Aggregator
PBS employee allegedly shot and killed outside home by estranged husband
Best of the Babylon Bee: Trump jails man for failing to give attention to this matter
Why Rams target is one of a few prime candidates to slip in the first round of NFL Draft
How to watch chilling new doc ‘Killing Grounds: The Gilgo Beach Murders’
The Mets aren’t the only team facing a crisis
Minnesota dad who shoved conservative reporter says he’s second-guessing living in US after backlash
China "Aggressively" Selling Oil In Recent Weeks
We knew there was a reason why China had accumulated a cool 1.5 billion barrels in its strategic petroleum reserve: the reason, to become the world's strategist petroleum reserve when the time arises... for a price of course.
According to the chief executive officer of commodity trader Mercuria, Chinese oil companies have been aggressive sellers in recent weeks, selling barrels to several nations in tenders.
“What has been happening in the last two or three weeks is actually they have been aggressively selling crude oil,” Mercuria CEO Marco Dunand said at the FT Commodities Global Summit in Lausanne on Tuesday. “They’ve taken out a lot of demand from various countries and offered aggressively in tenders."
Dunand said there are a variety of possible explanations for the selling. They include the release of oil inventories within China, continued sales of Iranian oil in the weeks after the war started, and possible optimism that the Strait of Hormuz would reopen quicker than it has so far.
He also said that Mercuria sees Chinese gasoline demand falling by 1 million barrels a day this year as a result of electric-vehicle adoption, which also could have played a factor in the sales.
But the most important thing Dunand said, was his response to question how long this last: “How long can they do this for? I think the guess would be probably for about another three weeks and then I think at that point they would have to revise their position."
Well, three weeks is also how long Iran has before its oil sector is permanently shut in. The good news: the end of the Iran war is - one way or another - now in sight.
Tyler Durden Wed, 04/22/2026 - 06:55The Jets’ biggest need in this NFL Draft may test Darren Mougey’s deal-making chops
What Does This Guy Have To Do To Get Deported?
Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,
Britain’s immigration system has hit a new low. A convicted Islamist terrorist who helped plot a bombing at the London Stock Exchange remains free to live in the UK, protected by human rights laws despite his asylum application being thrown out years ago.
The case of Shah Rahman exposes exactly how foreign terror offenders exploit loopholes that put British citizens at risk while officials tie themselves in knots over “rights.” As the migrant crisis spirals and taxpayers foot the bill for endless monitoring, this is not justice – it’s institutional surrender.
Rahman was jailed in 2012 alongside three other extremists inspired by Al-Qaeda over the plot to plant an improvised explosive device. He was released onto Britain’s streets just five years later in 2017, only to be recalled to prison in 2022 for breaches of his licence conditions.
This guy plotted to blow up the London Stock Exchange, went to prison twice and married a woman who was banned from Britain for life for having ISIS material, yet he gets to stay in the country because it would 'violate his rights' to deport him. https://t.co/MlKnUBupjs
— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) April 21, 2026After his initial release he lodged an asylum claim. It was rejected under Article 51 of the Refugee Convention, which bars refugee status for those convicted of “war crimes, crimes against humanity, terrorist acts or other serious criminal offences.”
Yet despite that rejection, an immigration judge ruled he could not be deported to Bangladesh. The judgement stated: “He was granted restricted leave to remain in the United Kingdom on the basis that he could not be removed to Bangladesh without breach of his rights under Article 3 of the Human Rights Convention.”
Article 3 guarantees the absolute right to be free from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment. In practice, it has become a get-out-of-deportation-free card for some of the most dangerous individuals on British soil.
Details of Rahman’s continued presence emerged during a separate legal battle involving his wife, Mauritian national Parveen Purbhoo. The pair married in an Islamic ceremony at East London Mosque in 2019 while he was on licence. Purbhoo was later barred from Britain for life by then-Home Secretary Suella Braverman after officers at Heathrow discovered Isis-related material on her phone.
A recent judgement in her case confirmed Rahman’s situation and delivered a damning assessment of her own conduct: “The applicant was complicit in Mr Rahman’s unlawful breach of notification requirements; and she has not provided either the police or SIAC with an explanation of how Islamist material came to be on her phone. Her willingness to place her own interests over and above legal or administrative processes is troubling and risky.” The court found she had been “reasonably assessed as a national security risk” and upheld the ban.
This is the same pattern of weakness we have highlighted before. In February we reported how the UK released another dangerous bomb-plot terrorist from prison early.
And back in January we covered the case of a convicted terrorist who plotted to bomb the British consulate now standing for election in the UK. Time after time, the system chooses leniency over public safety.
While ordinary Brits face rising costs, crime and the constant threat of terror, the state bends over backwards to accommodate those who plotted mass murder on our streets. Rahman’s case is not an outlier – it is the direct result of open-borders policies, ECHR activism and a political class more worried about international lawyers than British security.
Successive governments have talked tough on migration. Yet here we are in 2026 with an Islamist terrorist who targeted the London Stock Exchange still here, his wife’s Isis links exposed, and human rights lawyers still calling the shots. The Home Office insists it takes national security seriously. The evidence suggests otherwise.
Britain does not owe protected status to those who plotted to kill its citizens. Deportation should not be optional when the threat is this clear.
File this latest farce alongside a growing litany of ridiculous reasons sex criminals and other offenders have dodged deportation under the same broken system.
