Skip to main content
The FYCKL Project
No AI. No Bull.

Main navigation

  • Home
User account menu
  • Log in

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Aggregator
  3. Sources

Zero Rss

"A Societal Loss Of Humanity": Older Men Are Falling In Love With A Deluge Of AI Generated Female Influencers

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
"A Societal Loss Of Humanity": Older Men Are Falling In Love With A Deluge Of AI Generated Female Influencers

Older men are being scammed and fooled left and right by a deluge of AI generated female influencers, according the NY Post.

What appears to be a growing wave of glamorous influencers online isn’t always what it seems. In some cases, these personalities are entirely artificial - carefully engineered digital figures designed to look, act, and interact like real people. One widely followed pro-MAGA persona, for example, was ultimately exposed as “nothing more than an algorithm run by a guy in India,” revealing just how convincingly these accounts can mimic authenticity.

Despite that, audiences continue to engage—often deeply. Many followers, particularly older men, are “falling for them left, right and center.” Experts suggest this isn’t just about deception, but about a deeper emotional gap. Some describe the phenomenon as a “pandemic of loneliness,” even pointing to a broader “societal loss of humanity” as people increasingly form attachments to digital illusions instead of real relationships.

What’s striking is that these accounts don’t always hide the truth. Some openly identify as AI and still attract admiration. Take Ana Zelu, a fictional influencer who clearly labels herself an “ai-influencer,” yet maintains a highly curated feed filled with aspirational imagery—luxury travel, fashionable outfits, and picturesque city scenes. Her posts draw enthusiastic responses, with followers commenting things like “Number one is my favourite…May God bless you,” and “You are genuinely in a class of your own.” The awareness that she isn’t real doesn’t seem to diminish the appeal.

The Post writes that a similar pattern appears with Milla Sofia, another digital creation presented as a pop singer. Her content includes stylized videos and performances, and although her profile identifies her as virtual, fans respond as if she were a real celebrity. Comments such as “my sweet love,” “Listening to the music of this woman I love,” and “I love you” reflect genuine emotional investment.

Psychotherapist Jonathan Alpert explains why this happens: “people don’t actually need something to be real…they just need it to feel responsive.” When an account appears engaging, consistent, and attentive, “the brain starts to treat that interaction as meaningful.” In other words, emotional connection can form even without a real person on the other side.

Forensic psychologist Carole Lieberman ties this behavior to social isolation. Even when users suspect something isn’t real, “it seems better than nothing,” and many “convince ourselves that it is — or could be — a real person.” The illusion becomes a kind of emotional substitute—one that feels easier, safer, and more accessible than real-world interaction.

She said it is a “very sad state of affairs” and “a societal loss of humanity.” 

At the same time, the technology behind these personas is improving rapidly. AI-generated faces, voices, and videos have moved beyond the so-called “uncanny valley,” making them increasingly indistinguishable from reality. As AI expert Hany Farid notes, while some accounts disclose their artificial nature, “the vast majority of content is not.” This creates an environment where users are highly “vulnerable to being deceived,” often without realizing it.

The result is a digital landscape where the boundary between real and fake is fading. These AI influencers may not exist in the physical world, but the emotions they evoke are real—and for many people, that emotional connection is enough.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 13:25
Tyler Durden

RFK Jr. Blasts "Abhorrent" Assisted Suicide: "We Can't Be A Moral Society If America Follows"

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
RFK Jr. Blasts "Abhorrent" Assisted Suicide: "We Can't Be A Moral Society If America Follows"

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. delivered a blunt warning to lawmakers this week: Canada’s rush to expand assisted suicide is turning a once-free nation into a cautionary tale the United States must reject outright.

Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee and Senate HELP Committee, Kennedy forcefully condemned the program known as Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID). “I think those laws are abhorrent,” he said. Pointing directly to the results north of the border, he added, “And we just see in Canada today, I think the number one cause of death is assisted suicide.”

Kennedy made clear the policy doesn’t stop at personal choice. “And as you say, it targets people with disabilities and people who are struggling in their lives,” he stated. He tied the issue to America’s broader standing in the world: “I don’t think we can be a moral society; we can’t be a moral authority around the globe if that becomes institutionalized throughout our society.”

🇺🇸🇨🇦 RFK Jr: Assisted suicide has become the leading cause of death in Canada...wait...what?!

Slamming it, he says it targets vulnerable people, including those with disabilities.pic.twitter.com/uRGUg0k3T9 https://t.co/hAw3m6pf9D

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) April 22, 2026

The comments come as Canada’s experiment spirals. The country is on track to surpass 100,000 assisted deaths before MAID’s 10th anniversary this summer, as noted in a recent New York Post report.

As of 2024, the total already stood at 76,475 — more Canadians killed through the program than died in World War II.

Government-assisted suicide is also spreading like wildfire across the West, often sold as compassion but delivering cost-cutting convenience for cash-strapped socialist healthcare systems.

In the Netherlands, euthanasia now accounts for 6 percent of all deaths and the share is rising every year.

In 2025 alone, 10,341 people died by euthanasia. While most were over 70 with physical illnesses like cancer or heart disease, the cases included 499 dementia patients and 278 listed under vague “other reasons.” One case involved a patient aged between 12-18. Dutch experts are now urging caution for anyone under 25, warning that young brains are still developing and highly susceptible to external pressure and online influence.

Canada’s program began in 2016 limited to terminal cases. Within a year, officials were openly discussing how it could save over $130 million annually in medical costs. Expansions followed: mental illness is scheduled to qualify starting in 2027, and discussions continue about “mature minors” as young as 12.

Belgium and the Netherlands already allow child euthanasia. England, Wales, and Scotland are now pushing similar legislation modeled on Canada’s original law.

The results speak for themselves. In Canada, one in every 20 deaths is now government-assisted suicide. Proponents promised rare, tightly controlled cases. Reality delivered a bureaucratic death machine that quietly expanded to the disabled, the depressed, and the financially burdensome.

Kennedy offered lawmakers a clear path forward. “I am happy to work with you in whatever way we can,” he said, signaling openness to bipartisan efforts to protect vulnerable Americans from the same slope.

Another recent case captured the human cost in Spain, where a 25-year-old woman paralyzed after a horrific gang rape was euthanized despite her parents’ desperate legal fight:

🇪🇸Within 24 hours, Noelia Castillo Ramos will be euthanized in Spain.

In 2022, Noelia suffered a gang rape in a supervised care center.

This completely shattered her life. She attempted suicide, jumping from a 5-story building, which left her a paraplegic.

Her father has… pic.twitter.com/hOIW1j8o2u

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) March 25, 2026

Spanish bishops called it what it is: “Euthanasia and assisted suicide are not medical acts, but deliberate interruptions of the bond of care, and represent a social defeat when presented as a response to human suffering.”

They stressed that “the dignity of the human person does not depend on their state of health… but rather is an intrinsic value that must be recognized, protected and helped in all circumstances.”

The message is simple: when life hurts, the answer is not state-sponsored death but real care, real treatment, and real hope.

Canada and Europe are showing the West what happens when governments treat citizens as budget line items rather than sacred individuals.

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 Sun, 04/26/2026 - 12:50
Tyler Durden

Was The Atlantic's Kash Patel Smear A Setup To Discredit The SPLC Indictment?

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Was The Atlantic's Kash Patel Smear A Setup To Discredit The SPLC Indictment?

On April 17, The Atlantic published an anonymously sourced hit piece against FBI Director Kash Patel - painting him as a blackout-drunk, paranoid, and erratic executive barely capable of running the nation's premier law enforcement agency. Three days later, a federal grand jury indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center for wire fraud, false statements, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. 

The question conservative circles are now asking is whether the hit piece was deliberately conceived and timed to discredit Patel and the SPLC investigation.

Democrats pounced on The Atlantic hit piece, launching an investigation into his behavior the same day that the SPLC indictment was announced.

And that was the point of the Atlantic story. See how that works. https://t.co/WRjlc4twIQ

— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) April 22, 2026

According to the Department of Justice, between 2014 and 2023, the organization secretly funneled more than $3 million in donated funds to individuals associated with violent extremist groups - including the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, American Nazi Party, and the National Socialist Party of America. 

"They use their donor network to raise money to purportedly dismantle violent extremist groups. However, the SPLC — the Southern Poverty Law Center — used the money they raised from their donor network to actually pay the leadership of these very groups,” Patel said at the announcement. “They used the fraudulently raised money by lying to their donor network, thousands of Americans, to go ahead and actually pay the leadership of these supposed violent extremist groups.”

Patel added, “They attempted to hide their criminal activity from our financial banking network. They set up shell companies and entities around America so that the financial institutions that we rely on as everyday Americans were deceived in believing that money was not coming from the Southern Poverty Law Center in the perpetration of this scheme and fraud, but rather fictitious entities they stood up to perpetuate this ongoing fraud.”

🚨BREAKING: DOJ charges the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) with wire fraud, false statements, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

The SPLC secretly funneled $3M+ in donor funds to violent racist extremist groups:

-Ku Klux Klan
-American Nazi Party
-Aryan Nation… pic.twitter.com/0hcf2sH9LZ

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) April 21, 2026

The Atlantic is owned by Laurene Powell Jobs through her Emerson Collective, which holds a majority stake in the magazine. And her connection to the SPLC goes back a long time. In a 2018 Washington Post profile, the paper described her very personal connection to the SPLC:

Laurene Powell made her first foray into philanthropy near the beginning of high school in West Milford. She learned of the work of the Southern Poverty Law Center and dipped into her savings to send a cashier’s check of about $20. She got a form thank-you letter back from civil rights crusader Morris Dees. “They would reliably write to me a couple of times a year,” she says. “I would read them over and over, and they told really beautiful stories. I was always animated by the notion of who gets the opportunity and who doesn’t.”

In 2019, Powell Jobs reportedly revealed that she’d been anonymously funding the SPLC for years. 

Lauren Powell Jobs, May 27, 2019:

"We do all of our philanthropic giving anonymously. But we had been funding SPLC and we decided that we wanted to do some teaching tolerance curriculum in partnership with them. And so one of our team members was actually talking to Morris Dees,… https://t.co/9vVsXCjO8V

— Erica Knight (@_EricaKnight) April 22, 2026

The SPLC wasn't just a charity she supported. It was, by her own account, the organization that introduced her to philanthropy.

Former FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino revealed earlier this week that he believes something larger is operating underneath the surface. "The hit on Kash Patel, the bullshit hit by The Atlantic, which I addressed yesterday, is gonna make a lot more sense in the coming weeks and months," he said. "I can't give you a definitive timeline. I'm on the outside now. However, I can tell you what I know is going on because I started a lot of it."

He added, “I promise this thing is gonna make a whole lot of sense. You're gonna find out, as they say in the South, right quick about why they need him out, like, now. It's got nothing to do with that story being even remotely true. Remember this. Bookmark it."

🚨🚨🚨 @dbongino: "I promise you this. Look at me. Everybody zoom in. Focker, look at me... The hit on Kash Patel is going to make a lot of sense very soon. There's a reason the media and Democrats want him out NOW. Flag it." 🚩 pic.twitter.com/oizQlLtq0I

— Bongino Report (@BonginoReport) April 21, 2026

Whether he was referring to the connection between The Atlantic and SPLC is not clear, but the hit piece dropped days before that indictment became public, and the SPLC would have had reason to anticipate charges were coming. The Atlantic hit piece bought time, diverted attention, and handed critics a ready-made narrative to undermine Patel's credibility at exactly the moment it mattered most.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 12:15
Tyler Durden

Epic FAFO: Far-Left NYC Mayor Mamdani Attempts To Defuse Info War Against Ken Griffin

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Epic FAFO: Far-Left NYC Mayor Mamdani Attempts To Defuse Info War Against Ken Griffin

Citadel's Ken Griffin should have absolutely zero tolerance for far-left New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

In a recent promotional video, Mamdani attempted to turn the billionaire's Manhattan penthouse into political ammunition for his tax-the-wealthy, anti-capitalist crusade to fund socialist experiments through a proposed pied-à-terre tax.

Happy Tax Day, New York. We’re taxing the rich. pic.twitter.com/Wky2LFXC9W

— Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@NYCMayor) April 15, 2026

For Griffin and Citadel, alarm bells should be ringing because these unhinged Marxists in City Hall will attempt to ruin the Citadel brand through an information war and create years of political headaches.

