Aggregator
Prime Day is over, but Audible’s deal is still going strong — Get 3 months and $20 for free
Aaron Boone quite miffed after Willson Contreras’ outburst leads to benches clearing: ‘Ridiculous’
Uruguay manager Marcelo Bielsa screams at reporter after World Cup elimination following goalie drama
Zelensky Telegraphs 40-Day Pressure Offensive On Russia, Fueling Fears Of Slide Toward WW3
The Ukraine war is quite obviously escalating, especially regarding Ukrainian leaders seeking to "bring the war" to Russian soil, amid nightly drone attacks which have come in the hundreds and even thousands of late.
President Volodymyr Zelensky is seeking to seize on the momentum of repeat drone hits on Russian refinery and energy infrastructure - a reality Russia has suffered over many months, leading to a current fuel crisis spanning dozens of cities and regions, and especially Crimea, which has temporarily halted fuel sales to common citizens altogether this week.
Ukrainian media is touting a new Zelensky plan to ramp up the pressure on Russia over the next 40 days, aimed at "pressuring Russia to end its war".
Ukrainian Presidential OfficeHe has ordered Ukraine's State Security Service (SBU) to launch a new 40-day operation, which also includes "plan for long-range sanctions, medium-range sanctions, and the results achieved by the SBU," Zelensky said on X. He's further calling it an "influence operation."
"For several months in a row, the SBU has demonstrated the highest performance in defending Ukraine’s positions on the front lines through the use of various types of drones," Zelensky said on Thursday evening. According to more of the statement:
I approved a 40-day influence operation for the Service against the aggressor state aimed at compelling it to end the war.
Importantly, for several months in a row, the SSU has demonstrated the highest performance in defending Ukraine’s positions on the front lines through the use of various types of drones. The Center of Special Operations “Alpha” leads in terms of the occupier’s personnel and equipment neutralized.
Earlier, in mid-June, Ukrainian Defence Minister Mykhailo Fedorov proclaimed "Hell is beginning," for Russia and its military. "Logistics are being cut off. Crimea is being isolated," he said at the time.
Ukraine's asymmetric warfare against Russia's much-larger and better armed military machine is in a significantly better position than the status of a year or so ago. Russian forces still have the upper-hand on the front line in the east, but the pain clearly being inflicted on Russia's economy can't be ignored at this point.
This sets up a potential slide into tit-for-tat escalation which could unleash a WW3 scenario. In the meantime this is an interesting-timed warning from Latvia and Poland:
Western intelligence agencies are increasingly concerned that Russia may be preparing a limited hybrid operation targeting NATO's eastern flank, potentially involving the Baltic states or Poland.
Such a move, officials believe, could be an attempt to test the alliance's unity as the war in Ukraine enters a new phase.
According to reporting by The Guardian, intelligence officials from two NATO countries have warned that Moscow is considering a "provocation" rather than a full-scale military attack.
Report by Major General Yevhenii Khmara on our long-range sanctions plan, mid-range sanctions, and the results of the Security Service of Ukraine – specifically the Center of Special Operations “Alpha” – on the front.
I approved a 40-day influence operation for the Service… pic.twitter.com/Ue6O21i6xH
At the moment inside Russia, many regions of Russia seem powerless to stop Ukraine's inbound drone waves, given also that conventional air defenses are set up to defend primarily against larger, faster-moving projectiles like missiles or jets.
President Trump has lately suggested that Ukraine is doing well in the war, or at least much better than it once was. Kiev now feels the pressure to keep this narrative going, also so it can attract more and more weapons and intelligence help. But at some point Russia will feel it necessary to strongly reassert its red lines. This could come in the form of another massive escalation, and against 'decision-making centers'.
Tyler Durden Sat, 06/27/2026 - 07:35Does ‘Project Hail Mary’ Have a Post-Credits Scene?
ABC’s ‘3% delusion’ on criminal migrants turns the law on its head
When Extremists Run The Government
Authored by J.B. Shurk via American Thinker,
Two can certainly play the “extremist” game...
Politicians, government bureaucrats, central bankers, spy agencies, and mainstream news outlets lie to us every day.
For some people, the previous sentence is patently obvious. For others, that sentence represents “fringe” thinking. For certain law enforcement agencies in North America and Europe, that sentence reveals potentially dangerous “extremism.”
“Extremism” is such a morally squishy word. It means nothing. It suggests that the average beliefs of the average person in the average part of an average town are, on average, correct. Should a person’s beliefs move too far away from the “average,” then that person will eventually fall into the “extremist” abyss. Of course, the average person long believed that the sun and planets revolved around the Earth. The average person long believed that bloodletting cured disease. The average person long believed in magic. Relativity, microbiology, atomic physics, and quantum mechanics belonged to the “extremists.”
