economic field had to fight against the lies of the Biden Administration as well as establishment economists like Paul Krugman and Federal Reserve officials like Janet Yellen just to wake the public up to the fact that inflation was upon us and that it was NOT “transitory”.

Ultimately, everyone’s bank balances and monthly bills could not be denied and the gas-lighting ended. The only recourse of the establishment at that point was to blame Trump for all of it. The “Herbert Hoover” comparisons were rampant.

Who Really Has The Power To End Inflation?

To be clear, Trump has reduced the size of government by around 12%, which is an incredible accomplishment considering the amount of legal resistance that was put in place to stop him. However, he did not reduce government spending, which is currently 3% higher than under Biden.

One problem is that 60% of all federal spending is mandatory. By law, programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. all scale their spending to match inflation and there is very little that Trump can do about that. Then there’s the rising interest on debt payments, which is controlled by the Federal Reserve, not the President. Trump’s cuts were only focused on discretionary spending, on institutions like USAID, and even those measures were repeatedly throttled by activist judges.

Trump has tried to circumvent the bureaucracy by issuing tariffs as a counter to the debt problem, but once again, activist judges have intervened. For those who claim that tariffs are “causing inflation”, this is simply false. The contribution tariffs make to CPI is negligible (around 0.5 percentage points). The media (and some libertarians) continue to falsely claim that tariffs are an issue.

This is where I think the public has a disconnect from the reality of the situation, and this includes fiscal conservatives who think they are “holding Trump’s feet to the fire” over US debt. The president is not all-powerful and he has very little control over the direction of the US economy. If he made all the cuts these people demand, he would have to become a dictator and he would have to do it by force.

That is to say, they can’t have it both ways. Either the President takes a constitutional hands-off approach to the economy and government spending, or, he goes full-bore Francisco Franco, declares himself supreme leader, and starts chopping out large pieces of the government (the Spanish “Stabilization Plan” of 1959, not the price control plan of 1939 which ultimately failed).

That’s the only way these kinds of policies are going to happen in the US because Congress isn’t going to do jack. Congress’ primary job is to maintain the status quo, not enact solutions.

The reason fiscal reform is impossible is because our modern government is designed to perpetuate itself; it is designed to grow forever. This is accomplished through the bureaucracy, which is the REAL power base within American politics. Most people do not understand that political leaders come and go, but the bureaucracy is forever and there are no term limits.

The socialist parasites within these structures control the direction of the country and the economy (this includes the central bank). When they face any real political opposition, they simply stall, obstruct, and wait for that political party or leader to leave office. Trump, for example, has only four years to redirect a system that has been on the wrong path for decades. It’s not going to happen without bringing the hammer down.

This brings us back to the “Burrito Debate” and the issue of inflation vs public expectations. The debate started with a post quoting college students complaining about the cost of basic necessities including a “$20 dollar price tag” on burritos. This triggered a wider discussion about affordability vs perception, then spiraled into an argument over conservatives not having enough empathy for struggling youth.

Critics asserted that conservative dismissals of the ongoing cost of living crisis will lead to younger generations rushing to support socialism, and MAGA would be to blame. There are two elements to this argument that I think need to be addressed and I’ll try to summarize as best I can.

Gen Z Has No Point Of Reference Because History Is Ignored

First, there’s the issue of younger generations not having a point of reference for how bad the cost of living crisis today is compared to previous generations. Second, there’s the lack of understanding among older generations on where the current crisis is likely headed in the future without drastic action.

Of course, no burrito actually costs $20. This is a terrible contention which is not based in reality. Maybe it’s the most expensive burrito in the most expensive restaurant in a high cost city like San Francisco or New York, but for the majority of the country a burrito is pocket change.

This brings me to the first issue, which is the younger generation’s lack of historical perspective. To be clear, the current inflationary crisis in the US is NOT the worst inflationary crisis this country has seen in modern times. Not yet, anyway.

From 1972-1981 (just after the US dollar was fully detached from the gold standard), the US suffered one of the most brutal series of inflationary beatings in the nation’s history. Inflation rates hit as high as 13% per year, food prices rose by around 120%, rent prices jumped by 75%, home prices rose by 150% and gas shortages were rampant.

The 1970s demoralized middle-class America. The poverty rate hit 14% and the unemployment rate peaked at 9%. Wages remained stagnant or even dropped for some workers. The average yearly income by 1981 was only $12,000 for individual workers. Most younger people today complain about how “the boomers had it easy” with food prices and house prices back in the day. They don’t actually consider how low wages were, or how high inflation was.