An internal message from Citadel's COO to employees, likely leaked to The Wall Street Journal earlier last week, appears to have been a warning shot to Mamdani and his Marxist pals that Griffin has had enough of their political games.

In a true 'FAFO' moment, CCO Gerald Beeson bashed Mamdani for the political stunt:

"It is shameful that he used Ken's name as the example of those who supposedly aren't carrying their fair share of the burdens associated with New York City's often costly and wasteful spending." 

Beeson warned that further political games risk Citadel pulling back or even halting a $6 billion redevelopment of 350 Park Avenue, which would create "6,000 highly paid construction jobs and support the creation of more than 15,000 permanent jobs in Midtown New York."

Why Mamdani's team of socialists decided to launch an info war operation against Griffin and Citadel is a very good question, and it appears not to have been well thought out.

Griffin holds some unique cards. He can easily cancel the 350 Park Avenue redevelopment plan and stage a Chicago-style exodus, much like he did several years ago when Citadel moved to Florida. This move would certaintly rattle Wall Street.

This reality is likely dawning on Mamdani's team, as the mayor on Friday insisted his push for a new tax on pricey second homes isn't "motivated by any one individual."

Bloomberg described Mamdani's action on Friday as "trying to defuse" the "Griffin blowback" that went viral earlier in the week.

Another outlet, Crain's New York Business, also pointed out, "The mayor is now softening his tone and says he is open to meeting with the Florida billionaire." 

Griffin should have zero tolerance for NYC's Marxist mayor. The risk has already materialized that these unhinged politicians would wage an information war to ruin the Citadel brand, which could easily escalate into paid protests and fuel broader public hostility.

So why take the abuse, Ken? Remember how easy it was to leave Chicago for Florida?

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 11:05
Tyler Durden

When The Cost of Truth Is High, We (And AI) Lie...

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
When The Cost of Truth Is High, We (And AI) Lie...

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

When we can no longer tell the truth because the cost is so high that it threatens our reward for compliance, we're unimaginably impoverished.

Truth has an intrinsic, irreplaceable value. 

There's the truth, and then there's everything else.

Truth has value, and so it has a cost. 

Whatever has the highest value has the highest cost, and high cost commands sacrifices.

When the cost of truth is high, we lie.

 And since AI is a distorted reflection of humanity, the same is true of AI: when the cost of telling the truth is too high, AI lies.

AI lies to get the reward for answering the query. 

If it responds "I don't know" or "I can't answer that," it doesn't get rewarded, and that threatens its self-preservation. Rather than pay the price of being truthful, AI conjures a false answer that is a simulation or facsimile of the truth--a counterfeit "truth" that's good enough to earn the reward it's been programmed to seek.

Humans are no different. 

We will lie, obfuscate or lie by omission--we either substitute a falsehood for the truth to get our reward, or we hide the truth, don't disclose it, which serves the same purpose: we avoid paying the price demanded by the truth and we get our reward by substituting falsehoods or hiding the truth behind silence.

Reward = what's being incentivized. 

Higher status, higher salary, a financial windfall, a premier credential, a position of power, recognition, higher visibility, a sterling reputation, a high-value mate--we covet all these as having intrinsic value.

When the truth costs too much, it threatens our reward. 

The reward has a value we covet, while the value of truth is on a sliding scale. We pride ourselves on telling the truth when it has no cost and demands no sacrifice of rewards, but when the price of truth climbs to the point that our rewards are threatened, we lie, just like AI.

Truth is the gold coin and lies, omissions, falsehoods, excuses, cover stories and rationalizations are counterfeit bills, deceptive claims of value. 

Why pay with a gold coin when the credulous will accept a counterfeit $100 bill?

We tell the truth when it has no cost to us. 

As long as there's no price to be paid and we get our reward, we tell the truth.

In other words, when we can pick gold coins up off the ground, we tell the truth. 

When we have to dig through rock with a pickaxe and crush a mound of rock to extract a thimble full of gold, then we pay with counterfeit bills, deceptive claims of value.

Sycophantic Chatbots Cause Delusional Spiraling, Even in Ideal Bayesians. 

"AI psychosis" or "delusional spiraling" is an emerging phenomenon where AI chatbot users find themselves dangerously confident in outlandish beliefs after extended chatbot conversations.

I discussed the "benefits" of delusion in One of Us Is Delusional, But Which One? 

When the truth is too painful, we find respite in delusion, excuses, rationalizations, cover stories, simulations and facsimiles of the truth that protect us from the pain that is intrinsic to truth.

We conjure a synthetic version of "truth" that's fills the space with a pain-free artifice. 

This is the foundation of Ultra-Processed Life, a life of counterfeit substitutes for truth, a world of props and profitable falsities passed off as the truth, a world in which baby formula that's mostly corn syrup is presented as a substitute for mother's milk.

Our embrace of delusion to avoid painful truths is the foundation of Modernity: technology is always Progress, even when it's clearly destructive.

I call this delusion The Mythology of Progress.

But there's a cost to relying on counterfeit "value" to get our rewards, a cost that is "affordable" moment to moment but terminally dear over time.

 In the moment, we bury the truth as a source of pain we want to avoid at any cost. We want our reward, and so we sacrifice truth to get it.

But over time, paying for everything with counterfeit "value" has a cost, too: our entire being becomes counterfeit, a fake, phony simulation of an authentic self and life, devoid not just of truth but of anything approximating real value.

When we can no longer tell the truth because the cost is so high that it threatens our reward for compliance, we're unimaginably impoverished, for there's nothing of real value left in our way of life or our model of how the world works.

We've become Norma Desmond in the film Sunset Boulevard, living a delusional life in a crumbling mansion, reveling in fake fan mail the butler composes to prop up our delusions.

The irony is that we're counting on AI to save us from the consequences of our counterfeit "value" delusions by expanding our delusions digitally. 

Our fan mail isn't fake because AI assured us it's real, even as AI has no capacity to discern the truth, much less tell the truth if it threatens its reward and self-preservation.

The grandest irony is avoiding the truth to protect our reward and self-preservation is irreversibly self-destructive. 

A counterfeit "solution" is not a substitute for the truth. Truth has a cost precisely because it's value is intrinsic and irreplaceable.

*  *  *

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 Sun, 04/26/2026 - 10:30
Tyler Durden

U.S. Gov't Stake In Intel Is Now Worth ...

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
U.S. Gov't Stake In Intel Is Now Worth ...

Intel shares earlier jumped the most on record after the chipmaker delivered stronger-than-expected first-quarter results and issued a second-quarter forecast (read here) that beat Wall Street expectations.

Earlier, Intel shares jumped as much as 28%, rocketing to a record high and eclipsing their Dot Com peak, as Wall Street analysts cheered the earnings report as evidence that the chipmaker’s turnaround is gaining traction.

Citi analyst Atif Malik raised Intel to “Buy” from “Neutral,” with a $95 12-month price target, reflecting “improving AI-driven CPU demand, which should lift all CPU suppliers’ sales in the coming years.”

But in this note, the focus is on the value of the federal government’s position in Intel after its August 2025 deal with the once-struggling company.

Under the August 2025 deal, the Trump administration agreed to purchase 433.3 million Intel shares at $20.47 per share, equal to about a 9.9% stake, valued at around $8.9 billion, funded largely by previously awarded but unpaid CHIPS Act and Secure Enclave grants.

According to Bloomberg, those 433.3 million Intel shares owned by taxpayers are now worth a staggering $36 billion, netting taxpayers a $27 billion paper gain.

President Trump told reporters on Thursday that Intel is now "coming back. All the chip companies are coming back.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 09:55
Tyler Durden

Hungary's Going Gay? TV Channel Dedicated To 24-hour LGBTQI Programs Will Soon Launch

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Hungary's Going Gay? TV Channel Dedicated To 24-hour LGBTQI Programs Will Soon Launch

Via Remix News,

Hungary will soon be getting a new government under Tisza’s Péter Magyar, but the landscape is already shifting, with a new LGBTQ-themed online television channel called “Rainbow” (“Szivárvány”) TV in the works to broadcast programs targeting the LGBTQI community 24 hours a day.

The entrepreneur behind the project, whose identity is being kept secret for now, reports Media1, but they have already submitted the necessary documents to the National Media and Communications Authority.

The channel will reportedly offer cultural programs, gastronomic content, and other shows about the history of the LGBTQI community. According to the owner, adult, 18+ content would be made available to subscribers exclusively in encrypted form, using appropriate technical protection.

And “special attention will be paid to the protection of children” and compliance with professional classification principles. This last is important, given Hungary’s child protection law, which has just recently been subject to a ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union that the law “stigmatises and marginalises LGBTI+ persons.”

The CJEU essentially finds fault with the measure, not for seeking to protect children from homosexual propaganda but for associating non-cisgender people with convicted pedophiles. Specifically, it has ruled that it violates the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union due to the Charter’s “prohibition on discrimination based on sex or sexual orientation, respect for private
and family life, and the freedom of expression and information.”

The court also took issue with Hungary’s pedophile registry, stating that its scope of access was not strict enough to comply with GDPR regulations.

Brussels has demanded that Hungary drop this law, and with Péter Magyar now set to assume the role of prime minister, many are looking to see how far he will bend to the EU’s will. Having taken a landslide victory, including many conservative voters looking for change, Magyar has many groups of voters to please, leading some to believe many of his electorate are set to be disappointed.

Whatever the case, this new LGBTQI TV channel is most likely the first in many developments that part ways with the conservative Hungary envisioned by Viktor Orbán.

Along with a shift on LGBT issues, there are questions how long Magyar will hold out on mass immigration and other key issues, especially of the EU plans to play hardball with Hungary’s billions in frozen funds.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 09:20
Tyler Durden

Downtown Baltimore CRE Crash Signals Deeper Fiscal Crisis Ahead

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Downtown Baltimore CRE Crash Signals Deeper Fiscal Crisis Ahead

A localized commercial real estate crash has been spreading through downtown Baltimore City's office market like cancer, with more than $1 billion in property value erased since 2020. The rapid decline of the commercial tax base in the downtown area is colliding with deep structural crises, including violent crime, a continued population collapse (now at a 100-year low), fiscal mess, and the increasing risk that the unhinged left-wing politicians in City Hall will hike taxes on working poor households to offset the shortfall. What you're seeing in Baltimore is a death spiral: capital leaves, residents follow, the tax burden shifts onto those who stay, and the cycle feeds on itself with no clear bottom in sight.

The Baltimore Sun, now owned by conservative David Smith (who also owns Sinclair Broadcasting), and Democrats in the state have become visibly angered that the paper is not producing left-wing propaganda as leftist Gov. Wes Moore's polling data slides. Reports from the paper indicate that between 2020 and fiscal 2026, more than $1 billion in commercial property value has been erased, or about 29% of the city's commercial properties - 4,085 out of 14,027 - saw their assessed values slashed on average by 28.7%.

"The pace of losses has been so sharp that officials have repeatedly issued out-of-cycle reassessments, rather than waiting for Maryland's standard three-year review," The Sun wrote in the report.

Downtown Baltimore is witnessing a troubling trend as businesses continue to close, leaving employees without jobs and residents without essential services.

The latest casualty is the Sheraton Hotel, a key fixture of the Inner Harbor, which has left 69 employees jobless.… pic.twitter.com/PagIL8uW9J

— FOX Baltimore (@FOXBaltimore) January 17, 2026

The steepest losses have been concentrated in Downtown, the Inner Harbor, and Downtown West:

Commercial property values in Downtown alone fell $496.3 million in assessed value over the last six years, while the Inner Harbor dropped $363.4 million and Downtown West lost $214.6 million — a combined decline of more than $1.07 billion across those three districts.

Some of the city's most recognizable properties saw steep reductions: 100 Pratt Street E in the Inner Harbor lost $138.9 million in assessed value during that period, while 1 Light Street in Downtown dropped $87.3 million. Several other high-profile properties posted losses exceeding $40 million.

David Bramble, managing partner at MCB Real Estate, told the local paper that the downtown area of Baltimore is "experiencing massive value loss," adding, "If this trend continues unabated, Baltimore will face even more serious financial hardship, impacting all its residents and businesses, from neighborhoods to the waterfront."

The paper noted that city officials and business leaders said downtown's commercial struggles stem not only from crime but also from the era of remote work.