Defining “extremism” depends upon which populations are included when calculating an “average.” To the average American, Islamic terrorism is religious extremism. To the average jihadi in the Middle East, terrorism is part of the Islamic faith. One man’s “extremist” is another man’s “religious cleric.” Unsurprisingly, as more jihadists migrate to America, the more supportive of Islamic terrorism the Democrat Party becomes. We now have several Hamas-supporting members of Congresswho define Americans opposed to Islamic conquest as “extremists.” For a decade, Americans were told to be on the lookout for Islamic terrorism: “If you see something, say something.” Now, if you see something and say something, you will most likely be denounced as an “Islamophobic bigot.” If the definition of “extremism” can shift 180 degrees since the Islamic terror attacks on September 11, 2001, then “extremism” is a nebulous political label.
In the United States, citizens overwhelmingly support federal legislation that would require photo ID, proof of citizenship, and other safeguards to ensure that elections across the country are free, fair, lawful, constitutional, and secure.
Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans in Congress prefer to maintain the current “on your honor” system that can be gamed to permit large-scale vote fraud and rigged elections. By any polling measure, Congress’s point of view is far from that of the average American. Members of Congress, in other words, are the extremists! If you listen to the extremists in Congress, however, our elections have never been more secure.
In fact, when you look at some of the most important policy issues today, it becomes quite clear that Congress is ground zero for extremism.
Most Americans want Congress to stop spending more money than it receives in taxes; Congress has put us forty trillion dollars in debt. Most Americans want secure borders and an end to illegal immigration; Congress has enabled an evil human trafficking system to exist for over fifty years that rewards criminals and has flooded the country with somewhere between fifty and a hundred million (nobody knows for sure!) illegal aliens. Most Americans are concerned about lowering fuel and food prices; Congress has wasted trillions of dollars on “Green New Deal” scams that raise the household costs for fuel and food. Most Americans believe that college admissions and job hiring should be based on a person’s merit, skill, character, knowledge, and hard work; Congress continues to divide Americans by the color of their skin and their sexual eccentricities. Most Americans believe that men and women are biologically distinct; Congress pretends that biological sex is an imaginary social construct. Most Americans believe that a dollar saved today should maintain the same value ten, fifty, or even a hundred years from now; Congress thinks printing and spending dollars, depreciating the U.S. currency, and artificially spiking the dollar-denominated valuation of stocks, homes, and other assets is the best way to fake a constantly “improving” economy. Most Americans believe that we should refrain from military engagements overseas whenever possible; Congress can’t ever get enough of forever-wars. Most Americans want their representatives to work for American citizens; Congress believes it should work on behalf of non-Americans all over the world. Most Americans view their country as a nation; Congress views the United States as both a global empire and a home for every person on the planet.
On the most important issues, Congress is filled to the brim with extremists. They should be put on official security lists and monitored whenever they travel more than fifty feet from their taxpayer-financed homes. Instead, in the United States and throughout the West, the extremists run things.
That would explain why Christians are targeted for their beliefs. That would explain why the governments of Europe and North America have flooded their countries with unassimilable malcontents from the third world. That would explain why men are allowed into women’s restrooms and why pedophiles are accorded more respect than heterosexual married couples. That would explain why Western governments have declared war on “climate change” when most people don’t care about elites’ obsession with the weather. That would explain why so many European and North American politicians are willing to risk a nuclear war with the Russian Federation, while ordinary citizens have never been less willing to fight for the defense of their respective countries.
Perhaps the more that ordinary Westerners realize that it is the people running their governments, universities, and bureaucratic institutions who are most extreme, the less willing they become to do what those extremists say. Six years ago, the extremists locked down the world because of COVID. They closed churches, bankrupted businesses, disrupted childhood education, prevented family members from being together, and killed a lot of people with fake “vaccines.” If public health extremists tried to pull another COVID today, would ordinary Westerners do what the politicians and bureaucrats say? Or would Western citizens conclude that extremist governments endanger both their lives and liberties?
Two can certainly play the “extremist” game. Two-hundred-fifty years ago, the British Empire believed the patriots of America’s thirteen colonies to be extremists. The patriots disagreed. They considered it extreme for members of Parliament to make decisions on their behalf while residing 3,500 miles away. The two sets of “extremists” fought it out, and we American “extremists” now celebrate July 4 as Independence Day.
My question is this: How much longer can the governments of Europe and North America continue to ignore the wishes of their national populations before we find ourselves in a situation where there is an explosion of public declarations of independence from the political and bureaucratic extremists who have ruined people’s lives? For, as much as Western governments appear to be betting on mass surveillance, central bank digital currencies, censorship, propaganda, and technocratic oppression as weapons of control to help maintain power well into the future, there’s nothing so unpredictable as a fed-up populace ready for a little revolution. When enough people recognize themselves as average representatives of the public will and their government officials as extremists representing only their own interests, things get interesting. Being labeled an “extremist” by government extremists means nothing.