The point is, yes, Gen Z is struggling. Their fears should not be dismissed as frivolous. That said, I think because of internet culture and false expectations, many young people assume they are going through the worst crisis of all time and that no one understands them.

In reality, generations before them had it MUCH worse. The inflationary crisis of the 1970s did not end until the Federal Reserve exploded interest rates to 20%, causing a deflationary reset and making loans unattainable for most people for years.

If you are in your 20s and you think you’re not supposed to be struggling, I’m here to tell you that you’re wrong. We all had to struggle, many of us with terrible wages and low job availability compared to today. Don’t expect to be living comfortably until your mid-30s. It’s just the way things have always been.

Every generation experiences periods of economic uncertainty. But this doesn’t mean that there’s not considerable danger looming in the near future.

Kicking The Can Has Created An Economic Time Bomb

What some conservatives get wrong is the notion that the system can be fixed politically and that things will improve if we only keep Democrats out of office. Keeping leftists away from power is always a good thing, if only to prevent the country from going completely communist and cannibalizing itself. But when it comes to inflation, once an avalanche is set in motion it can’t be stopped and this avalanche has been building for decades.

Inflation cannot be reversed without a deflationary event. Since the credit crash of 2008-2009, political leaders and the Federal Reserve have been aggressively trying to prevent any deflation (the Keynesian standard). Which means that America (and most of the world) has not taken the deflationary medicine we should have taken years ago. Instead, we kicked the can down the road.

Some “experts” believe we can kick the can down the road for eternity. This is foolish.

The Catch-22 is that the central bankers must continue to intervene to prevent deflation but each time they do they pump up the money supply and create even more inflation, which then demands more deflation for balance.

The pandemic event was the most recent instance of this intervention. The covid bailouts caused an immense inflationary reaction and the spike in prices that followed is what most of Gen Z is feeling today as they enter the work-a-day world.

If the Fed stimulates, more inflation is on the way. If they hike interest rates and refuse to intervene, the US faces a deflationary crash. This is where we’re at in 2026 and yes, Gen Z and Gen Alpha will be hit the hardest unless something is done. But what?

The only policy solution that makes sense is an organized deflation plan, if such a thing is possible. Meaning, a reformed government would have to eliminate the central bank, hike rates far higher than they currently are, refuse to bail out failing companies relying on cheap debt, then institute austerity measures on social programs for everyone except the disabled and elderly. This is basically what Franco did (while also hunting down hundreds of thousands of liberals and communists, but let’s set that aside for now).

This government would have to find a way to cut spending, balance the budget and also act to mitigate greater damage to consumers by reducing taxes wherever possible (perhaps even ending property taxes on single family homes).

That would require a level of institutional coordination and cooperation that does not exist in the US right now. Again, Trump, or someone else, would have to act like an economic authoritarian and dictate every detail of the operation.

The system could return to a more normal condition after the economic bubble has been strategically burst, but I suspect similar actions would have to take place perhaps every 25 years to prevent another buildup of inflationary pressure. It would be a kind of “reset”, but not in the way that globalists at the WEF imagine. It would be a planned reset coordinated with the public so we are no longer waiting around for the bankers or random chance to decide when a crash is going to occur.

Meaning, each generation would have to accept the responsibility of dealing with a controlled deflationary downturn for at least a few years. Planning such an event would make it possible for the public to prep ahead of time. It could become a sort of deflationary tradition; similar to a Jubilee.

The only other option, as noted, is to do nothing and wait for the bubble to burst on its own. Eventually, high prices will drag down spending enough that deflation sets in. Job losses will jump. The Yen-carry trade will derail. A Black Swan event will pull the rug out from under us – Something will happen that sets the deflationary chain of events in motion and the central bank will do what it always does: Print money.

This is true of almost every country in the world right now. The US is not the only economy facing inflationary dilemmas, it’s just the largest.

A time will come when the dollar won’t be able to take it anymore and the currency system will break. Then, your burritos really will cost $20 or more and that will be a terrible day of reckoning. It’s a conundrum that should have been dealt with back in 2009, but NO ONE wants to be responsible for the financial pain caused by taking that bitter deflationary pill.

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 10:30

Death Of Europe's Industrial Base: VW CEO Set To Announce 50,000 Job Cuts

Death Of Europe's Industrial Base: VW CEO Set To Announce 50,000 Job Cuts

Europe's industrial demise has become impossible to ignore. The continent's automotive manufacturing base is being hollowed out by high energy costs, regulatory pressure, and a flood of cheap Chinese electric vehicles, with Germany, once Europe's industrial powerhouse, emerging as the epicenter of this terrible decline.