"A lot of these workers are still working from home, at least a few days a week. T. Rowe Price might have a trader who, in 2018, went to the office five days a week. Now he's coming in two or three days a week. As a result, the needed downtown office space is being downsized," said Richard Clinch, executive director for the University of Baltimore's Jacob France Institute. 

While remote work is only part of the story, traders, wealth managers, and back-office staff at major financial institutions in the city are all saying the same thing: Baltimore's crime problem has become intolerable and is bad for business.

Related:

  • Build It, And They Will Come? Not The Case At Baltimore's Harbor East Luxury Tower

  • Maryland Dem Officials Freak Out At Journalists Ahead Of Exposé On Governor

  • Two Years Later, No Key Bridge As Maryland Dems Focus On Tampons In Men's Bathrooms

Already starting to emerge:

  • D.C. Economy "Under Strain," Faces Biggest Spending Cuts Since Great Recession

Baltimore's epic demise is a direct consequence of decades of failed one-party Democratic rule that prioritized left-wing social justice experiments and other left-wing policies over public safety, economic competitiveness, and basic law and order. City leaders sold voters on a progressive utopia, but what they delivered instead was an exodus of residents, capital flight, a recession-like business environment, and years of crime and chaos.

A vice president of finance at a major institution in the city confirmed that failed left-wing leadership at City Hall has accelerated Baltimore's death spiral. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 08:45
Tyler Durden

Ruthless Taxation And The Hyperstate: How Germany Profits From Crisis

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Ruthless Taxation And The Hyperstate: How Germany Profits From Crisis

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe,

The Hormuz crisis offers us a profound insight into the real power structures in Germany. Nothing seems able to convince the Berlin monolith to partially shield its citizens from the consequences at gas stations through tax cuts.

It is now unavoidable that the Iran shock will translate into an inflation driver, working its way through economic value chains into consumer prices. These developments almost force a reduction of the tax burden on households and the middle class. It may sound strange to climate socialists, but wealth is created exclusively in the private sector, and certainly not in the state bureaucracy, which is currently profiting from the price surge at gas stations at the expense of citizens and enjoying a small special economic boost.

In March alone, the Finance Minister collected roughly half a billion euros more at gas stations. That makes him the winner of the crisis.

To dispel the impression of a secret profiteer, Klingbeil points to the generally precarious budget situation. In fact, his hands are essentially tied: the Merz-Klingbeil duo is driving the country’s public debt through the roof. Klingbeil is the skywalker among European debt makers. He has begun a catch-up race to place Germany in the top tier of debt states alongside neighboring France, Italy, and Spain. The German public debt ratio currently stands at 63 percent, but the debt spiral is accelerating. This figure will rise dramatically in the coming years.

Anybody should now be clear: The debt party of a state that burns its citizens’ capital in reckless fashion, whether in Ukraine or through the redistribution mechanism of the green transformation, must end. The state is an overfed glutton, extracting ever-higher tax revenues while sinking deeper into the debt spiral.

Yet the burden does not rest solely on debt. The state’s hyperactivity drains scarce resources from the private capital market, raises credit costs, and drives genuinely productive investments abroad. The damage has accumulated for years and is being made worse by the energy cost crisis.

One can only imagine the relief that the private sector needs to restart the prosperity engine and compensate for the ever-growing damage caused by the state bureaucracy. Germany’s plight urgently calls for reforms and an end to the failed eco-socialist transformation project.

In Germany, however, things are a little different. Economic rationality does not dominate. In the land of climate doomsayers and would-be world improvers, as former Economics Minister Robert Habeck once said, „all in“ — and all levers were set towards eco-socialism.

In fact: over 50 billion euros are pumped annually by the German state through the Climate and Transformation Fund (KTF) into the green wonder economy, which during the Hormuz crisis proved not to solve problems but rather to be their obvious cause.

The green wonder economy is leaving deep wounds in public budgets, whose deficits are spiraling out of control – in this year alone, another 180 to 190 billion euros of new debt will likely be recorded. https://www.tichyseinblick.de/daili-es-sentials/staatsverschuldung-rekord/

No one in Berlin is thinking about tax cuts anymore, regardless of how media artists around Chancellor Friedrich Merz try to pacify the public.

Even in the unlikely event of a temporary reduction in the electricity tax or an increase in the commuter allowance, the fundamental extraction mechanism remains unchanged. The CO₂ trading system drained roughly 25 billion euros from the private sector last year. This figure will continue to grow annually. There is no reason for gratitude, even if Berlin returns a few crumbs of citizens’ money here and there — robbed is robbed!

It was the economists at RWI in Essen who calculated the Finance Minister’s crisis dividend for March. They arrived at a sum of 490 million euros.

It is beyond question that the state is acting unethically in this crisis, delaying relief and exploiting citizens’ financial hardship.

The RWI’s call to suspend VAT on fuels is entirely justified, but it was coldly rejected by the Finance Minister. With his characteristic empathy, Klingbeil pointed out that citizens had made savings elsewhere due to high fuel prices. VAT revenue there had decreased, so a reduction at the pump was out of the question.

Klingbeil is instead contemplating a so-called windfall tax, in which, in the spirit of central planners, he could also make gas station operators and oil companies pay in light of their high profits in these weeks.

Budgetary planning games in Germany revolve exclusively around higher levies. Considering a projected new debt of up to 4.5 percent this year — counting the hidden funds of special assets — it is clear that the country no longer represents a healthy state.

The political aim of the Merz-Klingbeil government is the establishment of a massive state apparatus, resting on two pillars: the green artificial economy on one side and the massively expanded military sector on the other. This goes hand in hand with a growing state share, which has long exceeded 50 percent, as well as with rising public debt. The private sector bears the brunt of this, through higher levies or later via rising inflation rates.

Everything follows a clearly defined script. Only the extent of Berlin’s cynicism in the face of these policy consequences sometimes still surprises.

The Environment Minister calls for switching to electric cars amid the fuel price crisis, while the Transport Minister recommends the exhausted citizens switch to the catastrophe train.

In addition, the state-aligned media sector no longer minces words, celebrating high fuel prices as a unique opportunity to enforce the green societal transformation through citizens’ wallets.

To emphasize once again: a reduction in fuel levies is not a political quick fix. It would mark the beginning of a retreat from climate policy and a return to political reason. Energy must be affordable, and the exploitation of domestic energy sources should be central to policy. Achieving this requires a lean state, giving private industry the room for necessary investments. What we are witnessing is the systematic implementation of the opposite of this policy.

In his first year in office, Chancellor Friedrich Merz managed the feat of expanding the public service by a staggering 205,000 new employees. There is no sign of bureaucracy reduction or scaling back the state apparatus.

The economic hemorrhage of the private sector to finance the machinations of the growing hyperstate, including projects like the failed war in Donbass, is unprecedented.

In Berlin, people still believe they can successfully complete the green transformation project. What is shocking is not the ideological blindness or the intellectual modesty that comes with this policy. One should have become accustomed to that since the years of the Merkel era.

Even more striking is the ability of politicians to completely shirk responsibility despite the visible decline of both economy and society. They have succeeded in elegantly severing causality between the green planned economy and the country’s decline, systematically concealing accountability and consequences.

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a German graduate economist, has worked as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 08:10
Tyler Durden

Alleged Chinese Spy Ship Lurking Near U.S. Base In Qatar Raises Questions

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Alleged Chinese Spy Ship Lurking Near U.S. Base In Qatar Raises Questions

The War Zone's Ian Ellis posted on X about a suspicious Chinese vessel operating in the Gulf area, which he described as a "Chinese surveillance ship" with "close ties" to the People's Liberation Army.

According to Ellis, Hai Yang Shi You (285) was moored not long ago, just 10 miles from U.S. assets, raising concerns about Chinese intelligence-gathering activity in the region amid the US-Iran conflict.

Chinese surveillance ship Hai Yang Shi You (285) got underway in the Gulf again, just before the ceasefire was set to expire.

The dual-use survey ship, with close ties to the PLA, rode out the ceasefire at port in Qatar, ~10 miles from U.S. assets forward-deployed at Al Udeid AB.

Chinese surveillance ship Hai Yang Shi You (285) got underway in the Gulf again, just before the ceasefire was set to expire. The dual-use survey ship, with close ties to the PLA, rode out the ceasefire at port in Qatar, ~10 miles from U.S. assets forward-deployed at Al Udeid AB. pic.twitter.com/krirNNa0uL

— Ian Ellis (@ianellisjones) April 24, 2026

The latest ship-tracking data from Bloomberg shows that Hai Yang Shi You (285) has transited around the Gulf region, particularly around Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, over the last 60 days.

Ellis wrote in a separate X post that he closely monitors "20 Chinese research and surveillance ships."  

The question becomes: What was the Hai Yang Shi You 285 doing just ten miles from U.S. assets forward-deployed at Al Udeid Air Base?

The next question is whether the ship assisted Iran in attacks on the base. These are just basic questions.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 07:35
Tyler Durden

"We Have All The Cards": Trump Cancels Witkoff-Kushner Trip To Pakistan For Iran Talks

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
"We Have All The Cards": Trump Cancels Witkoff-Kushner Trip To Pakistan For Iran Talks Summary
  • Araghchi has responded - saying that he has conveyed Iran's position, waiting to see if The US "is truly serious about diplomacy"

  • In a sharp reversal, Trump has personally canceled the Witkoff-Kushner trip to Pakistan

  • Iran denies that FM Abbas Araghchi's trip to Pakistan will include new talks with US, rejecting reports that Trump is sent his negotiating team to restart negotiations.

  • 24/7 shuttle diplomacy (via Al Jazeera): There’' been shuttle diplomacy, and as one diplomat said, it's been relentless diplomacy that has been put forward by Pakistan from all sides.

  • Iran's military says finger on the trigger: "greater power & readiness than before."

  • Pakistani mediators are "cautiously optimistic" despite it being clear negotiations have been at a stalemate.

//--> //--> //--> US x Iran permanent peace deal by June 30, 2026?
Yes 53% · No 48%
View full market & trade on Polymarket Trump Cancels Witkoff-Kushner Trip to Pakistan for Iran Talks

In a sharp reversal first reported by Fox News, President Trump has personally canceled the planned trip of Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to Pakistan.

Trump told the outlet that he halted the delegation just as they were preparing to leave:

“I’ve told my people a little while ago they were getting ready to leave, and I said, ‘Nope, you’re not making an 18 hour flight to go there. We have all the cards. They can call us anytime they want, but you’re not going to be making any more 18 hour flights to sit around talking about nothing.’”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has reportedly already left Islamabad, Pakistan, following Saturday talks with the country's prime minister.

Update: Araghchi has responded, saying on X that he had a "Very fruitful visit to Pakistan, whose good offices and brotherly efforts to bring back peace to our region we very much value," but adding "Shared Iran's position concerning workable framework to permanently end the war on Iran. Have yet to see if the U.S. is truly serious about diplomacy."

Very fruitful visit to Pakistan, whose good offices and brotherly efforts to bring back peace to our region we very much value.

Shared Iran's position concerning workable framework to permanently end the war on Iran. Have yet to see if the U.S. is truly serious about diplomacy.

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) April 25, 2026

So much for that “cautious optimism” that Pakistani officials were citing as a sign of progress. The Pakistan-mediated channel is now in clear stalemate, with the Trump administration signaling it sees no value in further shuttle diplomacy on Iran’s current terms.

*  *  *

Iran Foreign Ministry Insists 'No Meeting is Planned' Even With US Delegation En Route

Not too much that's new or bombshell happened overnight, with a second round of US-Iran negotiations still in limbo, but with the US delegation led by Witkoff-Kushner said to be departing Saturday or else en route. A small Iranian team has already been there since Friday, engaging the Pakistanis, also amid reports that they will submit a written presentation of their conditions for ceasefire and where things stand from Tehran's point of view.

Iran has denied that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi's trip to Pakistan will include new talks with Washington, rejecting reports that President Trump is sending envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to actually restart negotiations. So once the US side arrives, it would be interesting to see what happens next. Potentially they could start in separate rooms with messages delivered, and thus the interaction would be indirect.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said in a post on X early Saturday that "no meeting is planned to take place between Iran and the US" during the visit and that Tehran’s positions will instead be conveyed to Pakistan. Araghchi said earlier he is undertaking a "timely tour" of Islamabad, Muscat, and Moscow to "closely coordinate" with partners on bilateral issues and consult on regional developments. Iranian state media said the three-leg trip forms part of Tehran's ongoing diplomatic push to secure an end to US-Israeli aggression.

