Zero Rss

Moscow Warns It Could Target British Military Facilities In Unprecedented Statement

From the very start of the Ukraine war, the United Kingdom has consistently been among Kiev's most open and ardent military supporters, time and again transferring heavy weaponry, including cutting edge long-range missiles like the Storm Shadow.

At the start of this week, Britain announced it plans to provide Ukraine with classified technology to allow for the country's own manufacturing of the British/French-designed SCALP air-launched cruise missile (which in the UK is known as the Storm Shadow). The allies expect to set up a production line in Ukraine as soon as year's end.

Getty Images

Already, Ukraine has used its domestic-made and designed Neptune cruise missile to strike oil refineries and military sites deep inside Russian territory. A domestic-made SCALP would present the likelihood of Ukraine then using this Western-designed missile to directly attack Russia, which only increases the chances of an eventual Moscow-NATO clash. Ukrainian forces already appeared to have used the missile on Donetsk and other locations closer to front lines in the Donbass.

On Thursday the Kremlin has issued one of its strongest warnings and threats aimed at London to date, accusing the UK of "fully taking part in the war on Kiev's side" - and thus thwarting any chance of peace talks while adding fuel to the fire.

Moscow is now saying that the UK's own military facilities could become fair game for direct attacks.

Kremlin spokesperson Maria Zakharova said in a Thursday press briefing, "We have repeatedly warned that the response to Ukrainian strikes using British weapons against Russian territory could be directed against any British military facilities and equipment in Ukraine and beyond."

Zakharova urged "all residents of the United Kingdom to think about the inevitable, catastrophic consequences of the hostile steps taken by their own authorities." She also laid out:

"We propose that the British leadership once again carefully analyze the situation and immediately, in the most resolute and unequivocal manner, abandon the hostile, aggressive line, which can only... create the risk of the conflict escalating to an entirely new level."

Ironically this comes just on the heels of a rare visit of the CIA Director to Moscow. US officials claim the Tuesday meeting between John Ratcliffe and top Kremlin intelligence officials was to convey a warning to President Putin to not attack any NATO member. However, many analysts are skeptical that this was the official reason.

Russia could target British military facilities in Ukraine and beyond in response to Ukrainian strikes using British weapons - MFA spox pic.twitter.com/JRrPaRipUX

— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) August 27, 2026

Zakharova further said on Thursday that Britain and France were "playing ⁠with ​fire" after years of escalating their involvement in Ukraine.

But London appears unmoved, with a UK Ministry of Defence official responding on Thursday as follows: "Britain stands shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine and we are committed to providing the equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself against Putin’s illegal invasion. Russia should be in no doubt about the resolve of this government to stand against Russian aggression, in Ukraine and against the UK and our allies," the official stated.

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 06:45

WHO's High-Price Pandemic Plan

Authored by David Bell and Ramesh Thakur via Brownstone Institute,

The recent release of Anthony Fauci's diaries, followed by his refusal to answer questions in an appearance before a US Senate committee by invoking the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination 111 times, highlighted a stark divide in how the Covid pandemic was handled by public health authorities. This is as true of Australia as of the US.

Repeatedly, against certainty expressed in public to justify official statements on the origins of the virus and on lockdown, mask, and vaccine policies, their private contemporaneous conversations confirm that even the top scientists were making decisions based on scientific uncertainty.

Consequently, one of the key legacies of the public-private gap is growing distrust of official claims. That scepticism should extend to the future pandemic agenda. We rely on the World Health Organisation to coordinate among countries to prevent scourges such as pandemics reaching our shores, or at least mitigate their effects. In doing so, we must defer to an army of international bureaucrats who work in such institutions. A deference that relies on trust.

Their salaries and careers depend on convincing us to part with more of our money to support their work. Yet, according to a new article on international pandemic financing in the Cambridge journal Health Economics, Policy and Law, the WHO and World Bank rely on dubious assumptions to calculate the return on investment case on which all major international efforts to mitigate future pandemics rely.

This should alarm governments. Mitigation is worth investing in, as pandemics will occur from time to time. But the article shows that current investments will have an overall detrimental effect on global health. Most starkly, it suggests a deep rot in the quality of institutions we rely on as stewards of this commonly accepted global good.

The WHO and World Bank report, produced at the request of the G20 in 2022, proposes an annual $31.1 billion budget for pandemic preparedness and prevention, about $10.5 billion of which would come through foreign aid (including Australia). About $26 billion would come from low and middle-income countries already struggling with economic issues including burgeoning Covid debt. For context, the entire WHO budget for 2024-25 was just $3.8 billion a year.

The point of the WHO and World Bank's argument is that if we spend such resources on preparing for pandemics, we will reap orders of magnitude greater return on investment down the road, more than a thousandfold in some wealthy countries - a bargain difficult to refuse if true.

The article from Leeds University shows that the financial arguments are based on smoke and mirrors. They rely on assumptions on the quality-adjusted life years lost to pandemics as against the big three global infectious diseases of HIV-AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria; on the share of global funds to be devoted to pandemics in comparison to the other three per life saved in each case; and on the benefits to be gained from investments in vaccines and other pharmaceutical products instead of in the more basic determinants of health resilience in the population such as nutrition, sanitation, water, and hygiene. These are the factors, along with antibiotics and gains in medical advances, that have reduced the mortality toll from pandemics since the Spanish flu of 1918.

Furthermore, the WHO and World Bank also discount the adjustments made to human behaviour to mitigate health risks as they become obvious, collateral costs of the pandemic response measures, and the likely benefits of investing in those measures.