One might even ask: Isn’t globalism tantamount to extremism when a politician puts other nations’ interests ahead of his own? Surely, when a government official undermines the nation he serves by championing open borders policies or wasting taxpayer dollars on “climate change” boondoggles at the U.N., that official deserves to be labeled an “extremist.” Globalists certainly don’t represent the average North American or European citizen. But they do represent the average cosmopolitan bureaucrat who sees no country as home.
In a world of nations whose populations require different things, globalism is extremist.
In a world of varying cultures and competing beliefs, forced multiculturalism is extremist.
In a world where some people wish to be free, international government is extremist.
Fighting for liberty is not extremist. It is government tyranny that is extreme.
Tyler Durden Sat, 06/27/2026 - 07:00Lakers need LeBron James, and he needs them. It’s time to get deal done
Plane crash at Beijing’s tallest skyscraper kills pilot and injures 13, authorities say
Mamdani’s rent freeze means big trouble for MOST tenants, and maybe for ALL
US Strikes Iran In Retaliation To Hormuz Ship Attack
Update (5:00pm ET): As was expected, the US retaliated against Iran one day after Tehran struck a commercial ship in the Strait of Hormuz, a tit-for-tat exchange similar to one observed a week ago, and one which threatened to break the two countries’ fragile ceasefire although we doubt there will be further escalation.
US Central Command said that American aircraft on Friday hit Iranian missile and drone storage sites as well as coastal radar installations, reportedly on Sirik Island located near the Strait of Hormuz, calling it a “powerful response to yesterday’s attack.”
U.S. aircraft struck Iranian missile and drone storage locations and coastal radar sites after Iran hit M/V Ever Lovely on June 25 with a one-way attack drone. The Singapore-flagged cargo ship was exiting the Strait of Hormuz along the Omani coast at the time of Iran’s attack.
The unwarranted aggression against commercial shipping by Iranian forces clearly violated the ceasefire. Furthermore, Iran’s dangerous behavior undermined freedom of navigation as commerce increasingly flows through the vital international trade corridor.
CENTCOM forces continue to provide safe passage coordination and support to commercial vessels transiting the strait. The U.S. military remains present and vigilant to ensure all aspects of the agreement with Iran are adhered to, obeyed, and in full force and effect.
Fox reporter Jennifer Griffin said that according to senior US defense officials the strikes on Iranian targets are "ongoing" right now.
According to unconfirmed reported from military bloggers, there is currently intensified U.S. military air activity is now underway over the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, with 6 U.S. Air Force aerial refueling tankers operating alongside a U.S. Navy P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraf
On Thursday, the Singapore-flagged container ship Ever Lovely sustained damage from what the US said was a one-way Iranian attack drone. The incident irked President Donald Trump, who said earlier Friday that “I don’t like the fact that they took a shot.”
“They shouldn’t be doing that,” Trump told reporters at the White House.
Earlier on Friday, he wrote on Truth Social that the Iranian attack was "a foolish violation of our Ceasefire Agreement
Since signing a 60-day truce last week, Trump has said that he would resume fighting against Iran if Tehran violates its terms, which provides for the flow of vessels through the vital waterway and talks over its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
The question now is whether the resumption of strikes will slow progress toward restoring shipping traffic in the vital energy thoroughfare to pre-war levels. Washington and Tehran were able to agree to an interim peace deal last week despite trading strikes in the lead-up to that document being finalized.
But the two sides continue to clash over key provisions of the deal, including whether Iran will impose tolls or other monetary costs on ships seeking to sail through Hormuz. Oman told European officials that vessels may ultimately have to be charged some fees, Bloomberg reported earlier.
Now we wait to see if Iran responds militarily, although we doubt it as the entire operation has a smell of coordinated, jointly orchestrated activity to throw red meat at the respective bases, especially after Iran's revolutionary guards said US forces attacked Sirik Island, and Iran "successfully repelled the attack."
- *IRGC: IRAN IS RESPONDING TO US ATTACKS NEAR STRAIT: ISNA
- *IRGC SAYS IRAN 'SUCCESSFULLY REPELLED' US ATTACK: ISNA
Finally, Fox News tweeted that "military strikes targeting Iran are complete for tonight."
And with that, the show is over.
* * *
Update (11:55am ET): While today's announcement by Dubai that the UAE was under missile attack proved to be a false alarm, the US ceasefire it nonetheless becoming increasingly unstable. Following yesterday's attack by Iran drones on a cargo ship next to Oman, we were wondering how long until Trump responds (and how), and he did just that moments ago when he posted on Truth Social that Iran shoting "at least four One Way Attack Drones at Ships transversing the Strait of Hormuz" is "a foolish violation of our Ceasefire Agreement."
