Thursday, December 4, 2025
Newsletter
Home Blog Page 2

Not an Adult Until 32: Landmark Study Re-Maps Human Brain’s Five Major Ages

Kathryn R. Bown
-
0
Not an Adult Until 32: Landmark Study Re-Maps Human Brain’s Five Major Ages

Neuroscientists have upended the traditional understanding of the human lifespan, reporting in a landmark study that the period of adolescence does not end with the teenage years or even in the mid-twenties, but rather continues until the average age of 32.

The research, conducted by the University of Cambridge and published today in Nature Communications, identifies four major “turning points” in neurological development, fundamentally rewriting the timeline for mental maturity and revealing that the human brain moves through five distinct, chronological epochs of wiring.

Image source: easy-peasy.ai

The New Neural Timeline: Five Epochs

The scientists analyzed the brain scans of nearly 4,000 individuals, aged zero to 90, mapping the structural organization and efficiency of their neural networks. They found that the brain’s architecture doesn’t change gradually, but rather in dramatic, swift shifts occurring around specific ages.

The study pinpoints the four major turning points and the five resulting brain phases:

EpochAge RangeDefining Characteristics
ChildhoodBirth to Age 9Network Consolidation; rapid growth of grey and white matter; “pruning” of unnecessary connections.
AdolescenceAge 9 to 32Increasing Efficiency of communication networks; White Matter continues to grow; period of highest risk for mental health disorders.
AdulthoodAge 32 to 66Stability and slow compartmentalization; the longest and most stable phase; plateau in intelligence and personality.
Early AgingAge 66 to 83Gradual network reorganization; reduced connectivity; increased risk of age-related conditions like hypertension.
Late AgingAge 83 onwardsFurther decline in connectivity; increased reliance on specialized regional networks.

The Biggest Shift at 32

Lead researcher Dr. Alexa Mousley noted that while puberty offers a clear start to adolescence, its end has always been scientifically murky. The new data, based purely on brain structure, puts the line in the sand at 32.

“Around the age of 32, we see the most directional changes in wiring and the largest overall shift in trajectory, compared to all the other turning points,” said Dr. Mousley. “Based purely on neural architecture, we found that adolescent-like changes in brain structure end around the early thirties.”

This finding aligns with other behavioral studies that suggest cognitive performance and efficiency peak in the early thirties. During this extended adolescent period, the brain’s white matter—the pathways that transmit information—is continuously refined, making communication networks more streamlined and robust.

Implications for Health and Policy

The findings hold significant implications beyond academic curiosity, particularly for understanding mental health and age-related vulnerability.

  • Mental Health Risk: The adolescent phase (9 to 32) is identified as the period of highest instability in brain wiring, corresponding with the typical onset of many serious mental health disorders, such as schizophrenia and anxiety disorders.
  • Peak Performance: The transition to the adult brain at age 32, which ushers in three decades of stable architecture, aligns with a plateau in intelligence and personality, suggesting this long epoch is the brain’s period of greatest consistency.

Experts believe that pinpointing these precise turning points will help scientists identify when and how the brain’s wiring is most vulnerable to disruption, offering new context for researching childhood learning difficulties and later-life conditions like dementia.

The message is clear: the journey to becoming a fully neurologically mature adult is far longer than previously assumed, giving everyone in their 20s and early 30s a new scientific explanation for why they might still occasionally feel like a teenager.

Thai Woman Awakes in Coffin Moments Before Cremation Ceremony

James J. Williams
-
0
Thai Woman Awakes in Coffin Moments Before Cremation Ceremony

NONTHABURI, THAILAND—In a miraculous and deeply unsettling incident that stunned a Buddhist temple community, a 65-year-old Thai woman, believed to have been dead for two days, was discovered alive inside her coffin just moments before her body was due to be placed in the crematorium oven.

The shocking discovery was made at the Wat Rat Prakhong Tham temple on the outskirts of Bangkok after temple staff, preparing for the service, heard faint but distinct knocking sounds emanating from the closed casket.

The 500-Kilometer Journey of the ‘Deceased’

The woman, identified as Chonthirat Sakulkoo, had been transported over 500 kilometers (300 miles) from her home in Phitsanulok province by her brother, Mongkol Sakulkoo.

According to Pairat Soodthoop, the temple’s general and financial affairs manager, the brother explained that Chonthirat had been bedridden for two years and had become unresponsive two days prior, appearing to have stopped breathing. Believing she had passed away, he had placed her in the coffin.

  • Failed Organ Donation: The brother first drove the body to a hospital in Bangkok, hoping to fulfill his sister’s wish to donate her organs. However, the hospital refused to accept the body because the family did not possess an official death certificate.
  • The Cremation Request: He then approached the temple, which offers a free cremation service. Temple staff also initially refused to proceed due to the lack of official paperwork.

It was while Mr. Soodthoop was explaining the bureaucratic procedure for obtaining a death certificate that the silence of the temple grounds was pierced by the sound of a desperate tapping.

‘Everyone Was Startled’

“I was a bit surprised, so I asked them to open the coffin, and everyone was startled,” Mr. Soodthoop told the Associated Press. “I saw her opening her eyes slightly and knocking on the side of the coffin. She must have been knocking for quite some time.”

A video later shared by the temple on its official social media page showed the woman, lying in a white coffin in the back of a pickup truck, visibly moving her arms and head as bewildered staff looked on.

Temple officials immediately suspended the scheduled cremation. An ambulance was called, and the woman was rushed to a nearby hospital in Nonthaburi province.

Doctors there determined that Chonthirat Sakulkoo had not suffered cardiac arrest or respiratory failure. Instead, they diagnosed her with a severe case of hypoglycemia—critically low blood sugar—which likely induced a deep, coma-like state that mimicked death.

The temple’s abbot has since ordered that the temple will cover all of the woman’s medical expenses. The incident serves as a harrowing reminder of the dangers of delayed medical intervention and the urgent need for proper certification before the rites of death are finalized.

Federal Judge Tosses Cases Against James Comey and Letitia James, Citing ‘Unlawful’ Prosecutor Appointment

Nancy Clayson
-
0
Federal Judge Tosses Cases Against James Comey and Letitia James, Citing ‘Unlawful’ Prosecutor Appointment

A federal judge has delivered a stunning legal rebuke to the Trump administration, ordering the immediate dismissal of criminal charges against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. The judge ruled that the prosecutor who secured the indictments was unlawfully appointed by the Justice Department, rendering the charges invalid.

The ruling on Monday from U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie puts an abrupt halt to two politically charged prosecutions that targeted two of President Donald Trump’s most visible and persistent political opponents.

The Grounds for Dismissal: A Defective Appointment

The judge’s decision did not address the substance of the allegations against Comey (who was charged with making false statements and obstructing Congress) or James (who faced charges of bank fraud). Instead, the dismissal rested entirely on the legal mechanism used to install the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan.

  • The Conflict: The Trump administration had pushed out the previous interim U.S. Attorney, Erik Siebert, and replaced him with Halligan—a former White House aide with no prior prosecutorial experience—in September 2025. This move came amid immense public pressure from the President to charge his political foes.
  • The Judge’s Finding: Judge Currie concluded that the Attorney General’s attempt to install Halligan was invalid because the legal window for the Attorney General to make such an interim appointment had already expired. She ruled that the power to appoint a temporary U.S. Attorney had shifted to the federal court of the district itself.
  • The Ruling’s Scope: “All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment, including securing and signing [the] indictment, were unlawful exercises of executive power and are hereby set aside,” Judge Currie wrote in her opinion. She stressed that accepting the government’s argument would essentially allow the administration to bypass the Senate confirmation process indefinitely.

Vindication and Retribution

The ruling was immediately hailed as a major victory for both defendants, who have consistently argued that the cases were a thinly veiled effort by the Trump administration to punish them for their political opposition.

  • James’s Response: New York Attorney General Letitia James stated she was “heartened by today’s victory” and vowed to remain “fearless in the face of these baseless charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day.”
  • Comey’s Reaction: James Comey, who was a key figure in the investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign, released a video saying, “A message has to be sent that the president of the United States cannot use the Department of Justice to target his political enemies.”

The Next Move: Appeal and Statute of Limitations

Judge Currie dismissed the cases without prejudice, meaning the Justice Department theoretically has the right to refile the charges under a lawfully appointed prosecutor. However, this is complicated by two major factors:

  1. Statute of Limitations: Lawyers for Comey immediately argued that the five-year deadline to bring charges against him had already expired just days after he was indicted in September. Since the original indictment was ruled invalid, it did not pause the running of the clock.
  2. Immediate Appeal: Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to pursue “all available legal action, including an immediate appeal” of the ruling, indicating that the administration is determined to press the charges against the two high-profile critics.

The decision is the most sweeping legal repudiation yet of the Trump administration’s aggressive efforts to place political loyalists in top prosecutorial positions and deploy the Justice Department as a tool against its perceived adversaries.

JFK’s Granddaughter, Tatiana Schlossberg, Reveals Terminal Cancer Diagnosis

Nancy Clayson
-
0
JFK’s Granddaughter, Tatiana Schlossberg, Reveals Terminal Cancer Diagnosis

In a poignant and deeply personal essay published Saturday, Tatiana Schlossberg, the 35-year-old environmental journalist and granddaughter of President John F. Kennedy, disclosed that she has been diagnosed with terminal cancer and given a prognosis of less than a year to live.

The news adds another chapter of heartbreak to the storied, yet often tragic, history of the Kennedy family. Schlossberg, the daughter of former U.S. Ambassador Caroline Kennedy and designer Edwin Schlossberg, revealed in The New Yorker that she is battling Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) with a rare mutation, an illness discovered just hours after she gave birth to her second child in May 2024.