Albanian migrant Klevis Disha, who entered the UK illegally in 2001 under a false name and was later convicted for possessing £250,000 in dirty money, successfully fought deportation by claiming it would be unduly harsh on his 11-year-old British son – who apparently dislikes “foreign” chicken nuggets because of texture issues.
First-tier Tribunal Judge Linda Veloso accepted the Article 8 family-life argument. Reform UK’s Shadow Home Secretary Zia Yusuf said: “A criminal migrant who entered Britain illegally under a false name and lied in a failed asylum claim has successfully fought his deportation by arguing his son disliked foreign chicken nuggets. This is the country the Tories and Labour have created.”
A Somali criminal, schizophrenic and alcohol-dependent for nearly 20 years, was allowed to stay because deportation would cause him excessive “stress” and breach Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights by worsening his mental health. Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Ian Jarvis ruled: “I conclude that the weight of the evidence before the Tribunal indicates that the [man] will very quickly become noncompliant with his medication… without the 24/7 support and monitoring which he currently receives in the United Kingdom.”
An insane Pakistani paedophile who reoffended by assaulting a teenage girl after release from prison for sex offences escaped deportation because his “uncontrollable” alcoholism would allegedly lead to “inhuman or degrading treatment” in Pakistan without proper treatment. He remains in Britain.
A separate Pakistani migrant arrived on a spousal visa and was convicted of attempting to cause children under 16 to engage in sexual acts after grooming decoy “barely pubescent girls” online while his wife was hospitalised with Covid. He won his appeal because deportation would be “unduly harsh” on his British children and family life.
Migrant shambles as unnamed judge lets paedophile we cannot name (to protect HIS privacy) stay in UK because pervert's Pakistani family might disapprove of him lusting after 'barely pubescent girls' https://t.co/4by6HxEcZ6
— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) February 7, 2025The judge even factored in the wife’s lack of intimate relations during her illness. Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick called the case “disgraceful,” adding: “The public are right to think that our immigration system is rigged in the interests of people who mean us harm, illegal migrants, against the interests of the British public.”
And as the Daily Mail also revealed, another migrant won asylum by claiming he was gay and fleeing persecution – only to be exposed with a secret wife and child back in Cameroon.
Revealed: Migrant granted asylum in Britain after claiming he was gay has a secret wife and child in Cameroon https://t.co/TMiC6wcoUI
— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) March 22, 2026Even being a convicted pedophile as well as an illegal migrant isn’t enough to warrant deportation:
The pattern is undeniable. Activist judges, human rights laws that handcuff the Home Office, and a political class addicted to open borders keep handing victories to those who should never have been here in the first place.
Britain’s children and communities deserve better. The safety of the public must come first – not endless excuses for foreign criminals.
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 Wed, 04/22/2026 - 06:30Ferrari drivers on food stamps — how states help scammers game welfare
6-month-old baby girl found abandoned in Times Square: NYPD
Where the Dexter Lawrence trade leaves the Giants’ effort to rebuild their defense
Anthropic investigating claim of unauthorised access to Mythos AI tool
Dr. Oz touts ‘Fraud War Room,’ ending payments to 400 hospices in California over fears of $100B fraud
How a Supreme Court hit job reinforces a dangerous leftist trend
7 foods cardiologists love that won’t bore you to tears — including some very clever swaps
Texas nurse Sarah Danh airlifted back to US as she battles ‘life threatening’ illness after falling sick on Japan honeymoon
Nearly 1 In 4 Americans Over 65 Are Still Working
For a growing share of Americans, retirement no longer starts at 65.
This map, via Visual Capitalist's Gabriel Cohen, shows where people aged 65 and older are still working across U.S. states, based on 2024 data from the U.S. Census Bureau via FinanceBuzz.
About 22% of Americans 65+ remain in the workforce, but the share climbs to nearly one-third in some states. The gap highlights how cost of living, job availability, and shifting retirement systems are reshaping when—and whether—Americans stop working.
The Workforces With The Most SeniorsThe New England states of Vermont and New Hampshire (both 28.6%) lead the country in the number of seniors still working, followed by South Dakota at 27.6%.
A clear regional pattern emerges: Northeastern states dominate the top ranks, with many posting rates above 26%. Higher living costs and longer life expectancy likely contribute to more Americans 65+ staying in the workforce.
Most people are not working full-time, however. In fact, among its retirement-age workers, Vermont has the highest concentration of part-time employees nationwide, reflecting in part the social role work plays in many older Americans’ lives.
The Two Full-Time StatesOn the flip side, there’s Maryland, which has the highest share of full-time retirement-age workers in the country.
Maryland and Hawaii are actually the only two states in which a majority of working people aged 65 and up are employed full-time. Full-time work is generally essential for seniors who cannot rely on other retirement sources of income, such as Social Security, or who obtain needed benefits through their job.
The decline of traditional pensions is a key driver behind this shift. With retirement savings increasingly tied to 401(k) plans and market performance, many Americans are working longer to maintain financial security.
West Virginia and the Truly RetiredAmong the 50 states in the country, West Virginia (16.7%) has the lowest share of retirement-age workers. It’s followed by Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, and Oregon, all of which sit around 19%.
In lower-ranking states like West Virginia and Arkansas, fewer Americans 65+ remain in the workforce—likely reflecting a mix of fewer job opportunities and lower living costs. In these areas, retirement may still be more attainable than continuing to work.
They may also have differing lifestyle preferences, electing to devote more time to family commitments than to the structure or social component of a job or so-called “side hustle.”
If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Mapping Unemployment Claims per 100,000 Workers on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.
Tyler Durden Wed, 04/22/2026 - 05:45