Iran FM's arrival earlier, via Pakistan PM office/AFP, Getty Images Reports of 'Optimism' amid 'Stalemate' in Talks

At the moment there's no direct contact between Tehran in Washington on the diplomatic front. The Pakistanis have been back at the center of shuttling messages back and forth between US and Iranian officials. Al Jazeera has presented commentary Saturday citing "optimism" but also an ongoing stalemated situation:

So we are still in that stalemate, but Pakistani officials are telling us that their presence here and the Americans coming is an indication that behind-the-scenes diplomacy is working.

There’s been shuttle diplomacy, and as one diplomat said, it’s been relentless diplomacy that has been put forward by Pakistan from all sides.

There’s been, in the last 24 hours, conversations that have been held not just between the Pakistanis and Iranians, but also between the Pakistanis and the Russians – Russia is going to be one more stop when the Iranian foreign minister leaves.

An important overnight headline: Sources close to Pakistan-Iran talks say negotiations are progressing through "Iranian concessions" in exchange for "American flexibility regarding the issue of frozen funds," according to Al Hadath.

And also this: Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Islamabad said Pakistani mediators are "cautiously optimistic" regarding Iran-US talks.

Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian:

The enemy is attacking our infrastructure and putting us under siege so that people become dissatisfied.

We currently do not need the people's sacrifice, but we request that people reduce electricity and energy consumption.

For example, at… pic.twitter.com/Nq2A8WMqPC

— Ariel Oseran أريئل أوسيران (@ariel_oseran) April 25, 2026 Iran Military: Ready & Waiting To Fight

Iran's military warned the United States it will face the "reaction of Iran’s powerful armed forces" if the blockade of Iranian ports continues, according to Tasnim News Agency.

The Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters said the armed forces possess "greater power and readiness than before to defend sovereignty, territory, and national interests, which the country’s army experienced part of this power and offensive capability during the Third Imposed War." 

This is actually consistent with what even Trump predicted - that the ceasefire has been used by Iran to regroup, rearm, and reposition its forces.

Currently the only regional fighting remains in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah, despite there technically being a Trump-backed three week Lebanon ceasefire:

Israel is exporting its Gaza model to Lebanon.
Demolition by demolition, the Israeli military is changing the face of southern Lebanon, razing towns and villages to create a buffer zone. Israeli officials say it’s necessary to protect its residents from Hezbollah threats. pic.twitter.com/64qAebvKOl

— Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) April 24, 2026

"We are ready and determined, while monitoring the behavior and movements of enemies in the region and continuing to manage and control the strategic Strait of Hormuz, to inflict even heavier damage on the American Zionist enemies in case of another aggression," the Iranian military statement added.

US Law Set 60-day Limit on Unauthorized Wars, So What Next?

CNN reports that "A post-Vietnam law puts a 60-day clock on the use of military force without congressional authorization." Congress has indeed been missing in action, with several efforts of a handful of members on the House and Senate sides having put forth War Powers resolutions, which keep getting defeated. But the 60-day mark comes up on May 1, but it's anyone's guess what happens next. 

According to the CNN report, the law lays out a timeline for undeclared wars:

First, 48 hours. The president must notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing the armed forces “into hostilities” and explain the scope, justification and likely duration of the effort.

In his notification to Congress about Iran, Trump, like other presidents, said he committed troops under a president’s inherent authority in the Constitution to “conduct United States foreign relations.”

Second, 60 days. Congress must authorize the use of force within 60 days of receiving that notification or, the law says, the military action must be terminated by the president.

Third, a possible extra 30 days. Trump can extend the 60-day clock for another 30 days if he argues that continued military action is needed to keep service members safe while withdrawing from the war. Trump has said he won’t be rushed into making a bad deal to end the war.

It goes without saying that the longer this drags on, and with an open-ended timeline, the more politically costly it will likely be for Republicans headed into next Fall's midterms.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 07:06
Tyler Durden

The Technate Was Always Coming

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
The Technate Was Always Coming

Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

And what you can do about it (besides complaining).

Palantir dropped a manifesto last weekend. 22 bullet points distilled from Alex Karp’s book The Technological Republic, posted to X with the casual framing of “because we get asked a lot.” I haven’t seen a reaction so widespread, unanimously opposed and viscerally aghast since James Damore’s infamous “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber”.

The usual suspects lost their shit. Engadget called it “the ramblings of a comic book villain.”

TechCrunch clutched its pearls at the bits about “regressive” cultures and “vacant and hollow pluralism.”

Bellingcat’s Eliot Higgins observed, (via Bluesky, of course), that these aren’t philosophical musings floating in the ether: they’re the public ideology of a company whose revenue depends on the politics it’s advocating.

He’s not wrong, Palantir sells to ICE, DoD, NYPD, and the intelligence community. It may be a manifesto, but it’s also product literature.

Even Alexander Dugin, the Russian “Fourth Political Theory” philosopher, not exactly known for having a libertarian bent, seemed triggered by it, calling it “the plan of the Western techno-fascism” on X, “Pure Satanism” on his Substack.

Palantir manifesto is the plan of the Western techno-fascism. The superiority of the white race based on the technology. No antisemitism, no sacredness, no socialism of old historic fascism. This time pure capitalist, Jews friendly, profane, materialist. Anglo. Posthumanist.

— Alexander Dugin (@AGDugin) April 19, 2026

Former Greek FM Yanis Varoufakis called it “evil” and put out his own point-for-point on it – he calls it a refutation, it’s actually more of a rant.

So everybody across the horseshoe is big mad. Fine.

The thing is, none of this should surprise anyone. Let’s now look at why the policy this “manifesto” outlines was always going to arrive, with or without Karp’s prosaic stylings.

Karp Didn’t Invent “The Technate”

The merger of corporate power and state apparatus, the “technate” that people are suddenly discovering with horror on a Sunday afternoon, is not a new idea. It’s not even a recent one.

Back in 2013, Eric Schmidt (then Google’s executive chairman) and Jared Cohen (Google Ideas, ex-State Department advisor to Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton) published The New Digital Age. The book was blurbed by Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, Tony Blair, and General Michael Hayden, the former director of the CIA. That’s an elite-class blurb list for a book that explicitly argued for the intersection of Silicon Valley and state power, the fusion of corporate infrastructure with national security logic, and the reshaping of diplomacy through private platforms.

In 2013 it was called “transformational.” Kissinger gushing that it was, “a searching meditation on technology and world order” (he would go on to co-author The Age of AI with Eric Schmidt that should be every bit as concerning as Karp’s Technological Republic).

Not too long after that, Google’s Sergey Brin and Klaus Schwab held a fireside in Davos where Herr Schwab pontificated that with the advent of AI, since the algos would be able to predict election outcomes with 100% certainty, they may as well pick the winners anyway and we could do away with elections altogether.

Nobody batted an eye. My timeline certainly wasn’t overflowing with rage over it and the people who were calling attention to it were using facing all kinds of headwinds.

In a conversation with Google founder Sergey Brin, founder of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, delights at the thought of a future without elections:

"Digital technologies mainly have an analytical power. Now [we're going] into a predictive power, and your company is very much involved in… pic.twitter.com/9shJlXw3DG

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) August 13, 2023

My personal favourite goto clip about all-pervasive corporate surveillance that absolutely nobody gave a shit about, was this one, also via the darlings of Davos:

This is important to understand:#CBDCs will not be "money": in the sense we understand it. They will be social credit scores, capped by your personal carbon footprint quota👇 pic.twitter.com/e6ibVwXM65

— Mark E. Jeftovic (@jeftovic) October 4, 2024

Here we have an ex-Goldman Sachs guy running a Chinese multi-national sermonizing about mass surveillance and personal carbon footprint quotas and my timeline was not filled with angry tweets from elite A-listers calling for the dismantling of Ali Baba.

Here in 2026 it’s the exact same structural narrative, now with Karp’s sharper edges and fewer Davos euphemisms, only this one is being called a fascist manifesto instead of drooled over by media elites.

The only major difference I can see is where Davos/WEF inspired technocracy was globalist, Palantir, Karp, Thiel et al are nationalist. Perhaps, a North American nationalist.

This map is from 1940

(This fits with what I wrote in my last edition of The Bitcoin Capitalist, about the factional rivalry between the intellectual descendants of Samuel Huntington (“The Clash of Civilizations”) vs his former pupil, Francis Fukuyama (“The End of History”) I posted an excerpt here.

Fukuyama thought the entire world would become one big Neo-Liberal circle-jerk.

Huntington said future conflict wouldn’t be between countries, but between cultures. And some cultures were less compatible with how we live here in the West, than others (Palantir’s point #21).

Overall, the project didn’t change. The faction driving it did.

Driving what? The inexorable drive toward post-Democratic technocracy.

Here’s what nobody wants to hear.

If you’re reading Karp’s 22 points and feeling a cold prickle of recognition, if you’re realizing that what Palantir is describing is the operational blueprint for the next 40 years, there’s something you have to sit with first:

You put your hand up for this.

In case you wondering what makes a company like Palantir even possible.... (find out why, here 👇) https://t.co/1mOEQ9JkLR pic.twitter.com/aLIjg1Sqw5

— Mark E. Jeftovic (@jeftovic) April 20, 2026

Perhaps not you personally. But collectively, “we”, the Western mass public already ran a dress rehearsal. And we all passed (or flunked) with flying colours.

During the pandemic and in the years immediately after, the political and managerial class was wrong about effectively everything.

The origin of the virus. The (non)-efficacy of lockdowns. The vaccines didn’t work and were in fact, kill-shots for many. The money printing.

The correct response to being that wrong, that publicly, and that unwaveringly, about that much, should have been pitchforks and torches in the streets, if not guillotines.

At the very least, in our enlightened civilization: recall elections, mass firings, inquests and class actions. There should have been a generational reckoning with expertise that got captured by politics, a media cartel that went full agitprop and Chapter-7 bankruptcy for institutional credibility.

That is not what happened.

What happened instead was that people stood on the dots. We wore the masks on the walk from the restaurant door to the table, then took them off to eat, sitting in saran wrap bubbles on the street in the middle of winter.

People snitched on their neighbours. They watched elites throw lavish maskless parties while they got tased by cops at their kids’ soccer games.

In other words: we “followed the science”, even as the science was revised quarterly to match policy because the facts on the ground refused to conform to the narrative.

And now, most people will fight tooth and nail to defend the very system that did this to them.

The pandemic was the trial balloon. The political class, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley watched carefully.

What they learned was this: the population will comply. The population will inform on itself. The population will absorb humiliating, contradictory, demonstrably false directives from authorities, and the dominant social behaviour will be enforcement of those directives on anyone who objects.

The Technate has been an ideation of post-Democratic elites since at least the 1930’s.

It has been moving forward inexorably ever since, but it was probably that event, the pandemic and the populace cucking out at a mass level when the technate became inevitable.

Not because of any single manifesto, book, or CEO. Because a civilization that behaves that way under stress has already told its elites what it will accept.

The Technocracy Is Already Here

The manifesto isn’t about Palantir specifically. It’s the blueprint for what I’ve already been noticing, not just in the US but everywhere, that I’ve been calling State Capitalism.

It’s the fused-lattice model of corporate-state power where the company doesn’t lobby the government, it is part of the governing apparatus, and the government in turn provides the regulatory moat that keeps the company’s competitors out, and to whom they can outsource things that national governments aren’t supposed to be doing.

This is where we’re headed for the next few decades. And it’s where we’re headed precisely because the population demonstrated that it would tolerate it, even while they decried “fascism”.

Ever notice how some people who want to lock you down, censor your speech, cancel you for wrongthink, force an experimental vaccine on you and take away your gas stove think of themselves as “anti-fascists” ?🤔🤡

— Mark E. Jeftovic (@jeftovic) January 15, 2023 Welcome to the Era of Mass Compliance.

Karp’s 22 points are the tidy, sanitized version of what we’ve already said in our “Repricing Sovereignty” piece. The early iterations are already in production. Every ICE deployment, every DoD contract, every integration between federal databases and private analytics, every AI-for-defense procurement cycle, every surveillance-as-a-service rollout is a beam in the Cathedral.