Germany's largest manufacturer by revenue is Volkswagen Group, whose CEO, Oliver Blume, is warning employees that the coming weeks will be critical as Europe's largest automaker prepares to detail the most extensive restructuring in its history.

"The next few weeks will be crucial: everyone must pull together," he told local outlet Bild am Sonntag. "We have drawn up the largest transformation plan in the history of the Volkswagen Group."

The upcoming meetings, scheduled for next week, are expected to provide employees and union representatives with new details about the plan to shed 50,000 jobs.

"The next few years will be decisive in determining who stays in the race and who comes out on top," Blume said, pointing to massive pressure to slash costs, fundamental shifts in the market, and global turmoil.

Blume warned, "The global car industry is in the midst of a massive crisis. And the Volkswagen Group is right in the thick of it. Geopolitics, trade barriers, regulation, weak markets and fierce competition are all taking their toll."

Christiane Benner, deputy chairwoman of VW's supervisory board and head of Germany's IG Metall union, told local outlet Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that Blume's plan to cut 50,000 jobs is a "hard provocation," adding that trust in management is severely "strained."

Meanwhile, Volkswagen is holding "concrete negotiations" with Chinese automakers about assembling their vehicles at German factories, Benner said. Such deals could help protect domestic jobs and improve plant utilization, though she cautioned that they would represent only a "complementary measure" rather than a comprehensive solution.

Talks aimed at securing the future of VW's Osnabrück plant are also progressing, according to Benner, who added that Qatar blocked a potential agreement involving Israeli defense contractor Rafael to convert a civilian production line to military production.

Whether the issue is the death of a industrial base, the Third World invasion of Europe, or disastrous green and energy policies that have sent energy prices through the roof, Brussels' terrible decisions are, as Nomura analyst Andrzej Szczepaniak described, "seeding political change" that will push the continent "toward more populism."

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 09:55

Alfalfa Sprouts Linked To Bacterial Infections In 15 US States

Alfalfa Sprouts Linked To Bacterial Infections In 15 US States

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

A total of 55 people have been infected with E. coli and Salmonella across 15 states in an outbreak linked to alfalfa sprouts, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

Fresh homegrown Alfalfa or Lucerne Medicago sativa sprouts in white bowl. Courtesy of the CDC

Of those 55 people, 46 were infected with Shiga toxin-producing E. coli, or STEC, seven with Salmonella, and two with both pathogens, according to the FDA's Aug. 21 update. Four people have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported.

Minnesota accounted for the largest number of infections, with 21 cases, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Wisconsin followed with 17 cases. Florida, North Carolina, North Dakota, and New York each reported two cases. Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Washington each reported one.

According to the CDC, illnesses began on May 31, with the most recent case beginning on Aug. 8.

State and local health officials have been interviewing sick people about the foods they ate during the week before becoming ill. Of the 37 people interviewed, 26 reported eating alfalfa sprouts.

Traceback investigations at grocery stores and restaurants identified alfalfa sprouts distributed by Minnesota-based Everything Sprouts LLC as a source of illnesses, according to the FDA.

On Wednesday, the FDA began an inspection at the company and collected product samples. Investigators are working to determine the source of contamination and whether other products or companies are connected to the outbreak.

Everything Sprouts said in an Aug. 21 statement that it was coordinating with the FDA and CDC to recall certain lots of alfalfa sprouts because of potential contamination with STEC and Salmonella.

The recall covers Everything Sprouts Alfalfa sprouts sold in 5-ounce plastic containers with lids and distributed from May 27 through Aug. 21. The products were shipped to retail grocery stores in Minnesota and Wisconsin as well as certain third-party distributors.

The company said federal and state agencies had notified it of reported illnesses. It also said it had tested its products daily during the outbreak and had not received a positive laboratory result.

Everything Sprouts said it was continuing to work with public-health officials to investigate the potential problem and would provide updates as more information became available.

The company also said that, as of its statement, it had received no direct reports of illnesses involving the recalled products.

According to Everything Sprouts, STEC and Salmonella infections can cause serious health problems. STEC infection can lead to acute diarrheal illness within several days of ingesting the bacteria.

Most people recover within about a week, according to the company, but people with weakened immune systems can experience more severe or prolonged illness and may develop complications requiring medical attention.

Salmonella infections can become especially serious in frail people, older adults, young children, and those with weakened immune systems.