The Sudden Onset and Harrowing Treatments

Schlossberg’s diagnosis was a shock, contradicting her self-perception as one of the healthiest people she knew. She detailed in her essay, titled “A Battle With My Blood,” how a routine check of her white blood cell count just minutes after delivering her daughter revealed a severe abnormality.

“I did not—could not—believe that they were talking about me. I had swum a mile in the pool the day before, nine months pregnant. I wasn’t sick. I didn’t feel sick.”

Since the diagnosis, Schlossberg has endured a grueling year and a half of treatment, including multiple rounds of chemotherapy, two bone-marrow transplants—the first from her sister, the second from an unrelated donor—and participation in experimental clinical trials. During her latest trial, she received the devastating prognosis.

She recounted the immense physical toll, including developing a life-threatening complication where her new cells attacked her old ones, and the struggle to regain the strength to walk again and hold her two young children, aged three and one.

The Political Dimension: A Family Feud Made Public

The essay quickly drew national attention not only for its candid personal account of facing death but also for its scathing criticism of her cousin, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the current Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Schlossberg accused her cousin’s policies of directly jeopardizing the nation’s medical research infrastructure and her own access to life-saving treatment.

  • Research Cuts: She wrote that she watched as her cousin “cut nearly a half billion dollars for research into mRNA vaccines, technology that could be used against certain cancers” and “slashed billions in funding from the National Institutes of Health.”
  • Healthcare Strain: She detailed her fear that the health system she relied on felt “strained, shaky” after the administration temporarily withdrew federal funding from her hospital, NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center.

Schlossberg revealed that her mother, Caroline Kennedy, had previously written to the Senate urging them to reject her cousin’s confirmation, highlighting the deep rift the political appointment has caused within the family.

A Mother’s Grief and the Kennedy Legacy

The diagnosis comes on the 62nd anniversary of her grandfather, President Kennedy’s assassination, an eerie coincidence that underscored the family’s long history of public tragedy.

In a heartbreaking reflection, Schlossberg wrote of the guilt she feels for adding to her mother’s burden of grief. “For my whole life, I have tried to be good… Now I have added a new tragedy to her life, to our family’s life, and there’s nothing I can do to stop it,” she confessed.

Schlossberg concluded her essay by focusing on her final months, dedicating her remaining time to creating memories with her husband and young children, acknowledging the painful certainty that she will not be there to watch them grow up.

“Mostly, I try to live and be with them now,” she wrote. “I will keep trying to remember.”

Mexico’s Fátima Bosch Wins Miss Universe Weeks After Walkout Drama

Lisa.Felice
-
0
Mexico’s Fátima Bosch Wins Miss Universe Weeks After Walkout Drama

BANGKOK, THAILAND—In a dramatic finale that capped off the most controversial staging of the pageant in years, Fátima Bosch Fernández of Mexico was crowned Miss Universe 2025 on Friday. The victory is a potent symbol of vindication for the 25-year-old, who captured global attention weeks ago by walking out of a pre-pageant event after being publicly berated by a local organizer.

Bosch’s win marks the fourth time Mexico has claimed the Miss Universe title, but this victory transcends national pride—it has been hailed as a powerful moment for female dignity and a clear rebuke of bullying within the highly scrutinized world of pageantry.

The Confrontation: ‘Not Respecting Me as a Woman’

The drama unfolded in early November during a live-streamed sashing ceremony in Bangkok. Nawat Itsaragrisil, the Thai national director and a senior executive of the organization, publicly confronted Bosch in front of dozens of contestants, accusing her of failing to follow guidelines on promoting the event on social media.

When Bosch attempted to defend herself and explain her absence from a promotional shoot, the executive reportedly escalated the situation, summoning security and allegedly calling her a “dumbhead”—a claim Itsaragrisil later tearfully denied but for which he did apologize.

In a pivotal moment of defiance that went viral worldwide, Bosch stood her ground. “You are not respecting me as a woman, nor as a representative of my country,” she stated, before choosing to walk out of the room. Several other contestants, including the reigning Miss Universe, Victoria Kjær Theilvig of Denmark, immediately joined her in a dramatic show of solidarity.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum publicly praised the contestant at the time, calling Bosch an “example of how we women should speak out” in the face of aggression.

Resilience Takes the Stage

The controversy hung over the remainder of the competition, which saw additional turbulence, including the resignations of two judges who raised concerns over the transparency of the selection process.

However, Bosch, who had been diagnosed with dyslexia and ADHD as a child, channeled the public scrutiny into a message of empowerment that resonated strongly with the judges and the global audience.

When asked in the final question round how she would use the Miss Universe platform to inspire and empower young girls, her answer was a direct reflection of her recent experience:

“Believe in the power of your authenticity. Your dreams matter, your heart matters. Never let anyone make you doubt your worth, because you are deserving of everything, you are powerful, and your voices must be heard.”

This message of resilience and authenticity appeared to seal her fate. As outgoing Queen Victoria Kjær Theilvig placed the crown on her head, Bosch broke down in tears, embracing the moment as both a personal and political victory.

Speaking to the media after her win, Bosch stated that she would like to be remembered as a person who “changed a little bit the prototype of what is a Miss Universe and a real person that gives the heart.”

The first runner-up was Praveenar Singh of Thailand, followed by Stephany Adriana Abasali Nasser of Venezuela. For Fátima Bosch, the crown is a testament that standing on one’s dignity, even on a global stage, can lead to the ultimate vindication.

U.S. Declares Global Diversity Policies an Infringement on Human Rights

Clyde K. Valle
-
0
U.S. Declares Global Diversity Policies an Infringement on Human Rights

In a radical overhaul of the U.S. approach to global human rights, the Trump administration has introduced sweeping new guidelines for its annual country reports, effectively classifying traditional Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and affirmative action policies worldwide as potential violations of fundamental individual rights.

The new instructions, issued by the State Department under Secretary of State Marco Rubio, mark a dramatic departure from decades of established practice, prioritizing what officials call “merit-based opportunity” and framing race- and gender-conscious policies as a form of “illegal discrimination.”

The New Yardstick: Meritocracy Over Margin

The shift is most visible in the guidance for U.S. diplomats preparing the widely cited annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. Moving forward, embassies and consulates are explicitly ordered to:

  • Scrutinize Affirmative Action: Diplomats must collect data on other governments’ policies that “provide preferential treatment” to job applicants or students based on race, gender, or national origin. The underlying policy, reiterated in a recent Executive Order, deems such preferences discriminatory and contrary to the U.S. legal principle of “colorblind equality.”
  • Emphasize “Creator-Endowed” Rights: The entire focus of the reports is being re-centered on “unalienable rights endowed by the Creator,” a foundation drawn from the Declaration of Independence. This shift aims to sideline internationally agreed-upon standards, such as those related to minority rights and gender equality, in favor of a narrower, U.S.-centric interpretation.
  • Flag Gender and Abortion Issues: In a further move that breaks from past reports, diplomats are instructed to extensively document state subsidization of abortions, the estimated number of abortions performed annually, and the prevalence of gender-affirming care for minors, which officials refer to as “chemical or surgical mutilation of children.”

Clash with Global Standards

The new directive places the United States at odds with global human rights norms, which often support temporary special measures (like affirmative action or DEI frameworks) to redress historical and systemic discrimination against marginalized groups.

UN human rights experts, in a rare joint statement earlier this year, expressed “deep concern” over the domestic anti-DEI policies of the administration and urged businesses and governments worldwide to “act in accordance with international human rights law and standards, regardless of government actions.” They warned that the U.S. action reverses years of progress in creating inclusive societies.

Critics, including Amnesty International USA, argue that the administration is ignoring the defined, legal purpose of the Congressional-mandated reports—which traditionally focus on abuses like torture, political killings, and the persecution of minority groups—in favor of a politically motivated, “religiously tinged view of human rights.”

Domestic Policy Gone Global

The policy reflects the President’s domestic campaign against DEI. Since taking office, Mr. Trump has issued multiple executive orders to terminate DEI programs across the entire federal government and has threatened to withhold federal funds from universities that maintain such practices, arguing that they are “illegal” and undermine merit.

By integrating this anti-DEI stance into its global human rights reporting, the administration is effectively using its diplomatic influence to promote its domestic political agenda, signaling to the world that adherence to traditional diversity policies will now be viewed through the lens of a human rights infringement by the U.S. State Department.

Trump Walks Back ‘Punishable by Death’ Post, Insists He Was ‘Not Threatening’ Democrats

Diane A. Wade
-
0
Trump Walks Back ‘Punishable by Death’ Post, Insists He Was ‘Not Threatening’ Democrats

President Donald Trump on Friday attempted to de-escalate a political firestorm he ignited by insisting he was “not threatening death” against Democratic lawmakers, despite having explicitly stated that their recent video to U.S. service members amounted to “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

The President’s clarification, made during a radio interview, came only hours after House Democratic leadership demanded he delete the social media posts and condemned his remarks as a “disgusting and dangerous death threat” that risked inciting violence.

The Video That Triggered the Threat

The controversy erupted earlier this week following the release of a 90-second video featuring six Democratic lawmakers, all of whom are U.S. military veterans or former intelligence officials.

In the video, the lawmakers—including Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) and Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.)—directly addressed active-duty personnel, telling them: “Our laws are clear: you can refuse illegal orders, you must refuse illegal orders.” They warned that threats to the Constitution were coming “from right here at home.”

The video, which appeared to allude to the President’s recent use of the military in domestic disputes, drew a furious response from the White House. On Thursday morning, President Trump published a series of posts on his social media platform, escalating the rhetoric:

  • “Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL.”
  • “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!“

The Weekend Walkback

Appearing on Fox News Radio on Friday, the President was pressed on the meaning of his inflammatory rhetoric.