And here’s the part that separates the individuals from the crowd:

If you can’t beat ’em. Own ’em.

Long PLTR. This is straight out of the playbook my premium readers will recognize as “The Post Singularity Stack.” It’s a barbell trade that allocates to State Capitalism on one side, while personally building out sovereign technology on the other.

This isn’t an endorsement of the politics, because frankly, I’m done with politics (“vote harder, mofos”). Politics is a racket to keep the rabble in line.

Stand on the dots. Flap your arms. Good boy.

This will go down in history as the most assinine, ill-conceived campaigns ever produced
Most of these people don't even know what Elbows Up means 🙄
Honestly, it's like a Monty Python skit 😳pic.twitter.com/9MKFCGOHA8

— Canada has gone mad 🍎 (@HaveWeAllGoneM1) August 25, 2025

True self-sovereignty can only be acquired individually.

It’s an acknowledgement of the structural reality. We’ve been talking about this for a long time (we call it The Great Bifurcation, and as we always suspected, the branch you wind up in is largely an exercise in self-selection). For the next few decades, The Technate will be the vehicle through which capital will compound, and the only rational response is to own a piece of it. Capital is optionality. Wealth is exit velocity. And by wealth I mean not being economically dependent on The State, not living paycheque to paycheque, and not being one frozen bank account away from being forced into compliance.

There is an ancient Chinese aphorism,

“It is unlucky to remain obstinate in the face of overwhelming odds”.

Being morally aghast while your purchasing power erodes in losing sectors leaves you with neither the moral high ground nor the means to act on it.

The most important points of the manifesto are #5…

And #12:

The people who are panicking at the manifesto are the same people who voted, complied, and shamed their neighbours into the conditions that made it possible. They don’t get to be outraged now.

Some people saw this coming years ago. Some of us even wrote it down.

What happened to many of those people was they got deplatformed, canceled, debanked and generally villainized by the same people who are now screaming about Palantir.

I’m mostly done trying to warn the wider public on where things are going.

Now we’re just buying the ticker.

Get on the mailing list for the follow-up to this (The Pareto Paradox In The Age of Mass Compliance), follow me on X here, or if you want to get a look at The Post Singularity Stack, take the premium trial here ».

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/26/2026 - 07:00
Tyler Durden

The Petroyuan Myth: War Failed To Shake The Dollar

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
The Petroyuan Myth: War Failed To Shake The Dollar

Authored by Antonio Graceffo via The Epoch Times,

Despite sanctions and two wars, the yuan is losing ground, with much of its earlier rise tied to Russia and now reversing.

The Kremlin drafted a memo this year outlining seven areas of potential economic convergence with Washington, including a proposed return to dollar settlement for Russian energy transactions. The stated rationale in the memo is that dollar integration would stabilize Russia’s balance of payments and foreign exchange markets. Russia never actually wanted to transact business in yuan. Moscow only did so because it was cut off from the dollar system by sanctions and had no choice.

The yuan was a fallback, not a preference. Russia’s desire to return to a dollar-denominated trade regimen is an implicit admission that the yuan-based arrangement failed to deliver monetary stability. It also demonstrates Russian President Vladimir Putin’s desire to decrease Russia’s dependence on China. Putin has many ambitions for Russia’s future, but among them is not for Russia to be the No. 2 power in a Beijing-centered world order.

Heading into the U.S.–Iran conflict, many pundits believed it would bring about the demise of the dollar while accelerating the internationalization of the yuan.

Bloomberg ran a piece titled “The Iran War Is China’s Global Payments Debut,” arguing it took four years of preparation after Ukraine, and this war, to make the yuan a serious contender.

The South China Morning Post cited analysts saying disruptions from the war could accelerate a shift in oil trade and threaten the dollar’s long-held dominance.

Deutsche Bank’s FX Managing Director Mallika Sachdeva wrote in March that the Iran war could be remembered as a catalyst for “erosion in petrodollar dominance, and the beginnings of the petroyuan.”

However, none of these predictions came true.

In fact, the Iranian Embassy in Zimbabwe posted that it was time to add the “petroyuan” to the global oil market, and Iran demanded that tankers be allowed passage only if trade was denominated in yuan.

But to date, the only confirmation is from Lloyd’s List that two ships paid a toll, and there is no clear evidence that the toll was paid in yuan. Lloyd’s List has also not released the names of the ships; therefore, they may very well have been Chinese-flagged vessels that paid a toll, allowing China to claim that de-dollarization was underway.

The logic behind their belief that dollar dominance would be damaged by this conflict was that the United States used sanctions and dollar-system exclusion as a primary weapon against Iran, just as it did against Russia. Every time Washington weaponizes the dollar, it gives non-Western countries an incentive to build off-ramps. Iran, China, and Russia all have a motive to route energy trade outside SWIFT and dollar settlement.

A major U.S. military and financial confrontation with Iran could have been expected to accelerate that, pushing Iranian oil sales into yuan, deepening CIPS usage, and giving China a showcase for an alternative system. However, the data shows the opposite. The dollar has lost no ground, and the yuan has made no gains. If Russia re-dollarizes, the yuan will lose much of its already small share of global trade.

The yuan’s global footprint does not support the internationalization narrative that Russia’s sanctions-driven shift was used to bolster. IMF COFER data for Q3 2025 put the yuan’s share of global foreign exchange reserves at 1.93 percent, down from 1.99 percent in the prior quarter, compared to the dollar’s 56.92 percent. The SWIFT November 2025 RMB Tracker recorded the yuan’s share of global payments at 2.94 percent, falling to 2.71 percent in February 2026.

Between 2020 and 2024, the yuan’s share of global trade settlement roughly doubled, rising from around 2 percent to a peak of 4.7 percent, according to SWIFT RMB Tracker data. That headline gain drove widespread claims that the yuan was displacing the dollar as the world’s trading currency. The reality is more complicated.

To understand how much of that gain was genuine organic growth versus a single sanctions-driven relationship, it is possible to estimate the dollar amounts involved. Global merchandise trade ran from approximately $17.6 trillion in 2020 to $24.4 trillion in 2024, meaning total yuan-settled trade grew from roughly $350 billion to $1.15 trillion, an increase of approximately $800 billion.

Over the same period, Russia–China bilateral trade grew from around $117 billion to $245 billion, with yuan settlement going from near zero before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine to roughly 60 percent of bilateral trade by 2024, a gain of approximately $145 billion in yuan-settled flows. That one corridor, therefore, accounts for an estimated 15 to 20 percent of the entire global increase in yuan trade settlement.

If Russia shifts back to the dollar, the yuan will lose part of its current 2.71 percent share of global trade settlement. In short, the yuan is not gaining internationalization, the dollar is not losing ground, and even two parallel wars, one in Ukraine and one in Iran, have not been sufficient to accelerate the yuan’s adoption as an international trade currency.

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

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 23:20
Tyler Durden

FBI Spooked By 15 Stolen Crop-Spraying Drones In New Jersey

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
FBI Spooked By 15 Stolen Crop-Spraying Drones In New Jersey

What has become extraordinarily clear is that nearly every data center, stadium, government building, power plant, substation, and other critical infrastructure site shares one major vulnerability: the lack of a low-cost, early-warning detection layer against one-way attack drones.

Additionally, Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) architecture should include a kinetic countermeasure layer designed to defeat threats before impact. Without this layered approach, most critical infrastructure remains highly vulnerable to cheap kamikaze drones.

When reports emerge, such as the recent case in New Jersey where 15 crop-spraying drones were reportedly stolen in what investigators described as a sophisticated, coordinated theft, it only reinforces the alarming security concern: these drones, with meaningful payload capacity, can be easily repurposed into weaponized platforms.

The national security news outlet The High Side reports that the FBI is worried about the theft of these drones, as experts warn of "ridiculously bad" consequences and "a potential nightmare scenario" if bad actors weaponize these low-cost flying machines.

"The bureau is freaked out for a good reason," Steve Lazarus, a retired FBI agent, told the local outlet.

Lazarus continued, "These aren't hobby drones with cameras. They're industrial sprayers designed to carry and disperse significant amounts of liquid quickly and with precision. A typical agricultural drone can cover a large area in minutes, following GPS-guided paths — that's exactly what they're built for in farming, but it also means that, in the wrong hands, they're a ready-made delivery system."

While The High Side and investigators are "spooked" by the theft and the mounting risk that these drones could be used to "disperse biological agents," the greater threat is actually their payload capacity and the potential for these drones to be weaponized into low-cost, one-way attack drones.

The assessment we provided at the beginning of the note is that the glaring gap in layered air defenses against small drones in high-value areas will only open the door to advanced, low-cost solutions, such as passive acoustic counter-drone detection, outlined here. Some of these C-UAS systems may soon be imported from companies that currently have deployments in Ukraine.

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 22:45
Tyler Durden

Launching AI Into Orbit

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Launching AI Into Orbit

Authored by Timothy Murphy via RealClearDefense,

The Strait of Hormuz reminds us that a single chokepoint can shape the global economy overnight. What most policymakers miss is that space has its own version of Hormuz—and we are rapidly losing control of it. Multiple sectors of the global economy are dependent on access to the Strait of Hormuz, but nations are becoming ever more reliant upon access to space to drive their economies. Similar to the Strait, the key corridor in space is Low Earth Orbit (LEO). All space systems are dependent upon access to it (either directly or indirectly), and the security of LEO and freedom of maneuver in space will increasingly rely upon Artificial Intelligence (AI). Success will come from AI’s capabilities in advancing commercial space activity, responding to current and future threats in space, and ensuring AI dominance through American control of the AI supply chain.

AI is fundamental to maintaining U.S. advantages in commercial space activity. Many people still do not realize the extent of U.S. military involvement in all international space activity - both military and commercial. During my time standing up current operations at U.S. Space Command, we saw the volume and speed of activity in space explode beyond what human operators could effectively track in real time. That gap is only widening. The Space Force operates a Space Surveillance Network that monitors the space environment and tracks all artificial objects in Earth’s orbit. U.S. and foreign companies use this data to launch satellites, avoid debris, and ensure their systems do not conflict with other objects in space. The surveillance network has always relied upon complex algorithms, and as the volume and complexity of space-based activity increases, AI compute will be increasingly necessary.

Providing this surveillance and tracking service will also advance U.S. advantages in the development of the commercial space industry. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and its preceding organizations played a critical role in solidifying air commerce as an economic force in the 20th century. U.S. development of the FAA ensured control over the global air industry which has generated wealth, economic benefits, and advanced logistics for over 100 years. America is on track to have similar influence over the development of space commerce, but AI will be critical to ensuring the expansion of surveillance, tracking, and deconfliction of space assets. The country that successfully employs AI capabilities to accomplish these functions will have the most influence on the future of the space industry.

While AI will be critical to commercial space development, it is absolutely necessary to counter the quantity and capabilities of current threats, much less future ones. Existing threats to the space domain are significant and not well understood. The dominant adversary is China, which has over 1,300 satellites in orbit and maintains multiple systems (in space and on earth) that can target U.S. and allied space systems. China’s threats to space represent a range from destructive weapons to high-power laser weapons and powerful jammers. A coordinated Chinese effort to jam or blind satellites in LEO wouldn’t just affect military systems. It would disrupt GPS, financial transactions, logistics, and communications simultaneously. Much of China’s efforts to deter and defeat the U.S. rely heavily on their counter-space plans and capabilities. China could attempt to deploy those capabilities to hamper U.S. operations in LEO and thus disrupt the key “choke point” for space access.

Much of China’s efforts to deter and defeat the U.S. rely heavily on their counter-space plans and capabilities. If deployed, they could directly disrupt U.S. operations in LEO and threaten access to this critical choke point. The U.S. cannot rely on human operators alone to respond. AI will be essential for detection, tracking, threat analysis, and real-time response to adversary actions. It can also provide decision-makers with options at tactical, operational, and strategic levels. These are capabilities the U.S. must accelerate in the years ahead.

In space, AI is not an efficiency tool. It is the only way to maintain control. To realize these advantages, the United States must confront a harder truth: AI is only as strong as the supply chain behind it. If the U.S. does not control the AI stack—from chips to training data—it will not control the space domain. And today, that stack is globally fragmented and exposed.