However, Trump's post follows earlier reports that the US and Iran had set up a deconfliction hotline involving precisely such events in the Gulf, so we doubt that there will be much if any follow through from this latest round of jawboning, especially now that Trump is set on maintaining the flow of oil through Hormuz as much as possible, which has allowed oil to tumble to pre-war levels.
* * *
With each week and month that passes since the start of Trump's Operation Epic Fury, more and more reports have come out revealing the massive extent of damage to US military facilities in the Mideast region based on Iran's retaliation across the region.
This is often based on fresh satellite imaging and analysis, despite US government pressure for these research entities to refrain from publishing such data, and to censor open source photographs. After a series of deep investigative reports, it has been proven time and again that the Pentagon and Washington officials have been downplaying and covering up the real extent of devastation caused by Iranian missiles and drones.
More fresh reporting in the Wall Street Journal once again adds confirmation to this, referencing satellite imagery which shows far more serious damage at a key naval base in Bahrain than the US has publicly acknowledged.
WSJ featured newly publicized images of whole US military command & communications buildings belonging to the US Navy in Bahrain obliterated, via AIRBUSThe damage is said to be bad enough that the Pentagon is mulling shrinking its troop presence there and elsewhere in the Gulf, including a potential reduced troop footprint in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Iran is hailing this reported pullback as a significant strategic victory produced by its retaliation.
Unnamed officials were cited in the report as saying American forces could retreat as far westward as Israel, after some bases essentially became unusable or uninhabitable altogether.
Concerning the Bahrain base details, WSJ writes:
The U.S. Navy base in Bahrain was repeatedly targeted between late February and June. Strikes that got through caused extensive damage, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of satellite imagery, social-media footage and interviews with current and former servicemembers—damage that the Pentagon hasn’t publicly acknowledged. Hit hard were the command headquarters and at least a dozen other buildings, along with two satellite communications terminals.
The military said no one was killed at the base, known as Naval Support Activity Bahrain, and that the strikes didn’t significantly impact operations. The U.S. evacuated most personnel but has kept a small staff on the ground.
Notably in Bahrain the headquarters building for the US Navy in the Middle East was struck and seriously damaged, along with sensitive communications centers being destroyed.
But here is a key, somewhat unexpected line in the Journal report: "The extensive damage done to America’s sole naval base in the Middle East - along with hits to at least 20 U.S. sites across the region, including military installations and diplomatic facilities - has the U.S. re-evaluating its entire footprint in the region, according to U.S. officials familiar with the deliberations.
This means that damaged structures and bases may not be rebuilt at all, and the sites may just be abandoned as future key US military hubs, WSJ says.
The draw-down of expensive Pentagon comms centers could include from Bahrain: "The military is now considering revamping the base in Bahrain, reducing the U.S. presence in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and moving some bases or base functions west, farther from the reach of Iranian missiles and drones, according to the officials familiar with the deliberations," WSJ writes.
Reconstruction costs would be staggering, per the same report:
The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated in a report published Tuesday that the total cost of the war was about $40 billion. That estimate included their calculus of $2.2 billion to $5.1 billion in damage to U.S. bases, based on structures that CSIS identified as damaged.
The Journal used satellite images and social-media footage to identify which buildings on the Bahrain base were damaged. To estimate what it would cost to construct buildings of the same types today, the Journal reviewed a publicly available Defense Department cost model as well as procurement reports. The estimates only cover construction, and don’t include other costs that could factor into the total if the buildings were to be rebuilt, such as debris removal and reinforcement.
*Report: Iranian Strikes Damaged Key U.S. Naval Base in Bahrain During War - Wall Street Journal*
* A new report says Iranian missile and drone attacks caused significant damage to the U.S. Navy's headquarters in Bahrain and other military facilities.
* The attacks are… pic.twitter.com/59uS1hQ4pm
"The estimated construction costs at NSA Bahrain totaled about $400 million," it continues. But ultimately a draw-back from these locations would be based on the proven reality that Iran can easily hit them at any time.
Some further implications to all this are that in any future flare-up or even return to all-out war between the US and Iran, American forces would find themselves executing a conflict much further away from the theatre itself. For example, dozens of major Air Force refueling tankers have already had to be relocated far away from the Gulf, to places like Tel Aviv. Many were destroyed in the opening weeks of the war while parked at Gulf airfields, clearly over-exposed as it seems Iran knew exactly where to target.
Back in late March, US officials admitted to the NY Times that Iran's significantly retaliation damaging US bases was "a war that is much harder to prosecute."
Tyler Durden Sat, 06/27/2026 - 06:15