“In the old days, if you said a thing like that, that was punishable by death,” Mr. Trump stated, referencing the historical penalty for sedition. “I would say they’re in serious trouble. I’m not threatening death, but I think they’re in serious trouble.“

The White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt also scrambled to contain the political damage on Thursday, telling reporters, “No,” when asked directly if the President wished to execute members of Congress. She defended the President’s anger by calling the Democrats’ video “dangerous,” arguing that it undermined the military’s chain of command, which could “lead to people getting killed.”

Image source: Wikimedia Commons

Democrats Stand Their Ground

Democratic leaders and the lawmakers who created the video swiftly rejected the President’s attempts to characterize his words as a mere historical reference.

  • Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the original post an “outright threat” and stated, “The President of the United States is calling for the execution of elected officials.”
  • The group of veteran lawmakers released a joint statement declaring that what was “most telling is that the President considers it punishable by death for us to restate the law.” They stated they would not be deterred by “threat, intimidation, or call for violence.”

One of the video’s participants, Representative Jason Crow (D-Colo.), a former Army Ranger, confirmed he has received an “uptick” in violent threats since the President’s posts were published, forcing Capitol Police to increase security monitoring for the lawmakers involved.

While the President insists he was merely defining a historic crime, the episode serves as a fresh reminder of the deeply polarizing power of his political rhetoric and the immediate physical security risks faced by those who publicly oppose him.

Death Toll Hits 43 as Vietnam’s Central Coast is Submerged by Historic Rains

Nancy Clayson
-
0
Death Toll Hits 43 as Vietnam’s Central Coast is Submerged by Historic Rains

NHA TRANG, VIETNAM—The death toll from relentless and historically severe flooding across central Vietnam has climbed to at least 43 people, with nine others missing, as a multi-week onslaught of extreme rainfall continues to devastate the region’s densely populated coastal cities and crucial coffee-growing highlands.

Emergency teams, backed by the military, are racing to pluck stranded residents from rooftops and evacuate tens of thousands of people from inundated communities, where water levels in major rivers have surpassed records set decades ago.

The Anatomy of a Crisis

The crisis, which began in late October and intensified sharply over the past week, has been fueled by significantly above-average rainfall—with some areas reporting nearly 70 inches of rain since Sunday. The flooding has impacted six provinces, with the central coastal province of Khanh Hoa and the coffee-producing highlands of Dak Lak bearing the brunt of the destruction.

  • Human Toll: As of Friday, authorities confirmed 43 fatalities, with Dak Lak and Khanh Hoa provinces accounting for the majority of deaths. More than 67,700 homes have been inundated, forcing the urgent relocation of approximately 61,000 residents. Many who could not be evacuated were forced onto their rooftops for days, waiting for rescue.
  • Economic Devastation: The agricultural sector has been crippled, with floodwaters destroying over 13,000 hectares of rice, flowers, and vegetable crops. The delay in harvesting in Dak Lak, the world’s top producer of robusta beans, risks denting the global coffee market. Preliminary economic damages are estimated at over $114 million.
  • Infrastructure Collapse: Major arteries, including sections of National Highway 1A, remain blocked due to landslides and surging waters, paralyzing transport across the region. Over half a million households and businesses have been left without power, compounding the humanitarian challenge.

Tourism Hotspots Underwater

Even popular tourist destinations have not been spared. Floodwaters have engulfed whole city blocks in the coastal resort city of Nha Trang, stranding hundreds of cars and submerging the ground floors of hotels and businesses. Reports indicate that doctors and patients at one isolated hospital survived for three days on instant noodles and water until rescuers could reach them.

The disaster’s intensity is tied to a combination of climate factors, including an active La Niña weather pattern. Experts warn that human-driven climate change is making such extreme, destructive weather events more frequent. Vietnam has been hit by at least 13 major storms this year, with total damages already exceeding $2 billion between January and October.

The government has mobilized the army and police, with Deputy Prime Minister Ho Quoc Dung ordering provincial leaders to utilize all security forces to “promptly relocate and evacuate people” to safe areas as forecasters warn that heavy rains are expected to continue through the weekend.

Trump to Host Socialist Mayor-Elect Mamdani in High-Stakes Oval Office Showdown

Clyde K. Valle
-
0
Trump to Host Socialist Mayor-Elect Mamdani in High-Stakes Oval Office Showdown

In a highly anticipated political summit that pits the leader of the MAGA movement against a rising democratic socialist icon, President Donald Trump is set to meet with incoming New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani at the White House on Friday.

The meeting brings the two fierce political adversaries—who have exchanged months of blistering, personal insults—together in the Oval Office to discuss the pressing financial and safety challenges facing the nation’s largest city.

From Feud to Face-to-Face

The scheduled sit-down follows a heated campaign where the two men served as ideological antagonists. Mamdani, who won the mayoral election on November 4th on a progressive platform focusing on affordability, had vowed to be “Donald Trump’s worst nightmare.”

President Trump, in turn, repeatedly labeled the Mayor-elect a “100% Communist lunatic” and, in the run-up to the election, threatened to cut billions of dollars in federal funding to New York City if Mamdani won. He even alluded to the possibility of arresting the Uganda-born, naturalized U.S. citizen if Mamdani followed through on his campaign pledge to fight federal immigration enforcement.

Despite the animosity, both sides indicated that pragmatic concerns about the city’s welfare drove the request for the meeting.

  • The President’s Stance: Mr. Trump confirmed the meeting in a social media post, stating that the “Communist Mayor of New York City, Zohran ‘Kwame’ Mamdani, has asked for a meeting. We have agreed that this meeting will take place at the Oval Office on Friday, November 21st.” He has recently indicated that he wants New York to be successful and may “help him a little bit maybe.”
  • Mamdani’s Focus: Mayor-elect Mamdani confirmed that the meeting is customary for an incoming New York Mayor and is essential “given the mutual reliance” between the city and the federal government. He stressed that his primary goal is to “speak plainly to the president about what it means to actually stand up for New Yorkers” and address the “cost of living crisis” that resonated with voters across the political spectrum.

A Clash Over City Funding

The single most critical point of contention will be the flow of federal funds. Mamdani is scheduled to take office on January 1, 2026, inheriting a city facing soaring rents and an ongoing migrant crisis that requires substantial federal support.

Mamdani’s progressive policy platform—which includes a rent freeze on rent-stabilized housing, city-run grocery stores, and tax increases on corporations—is antithetical to the President’s pro-business, deregulation agenda. The outcome of this meeting could determine whether the city receives critical federal assistance or faces a protracted battle for funding.

The highly anticipated encounter, which brings a Queens-born real estate mogul and a socialist representative from Astoria into a room to hash out the future of the nation’s most influential city, is poised to be one of the most closely watched political interactions of the year.

Trump Signs Bill to Compel Justice Department to Release Full Jeffrey Epstein Files

Diane A. Wade
-
0
Trump Signs Bill to Compel Justice Department to Release Full Jeffrey Epstein Files

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed into law a bill directing the Justice Department to publicly release all unclassified files related to the sprawling investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, ending months of political resistance and bowing to immense pressure from both Democrats and a powerful populist flank of his own Republican base.

The signing of the Epstein Files Transparency Act sets a firm 30-day countdown for Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce a massive collection of documents that could shed light on Epstein’s high-profile associates, the scope of his crimes, and the federal government’s handling of the case.

The U-Turn Under Duress

The President’s signature marks a stunning reversal of his stance. For months, Mr. Trump had dismissed the effort to force disclosure of the files as a “Democratic hoax” and resisted public pressure, despite having the authority to release the materials himself.

The political dynamics shifted rapidly this week as the measure gained overwhelming, bipartisan momentum in Congress:

  • House Revolt: The House of Representatives passed the bill by a near-unanimous vote of 427-1 on Tuesday, with many Republican loyalists—including figures like Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene—breaking ranks to support the measure.
  • Senate Clearance: The Senate swiftly followed, passing the bill by unanimous consent on Wednesday, signaling a definitive command from the legislative branch that could no longer be ignored.

Announcing the signing on social media, Mr. Trump sought to pivot the narrative, writing: “I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!” He then immediately accused Democrats of using the issue to “distract from our AMAZING Victories,” reinforcing his long-standing claim that Epstein’s social circle was primarily linked to the Democratic Party.

Trump Turnberry golf

What the Bill Mandates and What it Allows

The newly signed law is far-reaching, specifically compelling the Justice Department to release records related to:

  • All Investigations: Documents and communications concerning the federal investigations into Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell.
  • Associates and Entities: Individuals named or referenced in connection with Epstein’s criminal activities, as well as entities with alleged ties to his trafficking or financial networks.
  • Internal Memos: Internal DOJ communications concerning decisions to charge, or not charge, Epstein or his associates.
  • Flight and Death Records: Flight logs, travel records, and documentation related to Epstein’s 2019 death by apparent suicide in a federal jail cell.

Crucially, the legislation explicitly states that information cannot be withheld on the basis of “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity” to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.

However, the law does provide specific carve-outs, creating a potential battleground for the scope of the release:

  1. Victim Protection: The department may redact the personally identifying information of victims.
  2. Ongoing Cases: Material can be withheld if its release would “jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution.”

This final exception has created considerable concern among proponents of the bill, who fear the administration might use its recently ordered investigation into Epstein’s ties to certain prominent Democrats as a shield to block the release of a significant portion of the files.

For the survivors of Epstein’s abuse, who had fiercely advocated for the bill’s passage, the signing represents a momentous step toward a transparency that has been denied to them for years. The clock is now ticking for the Justice Department to comply with the new law, with the files expected to become public on or around December 19, 2025.

Doja Cat Blasts Fans Over Complaints About Stripped-Down World Tour

Lisa.Felice
-
0
Doja Cat Blasts Fans Over Complaints About Stripped-Down World Tour

AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND—In a fiery online exchange, global superstar Doja Cat has emphatically dismissed a wave of fan complaints regarding the opening night of her new “Ma Vie World Tour,” bluntly telling critics that her focus is on music, not theatrical production or expensive costume changes.