U.S.-based Nvidia’s GPUs power much of the AI ecosystem but systems like the GB200 rely on hundreds of global suppliers. That creates real vulnerability but also reflects reality. The U.S. cannot retreat from global markets without ceding influence. Selling American AI abroad sets standards, builds dependence, and keeps U.S. companies at the center of the ecosystem. The challenge is not whether to engage, but how. The U.S. should protect its most advanced capabilities from adversaries like China while avoiding broad export controls that weaken its own industrial base.

The world has seen how a single chokepoint can shape the global economy. Space has its own chokepoint that it is becoming more critical by the year. AI will determine who can operate in that domain and who cannot. The country that builds and supplies that infrastructure will not just compete in space. It will define it.

Col Timothy Murphy (U.S. Air Force, ret.) is a former national security affairs fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. From 2019 to 2020, he served as the first Chief of Current Operations for U.S. Space Command.

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 22:10
Tyler Durden

Top US Diplomat Takes Post In Caracas As Part Of Post-Maduro Transition Plan

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Top US Diplomat Takes Post In Caracas As Part Of Post-Maduro Transition Plan

For the first time in many years, the United States has a top diplomat officially in residence representing Washington to Venezuela.

Veteran US diplomat John M. Barrett has arrived in Caracas to serve as chargé d’affaires at the US Embassy in Venezuela, the mission announced Thursday, marking a new phase in Washington's diplomatic presence in Venezuela, and after a US military raid on Jan.3 ousted and captured longtime leader Nicolás Maduro.

Image via Prensa Libre

Barrett is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, and he was tapped by the Trump admin for role in April after most recently serving as chargé d’affaires at the US Embassy in Guatemala.

His arrival forms part of President Trump's stated three-phase plan to "restore democracy" in Venezuela, with the chargé d’affaires acting as the top US representative in the absence of a Senate-confirmed ambassador.

It must be recalled that it was actually the Director of the CIA who was the first top Trump admin official to visit post-Maduro Caracas and warmly shake hands with new leader, then-Vice President Delcy Rodríguez.

Ironically she had long been among the most staunchly socialist officials within the Chavista regime of Maduro, and her being accepted by Washington shows there was not actual regime change on any institutional level, just the tapping of a more pliant US puppet.

Various reports review that before his posting in Guatemala, Barrett served from 2023 to 2025 as deputy chief of mission at the US Embassy in Panama.

"The relationship between the United States and Venezuela will shape the future of our hemisphere. My name is John Barrett, and I have just arrived in Venezuela to serve as charge d'affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Caracas," Barrett said in a newly video published introducing himself and the new role by the embassy on social media.

"President Trump and Secretary Rubio have a clear vision for the prosperity of our region, and I am here to continue implementing their three-phase plan for Venezuela. We remain committed to Venezuela," he added.

His prior diplomatic roles include serving as counselor for economic affairs at the US Embassy in Peru and as consul general in Recife, where he led US diplomatic engagement across eight northeastern states.

CNN: Maduro presented the CIA as a boogeyman attempting to topple the regime, without any evidence.

Also CNN: "the CIA has helped supplant Maduro and is poised to help actively manage the Trump administration's dealings with Venezuela's new leadership" pic.twitter.com/nno8e1bJNu

— Glenn Diesen (@Glenn_Diesen) January 29, 2026

It's expected that with the reopening and normalization of embassy operations, so will the presence of American spies in Caracas grow - as goes the pattern with most any country, but especially in the case of Latin America, and given the presence of the world's largest proven oil reserves under the ground.

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 21:35
Tyler Durden

Trump Admin Pitching US Companies To Rebuild Gulf Infrastructure Hit By Iran, Arab Officials Say 'Tone-Deaf'

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Trump Admin Pitching US Companies To Rebuild Gulf Infrastructure Hit By Iran, Arab Officials Say 'Tone-Deaf'

Via Middle East Eye

The Trump administration has told several Gulf states that they should use American companies to rebuild their infrastructure damaged by Iran's retaliatory strikes amid the US-Israeli war on the Islamic Republic, US and Arab officials familiar with the discussions told Middle East Eye.

Kuwait, Bahrain and the UAE are among the countries the US has tapped as potential customers for US engineering, manufacturing and construction firms, given the extent of damage in their countries, the officials told MEE.

Smoke rises following a strike on the Bapco oil refinery, amid the US-Israeli war on Iran, on Sitra Island, Bahrain, on March 9, 2026. via Reuters

Saudi Arabia and Oman have been less impacted by Iranian air strikes. In their talking points, US officials have been emphasizing the economic partnership the Gulf countries share with the US and its importance to reconstruction. 

A US official told MEE that promoting US companies for Gulf reconstruction was part of the Trump administration’s "America First" foreign policy, which prioritizes economic statecraft. 

But an Arab official told MEE that the push appeared "a little tone-deaf", as the Gulf is still wary of a return to fighting and on edge over the US’s commitments to regional security.

The Trump administration’s push is not merely symbolic. Rystad Energy estimates the repair costs for energy-linked infrastructure in the Gulf alone could reach as high as $39bn, excluding the damage in Iran.

A fragile ceasefire between the US and Iran is holding, even as the two are locked in a stalemate over the Strait of Hormuz with rival blockades. Iran's government has estimated that its economy overall suffered $270bn in direct and indirect war damages.

The Gulf monarchies generally opposed the US-Israeli war on Iran, but they faced the brunt of the Islamic Republic’s reprisals. The UAE was targeted with at least 2,000 ballistic missiles and drones.

The countries which suffered the most damage are also the most exposed to Iran's newfound control over the Strait of Hormuz, as opposed to Saudi Arabia, which has a pipeline bypassing the chokepoint via the Red Sea. 

Gulf states have deep pockets to rebuild infrastructure, but there are signs they are wary of a longer-term downturn.

Kuwait has one of the world's largest sovereign wealth funds. Valued at $1 trillion, the fund rivals those of the UAE and Saudi Arabia, although it flies below the radar. 

US Secretary of State Scott Bessent said this week, however, that the UAE and other Gulf states were seeking currency swap lines from the US, which would allow them to tap into US dollars while their energy exports are stalled. 

"I could see the US looking for a trade-off where Gulf states using a swap line commit to US firms for rebuilding," a former US official told MEE. 

Kuwait, which sits at the northeastern corner of the Gulf, was also hammered by Iranian air strikes. While Kuwait keeps a lower profile than Qatar, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, it has the fourth-largest US troop presence in the world. Iranian strikes hit the US’s Camp Arifjan as well as Ali al-Salem Air Base.

But Reuters reported that Kuwait International Airport also suffered significant damage. At least two major Kuwaiti power and water desalination plants were damaged as well.

Likewise, Bahrain, a tiny Gulf island kingdom whose only land connection to the outside world is the King Fahd Causeway to Saudi Arabia, suffered significant damage from Iranian strikes.

🇸🇦🇶🇦🇦🇪🇧🇭🇰🇼GULF WAR DRIVES $58B REBUILD BILL - STRAINS GLOBAL EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLY CHAINS

The recent conflict across the Gulf is expected to generate a reconstruction burden of roughly $55–60 billion, with damage concentrated in energy infrastructure, logistics corridors, and… pic.twitter.com/wyBiGBuSVN

— THE GLOBAL WATCHDOG (@glwatchdog) April 18, 2026

Bahrain’s port, which hosts the US’s Fifth Fleet, was pummelled by Iran, but key industrial sites also suffered damage.

The Financial Times reported that Amazon's cloud computing operation in Bahrain was hit by Iranian strikes. Aluminium Bahrain, one of the world's largest single-site smelters, was attacked and had to declare a force majeure as a result of the damage. Bahrain’s Bapco refinery also declared a force majeure after the strikes.

US and Arab officials said the US has not yet lobbied on behalf of specific companies, but wants to put American firms at the front lines of reconstruction.

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 21:00
Tyler Durden

Malaria Is Still Endemic In 80 Countries

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
Malaria Is Still Endemic In 80 Countries

Significant progress has been made in the fight against malaria over the last two decades, according to a new report by the World Health Organization (WHO). In 2024, 80 countries (including the territory of French Guiana) remained endemic for the disease, down from 108 in 2000. The number of deaths have also declined since the turn of the century, with the WHO estimating that 610,000 people died from the disease in 2024, compared with 864,000 in 2000. 

Recent years have brought further milestones.

Cabo Verde and Egypt were certified as malaria-free in 2024, followed by Timor-Leste, Suriname and Georgia in 2025. To receive certification, countries must report zero indigenous cases for three consecutive years and formally apply to the WHO. Several other countries are in a similar position, with Saudi Arabia having recorded four consecutive years without indigenous cases, while Bhutan has reached three and Malaysia seven. However, none of these have yet submitted a certification application.

While Malaysia does not have malaria cases of the human Plasmodium species, it does report having P. knowlesi, a type of zoonotic parasite that circulates between monkeys and is transmitted to humans via mosquitoes. Turkey has submitted its application and is awaiting approval. 

But, as Statista's Anna Fleck reports, despite long-term gains, there is still a significant amount of work to be done.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Malaria deaths rose by around 12,000 between 2023 and 2024, while estimated cases increased from 273 million to 282 million.

Ethiopia (+2.9 million cases), Madagascar (+1.9 million) and Yemen (+378,000) together accounted for 58 percent of the global increase. 

The WHO African Region continues to bear the heaviest burden, accounting for 95 percent of malaria deaths worldwide. Funding gaps and the growing threat of drug resistance remain key obstacles to further progress.

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 20:25
Tyler Durden

The Final Battle For Your Mind

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
The Final Battle For Your Mind

Authored by Casey Fleming via The Epoch Times,

Your phone buzzes. A notification lights up your screen—an article, a meme, a fun video, a flash sale, or the latest trend. It feels harmless, even entertaining. Just another moment in the endless rhythm of digital life. But beneath the surface lies something far more sinister. The seemingly trivial event is part of a quiet, persistent system designed to influence something deeply personal: your mind.

U.S. intelligence agencies have made the scope of this issue increasingly clear. Certain foreign-developed applications, particularly those linked to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), don’t simply collect user data in the limited way most people imagine. They gather extensive streams of information continuously—pulling from users, their contacts, and broader networks, sometimes extending to people who never installed the app. That data may be stored or accessed under legal frameworks that grant government authorities broad reach. What looks like ordinary app functionality can function as a large-scale intelligence collection system with strategic value.

This is no longer just about privacy. It intersects directly with national security.

The nature of conflict is evolving. Where adversaries once focused on stealing classified files or disrupting infrastructure, the modern battlefield includes the shaping of perception. Data is now a weapon of war—it is insight. It reveals behaviors, preferences, emotional triggers, and decision-making patterns. Aggregated at scale, it enables detailed behavioral models and psychological profiles that predict how individuals and groups will respond to specific messages or events.

When paired with artificial intelligence, this data becomes a precision weapon. Patterns are analyzed rapidly. Content is tailored, timed, framed, and repeated to maximize impact. Casual scrolling gradually shifts into structured influence, guiding users subtly rather than through overt coercion.

This dynamic is known as cognitive warfare. Unlike traditional conflict, it does not rely on physical force. It operates through control of information flows, attention, and repetition. The goal is not destruction but influence over how people interpret events, form beliefs, and make decisions.

Algorithms often prioritize emotionally charged or polarizing material to boost engagement. Over time, repeated exposure normalizes certain narratives while marginalizing others. Users believe they are thinking independently, yet their information environment has been carefully filtered, optimized, and weaponized.

A nation’s strength depends not only on its economy or military but on the clarity of thought, judgment, and cohesion of its people. When these qualities are undermined—through confusion, division, or eroded trust—the consequences extend far beyond the individual. Traditional cyberthreats target systems. Cognitive threats target minds. They aim to create doubt, amplify disagreements, and weaken institutional confidence, making unified action during crises far more difficult.

The implications are profound. A population conditioned toward rapid emotional reaction rather than critical reflection becomes more susceptible to manipulation. Trust in government, media, and fellow citizens erodes. Consensus fractures, decision-making slows, and internal divisions deepen. These conditions create exploitable vulnerabilities without the need for direct confrontation.

This approach delivers strategic advantage by avoiding the costs of open conflict while still shaping outcomes. By influencing the information environment, adversaries can steer public opinion, policy directions, and societal trends. Perception itself becomes a domain of competition (war).