Symptoms can include fever, vomiting, nausea, abdominal pain, and diarrhea, which can sometimes be bloody. In rare cases, Salmonella can enter the bloodstream and cause more serious complications, according to the company.

In addition to Everything Sprouts-brand alfalfa sprouts, the CDC linked the illnesses to the company's Calco-branded sprouts in an Aug. 21 food-safety alert.

The CDC advised people who bought the affected products not to eat them and instead throw them away or return them to the place of purchase. It also recommended cleaning items and surfaces that may have contacted the sprouts with a dishwasher or hot, soapy water.

The CDC advised people to contact a health care provider promptly if they develop warning signs including diarrhea accompanied by a fever above 102 degrees Fahrenheit, bloody diarrhea, vomiting severe enough that liquids cannot be kept down, diarrhea lasting more than two days without improvement, or signs of dehydration.

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 09:20

Taiwan Tech Insiders Warn Beijing's Germanium Squeeze Is Hitting Production

Taiwan Tech Insiders Warn Beijing's Germanium Squeeze Is Hitting Production

Nikkei Asia reports that China is restricting or delaying exports of germanium- and quartz-based materials to Taiwan, creating "painful supply-chain bottlenecks" across the island's key aerospace, semiconductor, and optical companies.

The supply disruptions reinforce the urgent need for the US and its allies to accelerate supply-chain decoupling and secure alternative sources of critical materials. Beijing's ability to weaponize shipments could prove devastating during a military conflict or allow China to slow Western semiconductor and AI infrastructure buildouts while its domestic AI companies and infrastructure projects close the gap.

"It's an industrywide issue. Many of my peers have encountered the same problem, and it could significantly extend lead times across our business," one executive in the optical industry told the Japanese outlet, requesting anonymity for fear of retaliation from Beijing.

For context, germanium's most critical uses are in defense optics and communications infrastructure, and it plays a significant, though largely indirect, role in the AI buildout through fiber networks, photonics, and data-center connectivity rather than the GPUs used in chip stacks.

Taiwanese manufacturers warned that prolonged customs reviews for germanium- and quartz-based materials began last year and that lead times continue to worsen, causing some suppliers to miss customer delivery schedules. Sources said one chip equipment manufacturer had to delay production on one chip line for months due to the supply squeeze and noted that sourcing materials outside China is extraordinarily difficult.

"The quality and precision for quartz is very strict for the chip industry, and currently we don't have an alternative source from China," one Taiwanese executive told the outlet.

"We have been told that some of our Chinese suppliers have been summoned by the authorities and questioned about their customers and shipments," said one of the sources. "We have already lost some orders because longer lead times for certain materials mean we can't meet our customers' delivery schedules."

Aerospace suppliers are also reporting disruptions involving Chinese magnets.

"We have found that key permanent magnets essential for making motors have faced some disruptions because of Chinese export controls, and it's not that easy to find cost-effective alternatives in other places," an executive with an aerospace supplier told the outlet.

China's weaponization of critical-material supply chains amid heightened tensions with Taiwan suggests that the supply-chain decoupling theme will only accelerate from here.

Last week, Piper Sandler initiated coverage of LightPath Technologies with an "Overweight" rating and a 12-month price target of $15, citing the defense supplier's proprietary BlackDiamond infrared glass, which completely "circumvents" the need for germanium amid "significant cost increases and scarcity stemming from recent Chinese export controls."

Clarke Jeffries, vice president and senior equity research analyst at Piper Sandler, specializes in industrial software and defense technology. In a note titled "BlackDiamonds Are Forever," Jeffries outlined the core value proposition underpinning LightPath's investment thesis:

Central to LightPath's value proposition is the exclusive license to BlackDiamond, a synthetic glass that circumvents significant cost increases & scarcity from recent Chinese export controls on germanium.

With an exclusive license, and now competing at cost parity (or below) to Germanium, we believe LightPath is poised to capture meaningful share in of IR and Multi-Spectral optics market as the technical advantages of the BlackDiamond technology scale to large diameter optics and have the opportunity to be designed into large upcoming defense programs.

Beijing's tightening grip on germanium, tungsten, and other critical-material export flows merely confirms that the supply-chain decoupling investment theme will remain intact for many years.

The US and its allies must secure alternative sources before China further weaponizes export controls, which could soon create operational bottlenecks across the defense, semiconductor, and AI-focused industries.

That is why our decoupling theme is moving further upstream. On Wednesday, we examined Almonty Industries as a potential alternative supplier of tungsten (read report).

Tyler Durden Sun, 08/23/2026 - 08:50

Pages