The rapper, known for her sharp social media presence, lashed out after her Tuesday night show in Auckland, New Zealand, drew immediate comparisons to her previous, more visually extravagant Scarlet Tour, with fans criticizing the new show’s perceived lack of elaborate visuals, cohesive storyline, and frequent wardrobe swaps.

The Complaints and The Clapback

The friction began on social media platform X (formerly Twitter) where videos and comments from the first show of the tour, which supports her latest album Vie, went viral.

  • The Criticism: Fans voiced disappointment over the “simple stage setup,” the absence of dancers, and the distinct lack of multiple outfit changes. One user wrote, “No shade the Vie tour just gives scarlet with different outfits,” while another hoped the singer would be “open to feedback.”
  • Doja’s Response: The Grammy-winning artist responded with a blistering dismissal, making it clear she intends to ignore the criticism. “I won’t and I don’t need you,” she shot back at one user. To another who questioned the lack of storyline in a tour called “My Life,” she stated: “Because I make music for people who enjoy music. I’m not a Broadway act.”

The response grew even more aggressive when addressing the wardrobe criticism. “And I’m not your fking costume monkey,” she wrote. “I move at my own pace and break my fking back out there every night so you can keep your bulls**t opinion to yourself. You are not the artist you are the watcher.”

Music First, Gimmicks Later

The singer’s stance is a firm reiteration of her artistic independence, emphasizing a desire to move away from the hyper-visual, meme-driven persona that defined her earlier albums, Hot Pink and Planet Her.

  • Vocal Focus: In addressing the complaint about limited costume changes, she wrote: “Who fking cares I’m singing my MUSIC for the people who want to hear me SING. You’re not even at the fking show.”
  • Unwavering Defiance: When a fan suggested she should at least “take the wig off halfway through or SOMETHING,” Doja responded with a short, defiant message: “Watch me not do any of these things :)”

While some fans were supportive of the stripped-back, high-energy performance, praising her sustained vocal and physical stamina throughout the hour-and-a-half set, the clash once again highlights the often-strained relationship Doja Cat has with her fan base, a relationship defined by her willingness to challenge and even openly troll her most ardent supporters.

The “Ma Vie World Tour” is scheduled to continue through South America, Europe, and the United States, suggesting that the “music-first” philosophy—and the controversy surrounding it—is likely to travel with her.

Paris Court Halts Sale of Blaise Pascal’s 17th-Century ‘First Calculator’

Sonia Pantiss
-
0
Paris Court Halts Sale of Blaise Pascal’s 17th-Century ‘First Calculator’

In a dramatic ruling just hours before bidding was set to begin, a Paris administrative court has ordered the suspension of the auction and export of one of the world’s most significant scientific artifacts: La Pascaline, the 17th-century mechanical calculating machine invented by philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal.

The stunning intervention by the court, which declared the 1642 device a likely “national treasure,” has scuttled the sale at Christie’s, where the ebony-inlaid machine was expected to fetch up to €3 million ($3.5 million). The decision represents a major victory for French scientists and cultural campaigners who fought to keep the dawn of modern computing within France’s public heritage.

The Battle for La Pascaline

Invented by Blaise Pascal at the age of just 19 to help his father, a tax collector, La Pascaline is recognized as the world’s first functioning mechanical calculator capable of addition and subtraction. Christie’s had billed the item as “the most important scientific instrument ever offered at auction,” describing it as “nothing less than the first attempt in history to substitute the work of a machine for that of the human mind.”

  • The Private Hand: The specific model slated for auction is particularly rare, as it is one of only nine known to exist and the only one believed to remain in private hands. The others are housed in major European museums, including five in French public collections.
  • The Legal Appeal: The court action was spurred by an urgent appeal from a group of eminent French scientists and academics, including Nobel laureates, who published an impassioned op-ed in Le Monde. They argued that the machine was a “shining symbol of French science and technology” and the very “origin of modern computing.”
  • The Culture Ministry’s Blunder: The campaigners accused the Culture Ministry of committing an “astounding blunder” after it had previously issued an export certificate in May, which would have allowed any international buyer to take the priceless artifact out of the country.

Export Blockade and Final Ruling

The Paris court’s provisional ruling effectively suspends that export authorization, stating that given the machine’s “historical and scientific value,” it is highly likely to be classified as a “national treasure” under French law.

This classification is the highest level of cultural protection, immediately barring the object from leaving the country and triggering a 30-month period during which the French government and its partners have the exclusive right to raise the necessary funds to purchase the artifact for a public collection.

Christie’s confirmed that, at the instruction of the consignor, the sale—part of an auction of the late collector Léon Parcé’s library—has been suspended pending the final judgment from the court, a process that could take several months.

The dramatic intervention reaffirms France’s commitment to safeguarding key artifacts of its scientific and intellectual legacy, ensuring that the world’s first computing machine remains accessible for study and exhibition within the nation where it was born.

Russia Recruits Ukrainian Teens on Telegram for Internal Sabotage

Roy Siemens
-
0
Russia Recruits Ukrainian Teens on Telegram for Internal Sabotage

KYIV, UKRAINE—A chilling and widespread network of Russian intelligence operatives is exploiting the financial desperation and digital naiveté of Ukrainian youth, recruiting teenagers through popular Telegram channels to commit acts of sabotage, espionage, and even terrorism against their own country.

Ukrainian law enforcement agencies confirm that hundreds of minors have been approached and, in a significant number of cases, successfully manipulated into carrying out tasks ranging from photographing military targets to setting fire to vehicles and planting explosive devices. This tactic marks a new and deeply unsettling phase in Russia’s hybrid warfare strategy, turning children into unwitting agents of destruction.

The Digital Pipeline: From Job Offer to Bomb Courier

The recruitment scheme is sophisticated and leverages the prevalence of the Telegram messaging app in Ukraine, where job-seeking channels are frequently used by young people. Russian handlers, often working through obscure and disposable accounts, operate on a three-phase psychological algorithm:

  1. Initial Contact: Recruiters establish a friendly rapport, offering what appears to be “easy and quick money” for simple tasks like distributing propaganda leaflets or scrawling anti-government graffiti. Payment is typically made in small amounts of cryptocurrency.
  2. Escalation: The tasks quickly escalate to high-risk felonies. Teenagers are asked to photograph air defense installations, military enlistment centers, or railway relay boxes, providing crucial reconnaissance for Russian missile strikes or future sabotage.
  3. The Deadly Act: The final stage involves ordering acts of direct violence, such as setting fire to vehicles used by the military or even planting explosive devices. The most alarming revelation from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) is the tactic of using some teens as unwitting suicide bombers, paid to carry a package containing an explosive that is then remotely detonated when the courier is near a police station or other sensitive site.

One 15-year-old in Kharkiv, seeking money for a part-time job, was eventually offered the equivalent of a thousand dollars to construct and place a remote-controlled explosive device near a police station.

A Quarter of Sabotage Cases Involve Minors

The numbers confirm the effectiveness of this devastating tactic. According to the SBU, roughly a quarter of the over 700 individuals detained for espionage and sabotage acts in the past year and a half have been Ukrainian youth under the age of 18.

  • Motivation: Investigators say the primary motivator is rarely ideology, but simple financial necessity or the desire for “easy money.” For teens from disadvantaged backgrounds, or those struggling with the emotional stress of the war, the promise of hundreds of dollars for a seemingly “simple” task proves tragically compelling.
  • Blackmail: Once teens have completed an initial illegal act, Russian handlers frequently use the photos or videos as leverage, blackmailing the minors into further compliance with threats to expose them as collaborators to Ukrainian authorities.
  • The Targets: The crimes target the heart of Ukraine’s defense infrastructure, including military vehicles purchased by volunteers, railway lines crucial for transporting Western aid, and military commissariats.

The National Police of Ukraine has launched extensive campaigns to educate parents and students, emphasizing two key messages: there is no such thing as “easy money” in a time of war, and it is never too late to contact law enforcement.

The case highlights the horrific evolution of warfare, where sophisticated state intelligence services are now exploiting basic social media dynamics and the vulnerability of minors to sow terror and instability deep within the enemy’s borders.

Trump Dismisses Khashoggi Murder, Vows Saudi Crown Prince ‘Knew Nothing’

Diane A. Wade
-
0
Trump Dismisses Khashoggi Murder, Vows Saudi Crown Prince ‘Knew Nothing’

In a stunning diplomatic exchange that flew in the face of U.S. intelligence assessments, President Donald Trump aggressively defended Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) over the 2018 assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, casually dismissing the brutal murder with the phrase, “things happen.”

The President’s remarks came on Tuesday during the Crown Prince’s first visit to the White House in seven years, where Mr. Trump lavished the de facto Saudi leader with praise, calling him a “very good friend” and an “incredible” force for progress, while effectively erasing the central controversy that has overshadowed U.S.-Saudi relations for years.

The Oval Office Confrontation

The controversial comments came in the Oval Office as Mr. Trump and MBS sat together for a meeting meant to showcase the newly fortified alliance. When an ABC News reporter directly asked the Crown Prince why Americans should trust him when U.S. intelligence concluded he approved the killing, the President instantly intervened.

  • The Defense: Mr. Trump immediately cut off the reporter, describing the late Washington Post columnist as “extremely controversial” and saying, “A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about. Whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen, but [Prince Mohammed] knew nothing about it.”
  • The Rebuke: The President then turned to the reporter and snapped, “We can leave it at that. You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that,” later calling the query a “horrible, insubordinate and just a terrible question.”

The President’s assertion that MBS “knew nothing about it” stands in direct opposition to a declassified 2021 U.S. intelligence report, which concluded that the Crown Prince “approved an operation in Istanbul, Turkey, to capture or kill” Khashoggi.

A Trillion-Dollar Embrace

The warm welcome and dismissal of the murder were seen by analysts as directly linked to a massive economic package announced during the visit.