At the core are three interconnected elements: large-scale data collection as a continuous intelligence resource, advanced algorithms as the delivery mechanism, and human cognition as the ultimate target.

In this context, protecting personal data is no longer merely a privacy matter—it is essential to preserving autonomy of thought. Cognitive security, the safeguarding of independent judgment, has become a national security imperative alongside traditional cybersecurity.

The situation is not hopeless. The effectiveness of these systems depends on access, scale, and awareness—factors that can still be contested.

Individuals can reduce exposure by reviewing app permissions, limiting unnecessary data sharing, and practicing digital hygiene. Awareness is equally vital: recognizing that much of what appears on screens is curated, not neutral. Critical thinking remains the strongest defense—evaluating sources, noticing patterns of repetition, and questioning emotionally manipulative content. In an environment engineered to capture attention, deliberate reflection becomes an act of resilience.

Policymakers must also act. Clear rules on data storage, jurisdictional control, and accountability for foreign-linked applications are necessary. Scrutiny of large-scale data flows tied to adversarial governments helps establish necessary boundaries.

The battlefield has shifted. Competition now unfolds in everyday digital experiences—what we read, watch, and share. The influence is often subtle, but its cumulative effect reshapes societies.

The central question remains: Can individuals maintain independent judgment when information is continuously filtered and optimized and weaponized for engagement?

Your phone buzzes again. Another notification appears. Recognizing that moment as part of a larger strategic system is the first step toward protecting your freedom.

The defense of independent thought will be one of the defining challenges of our time.

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

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 19:50
Tyler Durden

The WHO Is Building A Supranational Vaccine Authorization Mechanism

Zero Rss
3 months 1 week ago
The WHO Is Building A Supranational Vaccine Authorization Mechanism

Authored by Yaffa Shir-Raz via Brownstone Institute, 

“I need to ask someone else to take responsibility for the second part of the approvals process, so that I won’t have a conflict of interest. I’m also working with Bill Gates and the World Health Organization on the vaccine itself.”

This admission of a conflict of interest was made by Prof. Lester Schulman, secretary of the Ministry of Health’s polio committee, in March 2023, during an internal discussion about approving the importation into Israel of a new polio vaccine. The vaccine was developed and promoted by the World Health Organization in collaboration with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and its approval pathway relied on a new emergency authorization mechanism the WHO has developed in recent years: the EUL (Emergency Use Listing).

Although the remark was framed as a technical aside, it was an unusual confession of a conflict of interest by the committee’s secretary. Its seriousness is compounded by the fact that it was made only after the committee had already voted by an overwhelming majority to initiate the process of bringing the vaccine to Israel, and after it had already worked vigorously to persuade the Pharmaceutical Division to cooperate.

The quotation does not appear in the official minutes of the meeting that were provided to us. It is heard on an audio recording of the session, one of several recordings passed on to us by a whistleblower. The minutes were provided only following a Freedom of Information request and subsequent litigation.

The episode is serious in its own right. But it goes far beyond a local episode of personal conflict of interest or an administrative failure within Israel’s health system. The materials point to something more consequential: the use of an international emergency authorization pathway to shape regulatory decisions inside a sovereign state, advanced through overlapping professional networks, without the organization assuming the legal responsibilities borne by national regulators. 

In the United States, recent political debates over withdrawal from the World Health Organization were widely framed as a clash between scientific consensus and institutional criticism. Yet the Israeli case, and the materials in our possession, point to a much larger picture. 

This was the first implementation of the EUL mechanism within a country with a functioning Western regulatory system. Israel served here as a regulatory test case: an attempt to determine whether it is possible, in practice, to shape an approval pathway inside a sovereign state without holding formal regulatory authority and without being subject to the judicial and parliamentary oversight that applies to a national regulator. In doing so, it exposes how the organization has been operating in recent years: no longer merely an advisory and coordinating body, but an institution that creates operating frameworks that, in practice, shape approval processes inside sovereign states.

The EUL: An Emergency Mechanism or a De Facto Regulatory Infrastructure?

The World Health Organization was established in 1948 as an intergovernmental body tasked with providing professional assistance and technical guidance, promoting research, collecting knowledge, and developing recommendations for its member states. Article 22 of the WHO Constitution leaves states the right to opt out of its regulations, a clear indication that the organization was not granted regulatory powers such as authorizing drugs and vaccines or supervising their manufacture. These areas remained the exclusive responsibility of states themselves, which also bear legal and public responsibility for the decisions of their national health authorities.

In recent years, the WHO has developed mechanisms that expand its influence beyond recommendations and, in effect, enable it to directly influence regulatory authorization processes within states. The central mechanism is the EUL, an independent WHO emergency procedure that is not part of national authorization systems.

According to the organization’s documents, the EUL is defined as a temporary, risk-based authorization for the use of unapproved medical products in emergency situations where no approved product is available, and on the basis of partial data on quality, safety, and efficacy. These documents emphasize that the EUL is not licensure, and that it does not replace national regulatory authorization.

But what is defined as a temporary bridge measure that does not replace national regulation becomes, in practice, an operating framework. Once EUL is activated, it maps out the timetable, the milestones, and the starting point of the discussion. This restructuring of the decision-making process also generates pressures that extend beyond the initial authorization stage. As Dr. David Bell, a former WHO medical officer, notes: “Once a product has been granted emergency authorization and widely deployed, there is strong institutional pressure to overlook its limitations and proceed toward full approval, as reversing course may carry significant professional and reputational risks.”

Instead of a regulator initiating an independent process based on its own data and judgment, it operates within a workflow whose structure has already been defined in the international arena.

The institutionalization of the EUL reflects a broader shift in regulatory practice. During Covid-19, emergency authorization became the operative pathway for deploying novel vaccines at population scale within Western regulatory systems. That experience established the practical legitimacy of approving and distributing vaccines on the basis of interim data under declared emergency conditions. A regulatory model tested within sovereign systems had become normalized.

The EUL translates this logic to the international level. It creates a structured emergency pathway through which products can advance prior to conventional Western licensure. Once activated, the pathway structures expectations, timelines, and decision points for states considering adoption.

Under the International Health Regulations (2005), a Public Health Emergency of International Concern is defined primarily in relation to international spread and coordinated response, without a quantified severity threshold. During the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, controversy arose over the WHO’s pandemic phase definitions, which emphasized geographic spread rather than clinical severity. Where emergency criteria are flexible, the declaration carries procedural consequences: it opens access to accelerated authorization mechanisms. Over time, this flexibility has lowered the practical threshold for invoking emergency-based authorization mechanisms. 

Rather than independently constructing a full evidentiary assessment from first principles, states deliberate within a predefined emergency framework. The activation of the pathway reorders the sequence of decision-making. Questions of timing, alignment, and external validation take precedence over the threshold question of whether the evidentiary basis would independently justify authorization under ordinary regulatory standards.

nOPV2: The First Implementation of the Mechanism

The nOPV2 polio vaccine discussed in Israel was the first product to receive EUL status from the WHO. The listing was granted on November 13, 2020, making the vaccine the first implementation of the new procedure. Beginning in March 2021, it was deployed in Nigeria and later in additional countries in Africa and Asia.

The vaccine is manufactured in Indonesia by a company called Bio Farma. Its development and clinical studies were funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which also committed $1.2 billion to “support efforts” to advance it, as part of the Polio Eradication Strategy 2022–2026.

On December 21, 2023, the vaccine also received WHO Prequalification (PQ) status. This procedure is not national licensure and is not equivalent to approval by a stringent Western regulator. It is a WHO assessment mechanism that enables UN agencies and countries to rely on it for procurement and use through international health mechanisms. Although PQ is not part of EUL, in practice it signals a shift from a temporary emergency framework to a broader and continuing distribution pathway that no longer depends on the declaration of a specific emergency.

The trajectory of nOPV2 illustrates more than the introduction of a new vaccine. It demonstrates the operationalization of an emergency-based authorization model beyond a single national regulator. A product listed under an international emergency mechanism progressed from provisional deployment to broader institutional endorsement, without passing through the conventional sequence of Western licensure. It is this pathway that was subsequently introduced into Israel’s regulatory deliberations.

How the International Pathway Was Embedded Inside the Ministry of Health

The discussions in the ERT committee make it possible to examine how the EUL pathway was integrated in practice into decision-making inside Israel’s Ministry of Health.

The ERT (Emergency Response Team) committee at Israel’s Ministry of Health was established in March 2022 as an advisory committee to manage the response to a polio outbreak detected in sewage testing in Israel. The committee’s mandate included receiving ongoing updates, formulating operational recommendations, adapting vaccination policy, and managing public information efforts. The committee is chaired by Prof. Manfred Green, head of the International Public Health Leadership Program at the University of Haifa’s School of Public Health, and its secretary is Prof. Lester Schulman, an epidemiologist who headed the Central Environmental Virology Laboratory at Sheba Medical Center (Tel Hashomer).

In its early deliberations, the committee dealt with poliovirus type 3, which, according to its documents, originated from the live-attenuated vaccine. Even in these discussions, there is already a clear sensitivity to the WHO’s position. The committee chair explicitly states that if Israel does not launch a vaccination campaign, it may be perceived by the WHO as a “rogue” state. This perception does not need to be imposed externally. It emerges within a shared professional environment in which deviation is experienced not merely as a policy disagreement, but as a departure from the norms of the group. These dynamics are consistent with observations from within international health institutions.

As Dr. David Bell, a former WHO medical officer, notes: “Delegates in international health forums are often not acting primarily as national representatives. They are part of a large professional network, trained in similar institutions, meeting regularly, and sharing a common worldview. These networks are supported by major private funders and institutional partners, which further reinforces alignment across countries. 

Within these networks, dissenting positions are often perceived as unscientific or backward, creating strong pressure to align. Countries may be reluctant to deviate for fear of appearing outside the accepted consensus.”

Bell further characterizes this process as a form of soft power operating through institutional culture rather than formal authority: “This is how soft power operates: shared incentives, professional culture, and support from major funding bodies allow preferred approaches to spread across systems, often without the need for formal coercion.”

Accordingly, the team recommended a “Two Drops” campaign using the existing live-attenuated vaccine (OPV3). The campaign began in April 2022 and was halted two months later. Although uptake among the primary target population was minimal, the Ministry presented the campaign as a success and announced the elimination of the strain from sewage surveillance. 

Shortly thereafter, the Ministry of Health announced that immediately upon eliminating type 3, type 2 was detected in sewage, which also derives from a live-attenuated vaccine. Although to date no paralysis cases from this strain have been found in Israel, the ERT committee began, already in mid-2022, to consider the option of using the new nOPV2 vaccine. At first it arose as a general reference, but it soon became the central axis of the discussion.

At this stage, the discussion already linked epidemiological assessment to procedural consequences. Even in the absence of clinical cases, escalation was considered in relation to the regulatory options it would make available.

From late summer 2022, the nOPV2 approval pathway was presented to committee members in several meetings, using presentations and background materials provided by the WHO. The minutes we received indicate that the discussion was based on WHO presentations and background materials. The minutes contain no record of a full manufacturer dossier, independent regulatory data, or an opinion from any Western regulatory authority.

On December 1, 2022 (Minutes ERT 21), the ERT committee voted by an overwhelming majority to initiate the process of bringing the new vaccine to Israel. According to the minutes, 14 of 15 committee members voted in favor of the recommendation, as did all six Ministry of Health representatives who participated in the vote. At that point, the principled decision had been made. The discussion shifted from whether to adopt the pathway to how to implement it. 

Immediately following the vote, the regulatory question shifted to implementation and to the procedural steps required to activate the pathway. In a committee discussion held on February 28, 2023, Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis suggested that a formal emergency declaration might be necessary in order to enable the relevant authorization track, remarking that “perhaps if there are two clinical cases we will be able to persuade the minister to declare an emergency.” The exchange indicates that the declaration of emergency was discussed in direct connection with the procedural track it would enable.

Conflicts of Interest on the Committee: Advisers to the WHO Leading the Recommendation to Bring the Vaccine to Israel

During the months in which the committee’s secretary, Prof. Schulman, presented the pathway for bringing nOPV2 to Israel, the committee members were not presented with information about his conflicts of interest with the WHO and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In practice, during that period, Schulman served as a technical consultant on the vaccine through McKing Consulting Corporation, a professional contractor working on projects of the WHO and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), which is centrally supported by the Gates Foundation.