  • Investment Pledge: The Crown Prince announced that Saudi Arabia would dramatically increase its planned investment in the U.S. to nearly $1 trillion, up from an initial $600 billion, focusing heavily on American infrastructure and technology sectors.
  • Military Deals: The visit also included discussions about highly sought-after U.S. defense sales, including the potential sale of F-35 stealth fighters and a framework deal for U.S. civilian nuclear cooperation.

In the Oval Office, Mr. Trump repeatedly praised the Crown Prince for the promised investment, saying, “What really counts is jobs, a lot of jobs, so I just want to thank you.”

MBS, for his part, called Khashoggi’s killing a “huge mistake” and “painful” but insisted that Saudi Arabia had taken all the “right steps” in its investigation and was committed to ensuring “that this doesn’t happen again.”

The President’s decision to downplay the assassination and contradict his own intelligence community’s findings confirms a complete strategic shift, prioritizing an economic and geopolitical partnership with the influential royal over traditional concerns regarding human rights and press freedom.

Maritime Mayhem: Inside the EU’s Battle Against Russia’s Shadow Fleet of Sanction-Busting Tankers

Clyde K. Valle
-
0
Maritime Mayhem: Inside the EU’s Battle Against Russia’s Shadow Fleet of Sanction-Busting Tankers

COPENHAGEN, DENMARK—The front line in Europe’s economic war with Russia is no longer confined to frozen bank accounts or border checkpoints. It is the open sea, where a vast, clandestine network of hundreds of aging, poorly insured oil tankers—dubbed the “shadow fleet”—is defying Western sanctions and carrying billions of dollars in Russian oil to global markets.

European coastal authorities, from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, are now engaged in a risky game of cat-and-mouse with this shadowy armada, whose unchecked operations pose a severe triple threat: sanctions evasion, hybrid security risk, and impending environmental catastrophe.

The Fleet: Old Ships, Obscure Owners

The Russian shadow fleet is a direct response to the G7 price cap and the EU’s embargo on seaborne Russian oil imports. To circumvent these restrictions, Moscow has rapidly amassed a fleet estimated to number between 600 and 1,400 vessels, primarily consisting of tankers well past their safe operational lifespan.

  • The Evasion Playbook: These ships operate by employing deceptive practices, often resorting to disabling their Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) to vanish from tracking, carrying falsified cargo documents, and conducting risky ship-to-ship (STS) transfers of oil in open waters, far from official ports.
  • Safety Time Bomb: The majority of these vessels lack proper Western insurance and are registered under dubious “flags of convenience” in jurisdictions with minimal oversight. Experts warn that the ships are highly prone to engine failure, collisions, and groundings, raising the specter of a major oil spill in European coastal waters or sensitive zones like the Danish Straits or the Bosphorus.

The Danish Straits and Europe’s Response

The most critical choke point for the shadow fleet is the narrow waterway connecting the Baltic Sea to the North Sea, through which dozens of these vessels pass daily.

The European Union has struggled to effectively police this network due to the legal complexity of international waters, but enforcement is escalating:

  • Expanded Sanctions: The EU’s 19th sanctions package, adopted in October, significantly expanded the blacklist to over 550 vessels in the shadow fleet. These sanctioned ships are banned from accessing EU ports and receiving any maritime services.
  • Boarding and Inspection Power: In a sharp escalation, the European External Action Service (EEAS) is moving forward with a proposal to grant member states the power to board and inspect vessels suspected of breaching sanctions or posing a clear maritime safety risk. France, Estonia, and Germany have already demonstrated a willingness to detain suspect tankers.
  • Hybrid Threat Concerns: Beyond oil, European intelligence has raised alarm that some shadow fleet vessels have been used to carry surveillance equipment, conduct hybrid attacks, or tamper with critical undersea infrastructure, such as communication cables and pipelines, further blurring the line between economic evasion and state-sponsored aggression.

As the shadow fleet continues to transport an estimated 70% of Russia’s seaborne oil exports, funding the Kremlin’s war machine, the confrontation on the high seas is set to intensify, placing immense pressure on coastal nations to choose between minimizing confrontation and upholding the integrity of the sanctions regime.

Epstein Files Expose Profound Rifts in the GOP—And The Unstoppable Power of Trump’s Base

Diane A. Wade
-
0
Epstein Files Expose Profound Rifts in the GOP—And The Unstoppable Power of Trump’s Base

The scandal surrounding Jeffrey Epstein has exploded from a murky legal matter into a devastating political weapon, shattering the illusion of Republican unity and creating open warfare between the White House and its most devoted grassroots activists.

The battle over forcing the release of the late financier’s Justice Department files has starkly exposed a growing schism: the populist, anti-establishment base, whose key demand is total transparency regarding elite corruption, versus the political establishment, including the President, who initially fought to keep the files locked away.

The Unthinkable Feud: Trump vs. Greene

The most high-profile sign of the fracture was the bitter, public feud between President Donald Trump and one of his staunchest allies, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.).

  • The Clash: Greene, a staunch advocate for releasing all Epstein-related documents, vocally criticized the White House’s initial opposition to the measure. This led the President to unleash a flurry of attacks, calling her a “ranting Lunatic” and a “traitor” and threatening to endorse a primary challenger.
  • The Base’s Demand: Greene and a small group of other populist Republicans, including Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), argued that the issue was not about politics, but about standing with victims and holding the “corrupt government accountable.” Greene, reflecting a sentiment shared by many “America First” followers, declared she was prioritizing “principle over politics” and did not “worship or serve Donald Trump.”
  • The Pivot: The sustained pressure from these vocal Republicans—backed by an overwhelming public demand for transparency—forced the White House to execute a sudden, stunning reversal. Mr. Trump abruptly changed course over the weekend, instructing Republicans to vote to release the files because his party had “nothing to hide,” effectively conceding to his own party’s populist wing.
Jeffrey Epstein files

A Smokescreen to Contain the Damage?

The reversal, however, was quickly met with skepticism from some of the Republicans who had forced the vote.

Representative Massie openly suggested that the President’s simultaneous order for the DOJ to launch a new, politically focused investigation into Epstein’s ties to Democrats—specifically naming former President Bill Clinton and others—might be an attempt to “prevent the release of the Epstein files” by declaring them part of an ongoing probe.

This line of argument reflects the core distrust within the MAGA base that the political establishment, regardless of party, is attempting to shield powerful “global elites” whose names might be in the files, a central theme of the populist movement.

The Power of the Populist Will

The final outcome—a near-unanimous vote in the House, and a Senate measure passed soon after, compelling the release of Justice Department records—serves as a crucial lesson in the new dynamics of the Republican party.

For a significant portion of Mr. Trump’s base, issues of perceived corruption and transparency, particularly surrounding the shadowy activities of the global elite, transcend even personal loyalty to the President. The crisis proved that when the base mobilizes around a cause it believes is fundamental, it can successfully force the hand of its own leader.

As the DOJ prepares to release millions of documents, the question remains whether the transparency the base demanded will ultimately heal the rifts or simply expose deeper fissures within the Republican coalition.

U.S. Military Escalates Caribbean Presence Amidst Venezuela Tensions

Roy Siemens
-
0
U.S. Military Escalates Caribbean Presence Amidst Venezuela Tensions

U.S. Military Escalates Caribbean Presence Amidst Venezuela Tensions

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — A significant expansion of American military might is underway in the Caribbean, transforming the strategic waters into a stage for a potent display of force that, while officially framed as an intensified war on drugs, is widely perceived as a thinly veiled pressure campaign against Venezuela. The deployment of advanced naval and air assets, including a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and stealth fighter jets, signals a palpable escalation of U.S. intentions in a region already grappling with political instability and economic crises.

The Trump administration has publicly asserted that this formidable military buildup is a critical component of its ongoing efforts to combat illicit drug trafficking. This narrative gained particular traction following a recent incident in which U.S. forces conducted their 20th strike on an alleged drug boat in the Caribbean Sea, an operation that tragically resulted in the deaths of four individuals. Such interdictions underscore the operational tempo and lethal capability now being brought to bear in these waters.

However, the scale and nature of the deployment suggest objectives extending beyond traditional counter-narcotics operations, particularly given the White House’s persistent calls for regime change in Venezuela.

A Provocative Display of Power

New imagery from the Pentagon vividly illustrates the magnitude of the current deployment: a B-52 long-range bomber, a symbol of American strategic reach, soaring over the USS Gerald R. Ford, the Navy’s newest and most advanced aircraft carrier. The Ford, a colossal vessel capable of launching and recovering a vast array of aircraft, is now steaming towards the Caribbean, accompanied by a formidable flotilla of warships. This naval strike group is further bolstered by F-35 stealth fighter jets, already operational in the area, flying out of a reactivated airfield in Puerto Rico.

This concentration of high-value military assets represents a potent signal, unmistakably "a provocative display of American military power that is now being staged against Venezuela," as one observer noted. The deployment of such advanced capabilities — from long-range bombers to stealth fighters and a supercarrier — far exceeds the typical requirements for interdicting small drug vessels. It strongly implies a readiness for broader contingency operations, including potential military action against the Maduro regime.

Puerto Rico’s Strategic Revival

Central to this burgeoning military footprint is the strategic revival of Roosevelt Roads Naval Station in Puerto Rico. Once a sprawling naval base that served as a crucial hub during World War II and the Cold War, Roosevelt Roads was largely shut down more than two decades ago. Now, it is buzzing with activity once more, serving as one of five key locations where U.S. forces are operating on American territory, strategically positioned just north of Venezuela.

The reactivation of Roosevelt Roads, particularly as a base for F-35 stealth fighters, signifies its renewed importance as a forward operating location. These fifth-generation aircraft, renowned for their advanced sensing capabilities and low observable profiles, are ideal for reconnaissance, air superiority, and precision strike missions, capabilities that are highly relevant in a potential conflict scenario.

For the residents of Ceiba, the town adjacent to the base, the return of military operations has been a jarring experience. Samuel Rivera Bayz, the mayor of Ceiba, acknowledged the immediate impact. "The F-35s wake us up in the morning," he told CBS News, reflecting the undeniable presence of the military’s renewed operations.

The sentiment among the local population is complex, a blend of unease and a sense of security. Damen Leyon, a local resident, articulated a common anxiety, stating, "I feel tense, kind of anxious, uh, not knowing what’s going to happen, uh, maybe an attack of someone close." This apprehension is understandable, as the island’s proximity to Venezuela and its status as a U.S. territory could potentially draw it into any direct conflict.

Yet, Mayor Rivera Bayz also conveyed a contrasting perspective, one rooted in a pragmatic assessment of U.S. global power. "Right now, the United States is the most powerful in the world," he asserted. "Having them here taking care of us, we feel more than safe." This duality reflects the island’s unique relationship with the mainland, where concerns about sovereignty and the economic impact of military presence often coexist with an appreciation for the security guarantees it provides. For a territory that has faced significant economic hardship and the devastating impact of natural disasters, the perceived protection offered by the world’s most powerful military can be a comforting assurance.

The Venezuelan Standoff

The stated target of this pressure, Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro, remains defiant. The U.S. has long sought his removal from power, citing allegations of widespread corruption, human rights abuses, and, critically, alleged ties to international drug cartels. The current military posture in the Caribbean directly aligns with the Trump administration’s "maximum pressure" campaign against Caracas, which has included severe economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation.

As U.S. forces conduct live-fire exercises in the region, a clear demonstration of their operational readiness, President Maduro has vociferously condemned what he describes as "threats of an invasion." In a televised address, he rallied his supporters with a stark warning: "Raise your hand if you want Venezuela to become a Yankee colony," a powerful rhetorical appeal to national pride and historical grievances against perceived foreign intervention.

This rhetoric resonates deeply within Venezuela, where memories of past U.S. interventions in Latin America fuel suspicions of Washington’s true intentions. Maduro’s government views the U.S. military buildup not as a counter-narcotics effort but as a direct threat to its sovereignty, an attempt to impose a U.S.-backed leadership.

Beyond the Horizon: Implications and Uncertainties

The deployment of such formidable military assets, ostensibly for counter-narcotics operations but clearly positioned against Venezuela, creates a volatile dynamic in the Caribbean. The distinction between a "war on drugs" and a "show of force" against a sovereign nation becomes increasingly blurred, raising questions about international law and regional stability.

The international community watches with a mixture of apprehension and scrutiny. While many nations share concerns about the Maduro regime’s authoritarianism and its role in regional destabilization, the prospect of military intervention, even under the guise of counter-narcotics, carries significant risks. It could further destabilize an already fragile region, potentially leading to a humanitarian crisis of even greater magnitude and drawing in other international actors.

For now, the USS Gerald R. Ford and its accompanying battle group, along with the F-35s roaring over Puerto Rico, represent a powerful, undeniable presence. The immediate future of Venezuela, and indeed the broader Caribbean, remains tethered to the evolving objectives behind this formidable American military posture. Whether it ultimately leads to intensified drug interdictions, a diplomatic breakthrough, or a more direct confrontation remains an open, and deeply concerning, question.

Pope Leo XIV Hosts Hollywood A-Listers, Urging Them to Confront the ‘World’s Wounds’

Sonia Pantiss
-
0
Pope Leo XIV Hosts Hollywood A-Listers, Urging Them to Confront the ‘World’s Wounds’

VATICAN CITY, VATICAN—In a grand gesture meant to bridge the gap between faith and secular art, Pope Leo XIV welcomed a star-studded gathering of Hollywood and international cinema luminaries to the Vatican on Saturday, urging the actors and filmmakers to use their craft as a “vehicle of hope” and a tool for challenging global injustice.

The special audience, held in the frescoed Clementine Hall, saw the first American-born Pope greet dozens of major figures, including Cate Blanchett, Spike Lee, Greta Gerwig, and Viggo Mortensen, solidifying the Holy See’s desire to actively engage with the world of culture.

A Pope Who Grew Up With Hollywood

The atmosphere was electric as Pope Leo XIV, known for his down-to-earth style and Chicago roots, admitted the significance of the meeting, acknowledging that he “grew up in the heyday of Hollywood.” Earlier in the week, the Vatican had even revealed his four favorite films: It’s a Wonderful Life, The Sound of Music, Ordinary People, and Life Is Beautiful.

In his address, Pope Leo XIV praised cinema as “a popular art in the noblest sense,” and challenged the gathered artists to embrace a higher purpose:

“When cinema is authentic, it does not merely console, but challenges… It articulates the questions that dwell within us, and sometimes, even provokes tears that we didn’t know we needed to shed.”

The Pontiff specifically urged them not to shy away from difficult subjects: “Do not be afraid to confront the world’s wounds. Violence, poverty, exile, loneliness, addiction and forgotten wars are issues that need to be acknowledged and narrated.”

Pope Leo XIV meets with Spike Lee during an audience with and stars directors from the cinema at the Vatican, Saturday, Nov. 15, 2025. (Vatican Media Via AP)

Celebrity Awe and A Knicks Jersey

The stars, many visibly awestruck by the setting and the Pontiff, waited nearly an hour after the speech to meet and exchange greetings with Pope Leo XIV, who took time to chat amiably with each participant—a rare move for large audiences.

  • Cate Blanchett, an Australian actress who works with the UN refugee agency, praised the Pope’s message: “Filmmaking is about entertainment, but it’s about including voices that are often marginalized and not shy away from the pain and complexity that we’re all living through right now.”
  • Spike Lee, a die-hard New York Knicks fan, presented the Chicago-born Pope with a custom Knicks jersey bearing the number 14 and the name “Pope Leo” on the back. The director explained that the number referenced the Pope’s regnal name, Leo XIV.
  • Director Gus Van Sant simply said he liked the Pope’s “vibe,” noting his defense of “slow cinema” and his call not to see the moving image “just in terms of algorithms.”

Defending the Fading Cinema

Drawing strong applause, the Pope also took a moment to deliver a “love letter” to the ailing film industry, warning that “cinemas are experiencing a troubling decline” as local theaters disappear from neighborhoods.

“I urge institutions not to give up, but to co-operate in affirming the social and cultural value of this activity,” he said, emphasizing that “sitting in the dark with strangers” is a unique way for people to reconnect to what unites them.

The star-studded event, organized by the Vatican’s culture ministry, successfully brought the spiritual and secular worlds together, sending a clear message that the Catholic Church views cinema not just as entertainment, but as a crucial force for promoting human values.

US Greenlights and Backs South Korea’s Nuclear Attack Submarine Program

Roy Siemens
-
0
US Greenlights and Backs South Korea’s Nuclear Attack Submarine Program

SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA—The United States has given its final, unprecedented approval for South Korea to construct nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs), agreeing to provide crucial technological assistance and cooperation on fuel sourcing in a deal that fundamentally shifts the military balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.

The historic commitment, which elevates South Korea to an elite group of nations possessing nuclear-propelled naval capabilities, was finalized as part of a sweeping trade and security agreement between U.S. President Donald Trump and South Korean President Lee Jae-myung. The move is a clear strategic signal aimed at increasing deterrence against North Korea and bolstering the regional posture against an expansionist China.

A Decades-Old Dream Realized

For South Korea, the agreement delivers on a long-sought military ambition. Unlike conventional diesel-electric boats, nuclear-powered attack submarines can operate submerged for months at a time, providing unparalleled stealth and endurance critical for tracking North Korea’s missile submarine fleet and projecting influence across the region.

The White House, in a joint fact sheet released Friday, confirmed the explicit approval: “The U.S. has approved for the Republic of Korea to build nuclear-powered attack submarines. The U.S. will work closely with South Korea to advance requirements for this shipbuilding project, including avenues to source fuel.”

  • Fuel Cooperation: Securing the necessary enriched uranium for the submarine reactors has been the central obstacle for Seoul. The U.S. has now committed to cooperating on fuel supply and supports a process that could lead to South Korea’s civil uranium enrichment for peaceful uses, albeit under strict non-proliferation safeguards and U.S. legal requirements.
  • Building Location Debate: The agreement has seen some initial public confusion over where the vessels will be constructed. While President Trump initially suggested on social media that they would be built in U.S. facilities—namely the South Korean-owned Hanwha Philly Shipyard—South Korean officials later clarified that the vessels are intended to be built domestically in South Korean shipyards, with U.S. technical assistance.

The Trade-Off: $350 Billion Investment

The military concession is inextricably linked to a massive economic package benefitting the American economy, a key feature of President Trump’s “America First” foreign policy.

In exchange for the nuclear submarine green light and a reduction of U.S. tariffs on South Korean goods (from 25% down to 15%), South Korea has pledged a staggering $350 billion in investments in the United States. This includes:

  • $150 Billion into the U.S. shipbuilding sector.
  • $200 Billion for investment into other strategic sectors under a Memorandum of Understanding.

The overall agreement also sees South Korea pledge to significantly increase its defense spending and purchase an additional $25 billion in U.S. military equipment by 2030, reinforcing the mutual defense alliance.

🇨🇳 Regional Repercussions and Proliferation Risks

The U.S. decision, which echoes the AUKUS deal with Australia, has already drawn sharp warnings from Beijing. China’s ambassador to South Korea voiced serious concern, stating the issue is directly related to the international nuclear non-proliferation regime and could impact regional stability.

For South Korea, the focus on nuclear propulsion technology comes with heightened scrutiny. Non-proliferation watchdogs are monitoring the deal closely, given the technology’s proximity to weapons-grade capabilities, though the agreement specifies non-weapon uses and includes U.S. oversight on fuel cycles.