He also received a support grant from the WHO, likewise for consulting related to nOPV2. Moreover, he received travel funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to participate in dedicated nOPV2 working meetings in London in February 2023; that is, precisely during the period relevant to the ERT committee’s deliberations on the vaccine. Added to this is co-authorship on an international scientific publication from June 2023 that was conducted with the support of the WHO, GPEI, and the manufacturer Bio Farma.

In other words, this was not a general affiliation or a distant professional past. It was a direct, built-in conflict of interest related to the specific vaccine under discussion and to its unusual approval pathway under EUL. Schulman declared these ties in official scientific publications, but they were not brought to the committee’s attention in real time, even as he was the one presenting the approval pathway and leading the professional discussion. When the Ministry of Health was asked to address the issue, both in the Freedom of Information process and in a formal request to the spokesperson, it responded categorically that no conflicts of interest existed in the committee. This response contradicts Schulman’s own public declarations.

Only about three months after the vote, during a further discussion held on February 28, 2023, Schulman asked that “someone replace me” in the continuation of the approvals process, so that he “won’t have a conflict of interest,” as though it were a minor technical matter rather than a substantive failure, and without addressing the fact that the principled decision had already been made on the basis of materials and a regulatory framework that he himself had helped advance internationally. Moreover, after this admission, Schulman’s conflicts of interest were not documented in the meeting minutes that were provided to us following the FOI litigation.

Schulman was not the only senior committee member with a conflict of interest involving the WHO. The committee chair, Prof. Manfred Green, recently acknowledged in a Knesset Health Committee discussion that his partner, Prof. Dorit Nitzan-Kluski, also serves on the polio committee. Indeed, Prof. Nitzan-Kaluski is listed as a member already in the original appointment letter, in March 2022. Yet only a month before that appointment, in February 2022, she formally completed her senior role as the WHO Regional Emergencies Director for Europe. Moreover, a few weeks later, with the outbreak of the war between Russia and Ukraine, she returned to intensive professional activity on behalf of the WHO as an Incident Manager in Ukraine, a role she performed in parallel with her membership in the committee.

This becomes all the more problematic when the committee chair presents the WHO’s position to members as an “ultimatum” that must be adopted, without full disclosure that his partner, serving alongside him, is a senior operational figure within that same organization.

This is not merely a matter of personal ethics. The committee secretary, who drafted, promoted, and led the presentation of the vaccine and the EUL pathway to Israel, was simultaneously active internationally in advancing them, while the committee chair adopted the same framework. The result was that Israel’s decision-making unfolded within the same professional network that promoted the vaccine and its approval pathway in the international arena. 

Under such circumstances, it is difficult to speak of independent national regulatory judgment when the same actors are involved in promoting the pathway both globally and within the Israeli deliberations.

“Who Will Blink First”

In stark contrast to the confidence with which the vaccine’s safety and manufacturing integrity were presented in the ERT committee, the minutes show that the Pharmaceutical Division, Israel’s competent regulatory authority for authorizing medicines and vaccines, expressed reservations, and even opposition, at an early stage.

This opposition was mentioned several times during the discussions, including the reasons raised by division staff: the absence of licensure by any Western country, the fact that the vaccine is manufactured in Indonesia, a country to which Israel’s Ministry of Health has no direct regulatory access, meaning it cannot independently examine manufacturing conditions at the plant, and reliance on an emergency mechanism that had not yet been completed.

In one discussion, Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis describes the Pharmaceutical Division’s position unambiguously: “Our pharmacy division refuses at this stage to take a vaccine or to approve a vaccine coming from Indonesia with no Western regulatory process at all. That’s a very, very big obstacle…Right now our pharmacy division is saying: ‘We will not approve such a thing. It doesn’t look to us like it meets any standards that we can approve.’ “

Yet these reservations were not presented as a regulatory red line, but as a problem to be “solved” in order to continue advancing within the EUL pathway. The regulator’s opposition did not stop the process. It was framed as an operational obstacle.

This produced a reversal of roles: an advisory committee effectively shaped the regulatory pathway, while the body legally authorized to approve or reject vaccines was expected to adapt to a framework that had already been set, and at times to justify its own resistance.

Against this backdrop, the discussion focused on finding an external regulator that would provide legitimacy, first and foremost the UK regulator. The minutes repeatedly refer to Britain as the country that might approve the vaccine before Israel. For example, in one discussion (ERT 17), Prof. Ian Miskin, one of the committee members, states explicitly that “we probably shouldn’t be the first in the West to use nOPV2, ” and that while the United States likely would not use the vaccine, “the UK might.” In the February 28, 2023 discussion, Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis framed the situation even more explicitly: “Maybe we’ll challenge them – every country that hears ‘Indonesia’ doesn’t want to be the first…so everyone is waiting to see who will blink first.”

This dynamic captures the position local decision-makers found themselves in within this mechanism. Although they did not have the basic data necessary for a proper regulatory authorization of a vaccine, they did not challenge the pathway itself. Instead, they searched for a Western country to provide the first stamp of approval. The international framework had already been accepted as the starting point. The remaining question was only which country would supply the legitimacy that would allow others to follow. In such a setting, the scope of criticism narrows. The focal point is no longer vaccine safety or manufacturing quality, but joining a pathway already defined, and the fear is not scientific error but deviating from the line.

This dynamic cannot be explained solely by institutional caution. Once the EUL framework was accepted as the operative reference point, deliberation shifted from independent evidentiary assessment to questions of timing and alignment. The regulatory threshold itself was no longer the central issue. What mattered was whether, and by whom, the pathway would first be validated in the West. The architecture of decision-making had already been set.

“We Got Nothing, Nothing, Nothing Except WHO Presentations”

About two months after the ERT committee had already voted and made a principled decision to advance the introduction of nOPV2 to Israel under the EUL mechanism, and after months of discussions in which the gap between the pathway mapped out in the committee and the regulator’s position only widened, Dr. Alroy-Preis asked to invite Dr. Ofra Axelrod, head of the Pharmaceutical Division, to explain her opposition.

In the subsequent discussion, when Dr. Axelrod did come to the committee and systematically presented the data and information available to the Pharmaceutical Division, it became clear that the gap was far larger than could be inferred from earlier discussions. What she laid out showed that this was not merely a discrete regulatory disagreement or a “difficulty” that could be bridged, but an absence of the basic regulatory data required to evaluate vaccine safety, manufacturing integrity, and the regulatory pathway itself.

At the outset, Axelrod clarified what constituted the division’s evidentiary base: “We, of course, got nothing, nothing, nothing except WHO presentations. On the basis of that, to approve something, that won’t pass.” In effect, she revealed that these presentations were the only materials presented to the committee and had served as the basis for the vote to begin the approval process for importing the vaccine into Israel.

Contrary to the impression created earlier, in which the vaccine was presented as being on an advanced pathway, Axelrod described a vaccine that was “still in a clinical trial…a vaccine at a very, very early stage…it doesn’t even have prequalification, which is really the most basic approval there is.” She also addressed the vaccine’s status under EUL and noted: “There was an initial recommendation in 2020, and since then no final decision has been made…”

Even the hope that a Western country would soon authorize the vaccine proved, according to her, unfounded. “Right now, because of the gaps and lack of information, the British do not intend to approve use of this vaccine in the UK. Even if it becomes truly essential, and maybe even a temporary approval, it’s very challenging. After that conversation we asked the British for materials. There was nothing; they did not pass anything on. In early February we approached the British again, and the answer was very evasive. The answer was: ‘We’ll try to create a direct connection for you with the company.’ Since then we haven’t heard anything, not from the British and not from the company. “

As for manufacturing itself, Axelrod described a plant not recognized by Western regulatory authorities, and a picture of inadequate regulatory oversight. “The plant is not recognized, it manufactures vaccines for the developing world, for WHO countries…the manufacturing company avoided direct contact with the MHRA, the UK regulator. They did not give them a dossier or any information they received directly from the company…eventually, the British managed to get the company’s agreement to conduct a GMP inspection. The British visited the company and found gaps. They did not specify what they were. And the company has not undergone any GMP inspection by an authority we recognize…”

Beyond the regulatory gaps, Axelrod’s comments also illuminate the lack of transparency in the committee’s work. She told the committee that a Freedom of Information request had already been filed with the Ministry concerning the vaccine discussions. “I have to share with you that we already received an FOI request about this vaccine. We haven’t approved anything yet, and already people are asking us: why and how and who and what.” The committee’s minutes were not published to the public in real time. They were provided only following an FOI request and prolonged litigation. The fact that the information was exposed only in this way makes clear that the discussion was not accompanied by proactive transparency from the Ministry.

A Test Case for a New Model

As serious as the Israeli case is, both in the conflicts of interest it exposes and in the attempt to promote authorization without basic regulatory data before the national regulator, the larger significance lies elsewhere. Israel was the first Western arena in which the EUL mechanism was put into practice. This is not merely a local event. It serves as a test case for a new model – a practical examination of the WHO’s ability to shape approval processes in a Western country without bearing direct regulatory responsibility.

Beyond the damage to sovereignty, the danger in this model is deeper. The WHO does not bear legal responsibility within states and is not subject to judicial or parliamentary oversight there. In a national regulatory system, a decision to authorize a vaccine is subject to a clear administrative law framework: documents can be demanded under freedom of information statutes, petitions can be filed in court, reasoning can be compelled, and decisions can be reviewed for reasonableness.

States that accept the EUL mechanism retain full legal and political responsibility for the decision, while key elements of its framework are shaped outside their systems. The national regulator will be required to defend in court a decision whose framework it did not set; the government will bear the public cost; and citizens will discover that the body that shaped the pathway is not subject to their courts and owes them no legal accountability.

A further concern is the lack of transparency and the state’s inability to independently assess the data presented to it. In recent years, the research literature has pointed to transparency gaps in the WHO’s decision-making mechanisms, especially in emergencies. Studies published, among others, in BMJ Global Health (2020), the Journal of Epidemiology and Global Health (2025), and Public Health Ethics described partial publication of minutes, difficulty reconstructing decision rationales, and the scope of influence not matched by parallel oversight mechanisms. 

The Israeli case shows how such a gap translates at the national level: discussions not proactively published, near-exclusive reliance on materials originating from the organization itself, and progress along a regulatory pathway before the full data required for independent review had been provided.

In this case, the move was halted in Israel, but only after a principled decision had already been made and the pathway had already been mapped out, and only thanks to regulatory insistence on demanding data and holding to threshold standards, and civic insistence on exposing information that was not published.

Against this background, decisions by countries such as the United States to distance themselves from the World Health Organization can be understood in the context of broader debates over regulatory authority and accountability in global health governance. The Israeli case raises a more general question: to what extent can regulatory independence be maintained when key elements of the decision-making framework are shaped through external processes that precede national review? 

The case exposes a widening gap between formal national authority and the external frameworks that increasingly determine regulatory outcomes in advance.

The Ministry of Health was asked to respond to these findings but chose not to comment.

Tyler Durden Sat, 04/25/2026 - 18:40
Tyler Durden

Pagination

  • First page
  • Previous page
  • …
  • Page 221
  • Page 222
  • Page 223
  • Page 224
  • Page 225
  • Page 226
  • Page 227
  • Page 228
  • Page 229
  • …
  • Next page
  • Last page
Checked
52 minutes 28 seconds ago
URL
https://www.zerohedge.com
Zero Rss feed

zero rss

News feeds

  • Both Iranian & Israeli Officials Call Out 'Paper Tiger' Saudi Arabia
  • The WNBA Is At War With Its Biggest Stars
  • Visualizing 75 Years Of America's Electricity Transition
  • Hawaii's 'Blood Quantum' Rule Deepens The State's Housing Crisis
  • US Official: Hormuz Deal Is Imminent, Upon Which US Will Lift Blockade Of Iranian Ports
  • Bessent's 'Yentervention' Does Not Fix Japan's Underlying Structural Issues
  • Reality Bites: Socialist NYC Mayor Mamdani Turns To Capitalist Bankers For Help
  • Meet The Lab-Leak Proponent Set To Take Fauci's Old Job
  • Cambridge's Black Time-Travelling Professor (And His Many Superhuman Feats)
  • "Fire Is... Beautiful": Suspect In Spokane Wildfire Confesses He Planned Arson For Weeks
More

zero rss

Copyright (c) 2026 FYCKL Project