Ultimately, the pact signals Washington’s deep commitment to an integrated defense strategy in the Pacific, providing Seoul with a vital strategic asset while simultaneously leveraging its defense goals to secure massive U.S. industrial investment.

The Black Book Files: A Deep Dive into the High-Profile Names Unsealed in Jeffrey Epstein’s Documents

James J. Williams
-
0
The Black Book Files: A Deep Dive into the High-Profile Names Unsealed in Jeffrey Epstein’s Documents

The full, explosive extent of Jeffrey Epstein’s powerful social orbit has been laid bare following the release of thousands of court documents and emails from the late financier’s estate, connecting the convicted sex offender to a dizzying array of global politicians, celebrities, and business titans.

While much of the media focus has centered on the contradictory claims involving President Donald Trump, the sprawling files—released by the U.S. House Oversight Committee—shine a harsh light on the many prominent figures who maintained contact with Epstein even after his 2008 conviction.

The Political and Royal Connections

The documents, which include emails, depositions from Epstein’s victims, and internal communications, contain references and accusations related to some of the world’s most recognizable figures:

  • Prince Andrew: The former British royal faced a devastating blow with the release of a 2011 email from Epstein to a journalist. In the exchange, Epstein appears to confirm the authenticity of the infamous photograph showing Andrew with accuser Virginia Giuffre, stating: “Yes, she was on my plane, and yes she had her photo taken with Andrew.” This directly contradicts Andrew’s public claim of having “no memory” of meeting Ms. Giuffre, intensifying the controversy that recently led the King to strip him of his remaining titles.
  • Former President Bill Clinton: Mr. Clinton’s name appears repeatedly, partly because he flew on Epstein’s private jet multiple times in the early 2000s, often in connection with the Clinton Foundation’s work. In a deposition, one of Epstein’s victims recounted an alleged quote from Epstein, who said “Clinton likes them young”—a claim the former President’s team has vehemently denied, stating he had no knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activities.
  • Larry Summers: The former U.S. Treasury Secretary and Harvard University President is mentioned in an email exchange where Epstein disparaged both him and President Trump, showing Epstein’s continued correspondence with powerful figures years after his initial plea deal.

The Celebrity and Academic Orbit

The unsealed records detail the breadth of Epstein’s contacts and the celebrities who spent time at his residences, often with the financier’s victims present:

  • Michael Jackson: In a 2016 deposition, one of Epstein’s victims, Johanna Sjoberg, testified that she met the late musician Michael Jackson at Epstein’s Palm Beach home. She confirmed she did not massage Jackson and did not accuse him of any wrongdoing.
  • David Copperfield: Ms. Sjoberg also testified that she had dinner with the famed magician at one of Epstein’s residences, where he performed magic tricks. Copperfield is not accused of misconduct.
  • Alan Dershowitz: The prominent Harvard Law professor and former Epstein attorney is named throughout the documents, particularly in connection with the lawsuit filed by Ms. Giuffre, who had previously accused him of abuse. Dershowitz has always denied the claims, and Giuffre later withdrew her accusation against him, saying she “may have made a mistake.”
  • Michael Wolff: The author of several books on the Trump administration exchanged emails with Epstein in 2015 and 2019, discussing the potential political fallout from Epstein’s connection to the then-presidential candidate.

The Critical Caveat

Crucially, the sheer volume of names mentioned in the documents and depositions has led to widespread misinterpretation. The inclusion of a name does not mean the individual participated in or was aware of Epstein’s illicit activities. Many are named as employees, social acquaintances, or as people who were simply mentioned in passing by victims or associates.

Nonetheless, the release underscores a fundamental truth about the Epstein case: the massive network of wealth, power, and influence that enabled the disgraced financier to operate his criminal enterprise with impunity for decades.

Trump Declares War on Marjorie Taylor Greene, Vows to Back Primary Challenger

Nancy Clayson
-
0
Trump Declares War on Marjorie Taylor Greene, Vows to Back Primary Challenger

WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA—The “Make America Great Again” movement is fracturing in spectacular fashion as President Donald Trump publicly severed ties with one of his most fervent and longtime allies, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, denouncing the Georgia Republican as a “ranting Lunatic” and vowing to endorse a primary challenger in her district.

The explosive public feud, which escalated over the weekend, marks the most significant political rupture of Mr. Trump’s second term, creating deep fissures within the GOP base and underscoring the President’s zero-tolerance policy for dissent.

The Spark: Epstein Files and ‘America First’

The tension between the two leaders, which had been simmering for months over issues ranging from foreign policy to healthcare, burst into the open primarily over the push to release government-held documents related to the late convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein.

  • The Accusation: After Mr. Trump announced on his social media platform late Friday that he was withdrawing his support and endorsement, Greene fired back, asserting that the President was “lying about me” and that her insistence on releasing the Epstein files was “what sent him over the edge.” She is one of the few Republicans to sign on to a discharge petition to force a vote on the release of the documents.
  • The Focus: Greene has also publicly criticized Mr. Trump for what she sees as a drift from his core “America First” principles, arguing that his administration is focusing too heavily on foreign affairs and not enough on issues like soaring domestic costs and the expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies.
  • The Name-Calling: Mr. Trump, in a flurry of posts, lashed out at Greene, calling her “‘Wacky’ Marjorie” and accusing her of having “gone Far Left,” citing her recent critiques of Republican leaders during the government shutdown and her appearance on the daytime talk show The View. He debuted a new nickname on Saturday, referring to her as “Marjorie Taylor Brown,” stating “Green grass turns Brown when it begins to ROT!”

A Threat to the Movement

The political breakup is being viewed by many analysts as a watershed moment for the MAGA movement, signaling that no Republican—no matter how loyal their past support—is safe from the President’s personal wrath.

Mr. Trump confirmed on Friday that he has been contacted by “wonderful, Conservative people” interested in challenging Greene, adding, “If the right person runs, they will have my Complete and Unyielding Support.”

Greene, who has devoted immense time and money to supporting Mr. Trump, made it clear that she is not backing down.

“I have supported President Trump with too much of my precious time, too much of my own money, and fought harder for him even when almost all other Republicans turned their back and denounced him,” she wrote. “But I don’t worship or serve Donald Trump.”

The Congresswoman later claimed she was receiving warnings for her safety and squarely blamed the President’s rhetoric for fueling “a hot bed of threats against me.”

With primary season for the next midterms approaching, the battle between the former allies threatens to create a highly volatile, expensive, and damaging intra-party war in one of the most visible Republican districts in the country.

Trump Rolls Back Tariffs on Coffee, Beef, and Tropical Fruit to Tame Soaring Grocery Bills

Clyde K. Valle
-
0
Trump Rolls Back Tariffs on Coffee, Beef, and Tropical Fruit to Tame Soaring Grocery Bills

In a significant and sudden shift in economic policy, the Trump administration announced late Friday that it is rolling back its “reciprocal” tariffs on dozens of imported food and agricultural products, acknowledging the intense public pressure over spiraling grocery bills that have vexed American consumers.

The move, formalized through an executive order, will immediately lift levies on hundreds of common items, including coffee, tropical fruits like bananas and avocados, spices, and certain cuts of beef, in a direct attempt to ease the mounting cost-of-living crisis.

The Consumer Revolt Forces a Policy U-Turn

The decision marks a dramatic, if politically necessary, retreat from one of President Trump’s core economic pillars: the use of broad, universal tariffs to force reciprocal trade deals. The tariffs, implemented earlier this year, were designed to counter what the administration termed “unfair” trade deficits but have been blamed by economists for contributing to domestic inflation.

  • Inflationary Pressure: A recent analysis from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis estimated that the tariffs imposed this year have added as much as 0.5 percentage points to the nation’s headline inflation rate. Businesses, who pay the tariffs at the border, have passed on a substantial portion of these costs to consumers.
  • Political Context: The rollback comes less than two weeks after Democrats achieved notable success in off-year elections, focusing their campaigns heavily on issues of affordability and the high price of everyday goods. The White House has faced increasing pressure from within its own party to address the visible signs of economic anxiety felt by voters at the supermarket checkout.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had signaled the change earlier this week, telling reporters that the administration would be making “substantial” announcements on tariff exemptions for “things we don’t grow here,” specifically naming coffee and bananas, with the goal of bringing prices down “very quickly.”

The Details: What Gets Exemption?

The new executive order exempts a broad range of products from the “reciprocal tariffs” that were imposed on most U.S. trading partners in April. The tariff relief applies to goods from both countries that have recently secured trade deals with the administration (like Argentina, Guatemala, and Ecuador) and those that have not.

Key products exempted from the duties include:

  • Beverages: Coffee and cocoa beans.
  • Fruits and Produce: Bananas, pineapples, avocados, and citrus fruits.
  • Proteins: Certain grades of imported beef (including Argentinian beef, a politically sensitive concession to a new trade partner).
  • Spices and Herbs: A wide array of spices used in food preparation.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer defended the initial use of the tariffs as “incredibly successful” on a macro level, but acknowledged that the tariffs on goods produced almost entirely abroad—where there is no domestic industry to protect—were not necessary for leverage.

The tariff exemptions are effective immediately and retroactively to Thursday.

Rift with Ranchers

The most controversial element of the rollback involves beef. The plan to lower tariffs and potentially expand imports of beef, especially from Argentina, has caused a rift with a critical Republican constituency: American ranchers.

Domestic cattle producers argue that allowing an influx of cheaper foreign beef undermines the administration’s own stated goal of boosting domestic production and threatens the profitability of U.S. family farms. A senior administration official, however, argued that opening up trade with newly aligned partners would ultimately have a positive effect on consumer prices, providing much-needed relief to struggling household budgets.

While the full economic impact remains to be seen, the decision marks a rare, public recalibration of the President’s aggressive trade strategy in response to the political realities of American households squeezed by the rising cost of putting food on the table.

Trump Orders DOJ to Investigate Epstein’s Ties to Clinton and Banks

Diane A. Wade
-
0
Trump Orders DOJ to Investigate Epstein’s Ties to Clinton and Banks

In a highly unusual and politically charged move, President Donald Trump has formally directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI to initiate an investigation into the deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged ties to prominent Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton, and major financial institutions like JPMorgan Chase.

The order, issued late Friday, represents an extraordinary step by a sitting President to use the federal law enforcement apparatus to pursue political adversaries, and it came just hours after a fresh release of congressional documents renewed focus on Mr. Trump’s own past relationship with the late financier.

The Target: Democrats and Financial Institutions

President Trump’s directive, delivered via a social media post, accused Democrats of orchestrating a “hoax” to distract from the recent government shutdown and divert attention from the newly public documents concerning Epstein.

Attorney General Pam Bondi quickly acceded to the President’s demand, announcing that she had assigned Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, to lead the investigation.

The specific figures and institutions named for federal scrutiny include:

  • Former President Bill Clinton: Who socialized with Epstein and traveled on his private jet multiple times in the early 2000s.
  • Larry Summers: Former Treasury Secretary and Harvard President.
  • Reid Hoffman: LinkedIn founder and a prominent Democratic donor.
  • JPMorgan Chase: Which was Epstein’s primary bank between 1998 and 2013 and recently paid $290 million to settle a class-action lawsuit filed by Epstein’s survivors.

Mr. Trump insisted the investigation should determine “what was going on with them, and him,” and called the matter “another Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, with all arrows pointing to the Democrats.”

Exclusive by James Beal, US Editor, and Dan Bates – with pictures, , PLEASE LEGAL, , GRINNING Ghislaine Maxwell watches as Jeffrey Epstein and US President Bill Clinton shake hands during a tour of the White House – in extraordinary photographs obtained by The Sun., , The never-before-seen images – which show how the British heiress worked her way into the seat of world power – can be published for the first time, ahead of her child grooming trial., , Before the case comes to court, Maxwell’s family have launched a website featuring a glowing biography of the socialite, highlighting her ‘achievements’ after moving to the US in 1990., , But there’s no mention of the swanky White House bash just three years later – where she and her paedophile ex-lover were VIP guests of the Leader of the Free World., , The Sun can reveal how they were given a tour of Clinton’s residence quarters and the famous East Room, after Epstein gave £7,280 to the refurbishment of the Oval Office.

Erosion of Independence

The decision by the Attorney General to immediately launch a probe at the specific request of the President drew immediate criticism from legal experts and Democrats, who warned it represented a severe breach of the DOJ’s longstanding tradition of apolitical independence.

The move is also in direct contrast to a July 2025 memo from the Justice Department and FBI, which stated that a comprehensive review of the Epstein files found no credible evidence that warranted an investigation into any uncharged third parties.

The President’s order was viewed by critics as a clear attempt to shift the narrative and deflect from the thousands of documents released this week by the House Oversight Committee. Those documents included an email written by Epstein in which he claimed that Mr. Trump knew about his sexual abuse of underage girls but never participated—a claim the President vehemently denies.

Meanwhile, JPMorgan Chase, which settled with Epstein’s victims last year, released a statement saying the bank regrets its association with the man but did not help him commit his “heinous acts.”

The newly ordered probe ensures the Epstein saga will continue to consume federal resources and dominate the political landscape as the nation awaits the results of an investigation initiated at the highest level of the executive branch.

Record Settler Violence in West Bank Triggers Open War Between Israeli Military and Government Hardliners

Roy Siemens
-
0
Record Settler Violence in West Bank Triggers Open War Between Israeli Military and Government Hardliners

JERUSALEM, ISRAEL—The surge in violence perpetrated by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank has reached unprecedented levels in 2025, not only devastating Palestinian communities but also tearing open a highly visible, painful rift within Israel’s own governing establishment.

The confrontation has pitted the country’s top military commanders and ceremonial President against far-right ministers in the governing coalition, who are widely viewed as enabling and sometimes outright encouraging the attacks.

The Data: A Year of Unprecedented Attacks

The surge in violence has been starkly documented by international observers. Data from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) indicates that 2025 is on track to be the most violent year on record for settler attacks since tracking began in 2006.

  • Record Incidents: In October 2025 alone, OCHA documented 264 violent incidents, the highest monthly total ever recorded, coinciding with the sensitive olive harvest season.
  • Targeting and Terror: The attacks—which include uprooting thousands of olive trees, burning homes and vehicles, and direct physical assaults—are concentrated in Area C of the West Bank, often intended to seize Palestinian agricultural land and displace residents.

In the most brazen acts, settlers have been filmed attacking Palestinians, human rights activists, and even clashing with the soldiers dispatched to control them.

The Military vs. The Ministers

The military, whose primary mission is to maintain security, is now openly struggling against a domestic “anarchist fringe” that directly undermines its operations and diverts crucial resources.

  • IDF’s Condemnation: In a rare public censure, the head of the Central Command, Maj. Gen. Avi Bluth, denounced the settlers’ actions, calling the situation “unacceptable” and stating that the violence committed by a “minority of criminals… divert the attention of our forces from fulfilling their mission.”
  • The Graffiti Response: The gravity of the split was illustrated by an attack this week on a mosque in Deir Istiya. Settlers torched parts of the building and scrawled graffiti in Hebrew, including messages that referenced Gen. Bluth’s comments, such as “We are not afraid of Avi Bluth” and “Keep on condemning,” displaying open defiance toward the military chain of command.
  • President Herzog’s Plea: In a move considered rare for his largely ceremonial role, President Isaac Herzog forcefully condemned the attacks, calling the violence “shocking and serious” and stating that the perpetrators “cross a red line” that demands decisive action from all state authorities.

Government Protection and Impunity

The condemnation from the military brass and President Herzog is being openly challenged by two powerful figures in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government: Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

Both ministers are prominent proponents of the settler movement, and critics—including human rights organizations—accuse the Israeli police and military of consistently failing to hold the perpetrators of these attacks accountable, fostering an environment of near-total impunity.

The lack of political will from the Prime Minister’s Office to definitively curb the attacks has created a situation where the political wing of the government appears to be at odds with the military’s operational and moral priorities.

As the violence continues, the internal Israeli crisis raises profound questions about the government’s ability to maintain law and order and control the actions of a militant fringe that is increasingly challenging the state’s authority and damaging Israel’s international standing.

End of the OxyContin Empire: Judge Clears $7.4 Billion Purdue Pharma Opioid Settlement

Kathryn R. Bown
-
0
End of the OxyContin Empire: Judge Clears $7.4 Billion Purdue Pharma Opioid Settlement

A federal bankruptcy judge on Friday officially approved the latest, and likely final, settlement for OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma and its owners, the Sackler family, requiring them to pay up to $7.4 billion to resolve thousands of lawsuits over the company’s central role in fueling the U.S. opioid epidemic.

The ruling by Judge Sean Lane of the Southern District of New York marks a pivotal, if painful, close to one of the most complex corporate bankruptcy sagas in U.S. history, paving the way for billions of dollars to finally flow to states, local governments, and individual victims.

The Cost of Accountability

The $7.4 billion agreement is a revised plan, crafted after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a previous deal that would have granted the Sackler family blanket immunity from future civil lawsuits. The new plan offers less protection to the Sacklers, making it more palatable to a vast majority of creditors.

The settlement is structured around several critical components:

  • Sackler Contribution: Members of the wealthy Sackler family will contribute a massive $6.5 billion to $7 billion of their personal fortune over 15 years, starting with a $1.5 billion initial payment upon the plan’s effective date. The family members will officially relinquish ownership and control of Purdue Pharma.
  • Purdue’s Role: Purdue Pharma will pay an additional $900 million upfront.
  • Victim Compensation: A pool of up to $865 million has been set aside specifically for individual victims of the opioid crisis, with lawyers estimating that individuals who received long-term prescriptions for Purdue’s opioids could receive around $16,000 before legal fees.
  • The New Entity: Purdue Pharma will be converted into a new, independent non-profit entity named Knoa Pharma. This new company will focus on developing and distributing opioid overdose reversal and addiction treatment medications, with all future profits dedicated to addressing the opioid crisis. The Sackler family will have no role in this new entity.

A New Precedent for Civil Liability

A core distinction of this approved plan is the greater scope it allows for victims to pursue the Sacklers personally. Entities and individuals who choose not to opt into the settlement will retain the right to sue members of the Sackler family, a crucial concession made after the Supreme Court’s prior rejection of the deal.

However, the vast majority of creditors—including attorneys general from all 55 eligible U.S. states and territories—supported the revised plan, arguing that while it doesn’t deliver criminal accountability, it represents the best and fastest way to get urgently needed funding to communities devastated by the crisis.

“The plan is entirely lawful, does the greatest good for the greatest number in the shortest available timeframe,” argued Marshall Huebner, a lawyer for Purdue, acknowledging that no amount of money could truly compensate for the human toll of the epidemic.

The Non-Financial Mandates

Beyond the cash payout, the settlement imposes several non-financial mandates that close the book on the Sackler family’s influence:

  • Opioid Ban: Sackler family members are permanently barred from involvement in any company that sells opioids anywhere in the world.
  • Naming Ban: They are also barred from having their names added to institutions in exchange for charitable contributions.
  • Public Document Library: The settlement creates a public repository of internal company documents—larger than the entire tobacco industry repository—to make available millions of documents related to Purdue’s historical sales and marketing practices, providing transparency to a decades-long tragedy.

Judge Lane is expected to release the full, detailed written opinion of his decision on Tuesday. While the saga is legally complex, the approval marks a monumental shift of resources toward abatement efforts for the opioid crisis, which has been linked to nearly 900,000 deaths in the U.S. since 1999.

123...1,237Page 2 of 1,237