This matters because our government has signed on to the amended International Health Regulations, is expecting to sign the proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement, and looks set to sign a UN political agreement this September advocating for yet more money for the authors and beneficiaries of the growing pandemic industry. They are promising a lot of money based on the WHO's costings.

It matters because most Australians assumed that we could trust international institutions and that they valued rigour rather than engage in false accounting and subterfuge.

Unfortunately, incentives without accountability are a poor basis for health governance. It matters because funds to finance the pharmaceutical corporations, research institutions, and bureaucrats who stand to benefit from the pandemic agenda will have to be diverted from programs that work. International funding for the big endemic diseases and basic priorities such as nutrition is already falling, while the pandemic agenda expands. The Leeds authors call for simple transparency and honesty in assessing global health priorities, and in paying for them. Not a big ask. The Australian government has a choice to be constructive on behalf of its taxpayers and require better, or through blind acquiescence remain part of the problem.

Republished from The Australian

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 06:30

Got Hard Assets? UBS Says "Position For A Commodity Upcycle" As Global Scarcity Emerges

One day after veteran commodities strategist Jeff Currie told investors to "get long and buckle up" for the next leg of the commodities rally, UBS strategist Sagar Khandelwal issued a similarly bullish call, urging clients to "position for a commodity upcycle."

Khandelwal said electrification, surging power demand, artificial-intelligence infrastructure spending, persistent supply constraints, and years of underinvestment are converging to create a perfect storm for a sustained upcycle in hard assets.

Commodities can generate returns while protecting portfolios against energy disruptions and renewed inflation, he said. That defensive role becomes valuable when the toxic mixture starts hitting stocks and bonds. 

Here's how the UBS strategist framed the trade:

Position for commodity upside

We believe commodities can provide both a structural source of return and portfolio protection in scenarios where higher inflation expectations challenge equities and bonds. While commodities have historically offered valuable diversification benefits due to their relatively low correlation with traditional asset classes, we also see a supportive longer-term backdrop driven by electrification, rising power demand, AI infrastructure investment, and supply constraints across several markets. In our view, investors should maintain diversified exposure across precious metals, energy, industrial metals, and agriculture to capture a broad range of opportunities. Given fast-shifting leadership within commodity markets, we think an actively managed approach can help investors navigate the commodity upcycle.

Gold

Gold has resumed its upward trend as US inflation concerns have ebbed, and markets have reined in expectations for near-term Federal Reserve rate hikes. Looking ahead, however, we believe central bank demand, continued diversification away from the US dollar, and global debt concerns will remain important structural supports. For investors with substantial gains following the strong rally over the past year, higher prices may provide an opportunity to rebalance some exposure into other commodity sectors. We continue to view gold as a useful strategic diversifier, and we remain constructive on gold prices over the next 12 months.

Energy

The ongoing conflict between the US and Iran highlights the fluid nature of geopolitical events and how they can impact energy. With crude supply remaining restricted and both sides facing constraints in reaching a compromise, uncertainty over how quickly shipping conditions and production will normalize is likely to keep energy markets sensitive. In our view, energy exposure can help protect against lingering supply uncertainty and inflation spillovers, while robust demand supports a constructive medium-term outlook.

Industrial metals

Industrial metals, such as copper, have benefited from secular demand drivers such as electrification, the energy transition, and the ongoing global buildout of AI infrastructure. Prices have remained resilient despite periodic global economic growth worries. While factors like tariffs and trade policy risks may keep prices volatile in the near term, demand trends remain constructive for the asset class over the longer term. In copper specifically, supply constraints and projected market deficits reinforce our positive longer-term outlook.

A look at the Quantix Commodity Index Total Return shows that the broad commodity complex has surged to a record high, gaining more than 22.5% since late June. The index tracks 24 US-dollar-denominated futures across energy, agriculture, livestock, industrial metals, and precious metals, suggesting the rally is no longer confined to a single corner of the physical world.

That momentum in the commodities index reinforces veteran Currie's warning last week that "scarcity in the physical world" is reemerging. Already, we're seeing London copper trading above $14,000 a ton, the Bloomberg Agriculture Spot Index breaking out to a three-year high, and European tungsten prices exceeding $3,000 a ton.

Currie's conclusion was very blunt: "The illusion of abundance is likely behind us."

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 05:45

'White Lives Matter' Graffiti Sparks Investigation, Suspects Face Up To 3 Years In Prison

Via Remix News,

Polish prosecutors are now investigating a "White Lives Matter" graffiti as a hate crime in the city of Rzeszów, with the suspects facing up to three years in prison if they are apprehended and convicted.

Painted on a wall in the Polish city of Rzeszów, the graffiti was reportedly created as a memorial to the murdered British youth Henry Nowak.

??? In Poland, prosecutors are now investigating a "White Lives Matter" graffiti as a hate crime, with the suspects facing up to 3 years in prison if they are apprehended and convicted.

Painted on a wall in the Polish city of Rzeszów, the graffiti was reportedly created as a... pic.twitter.com/FP1HYP0cDZ

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

Polish police have reportedly secured surveillance footage and referred the case to Polish prosecutors.

However, Polish newspaper toRzeszow claims that cameras are not in the direct area where the wall was painted, making it difficult to identify the suspects.

Authorities also painted over the entire wall.

Major Polish news outlet wPolsce24 has reacted with outrage to the investigation: "The Rzeszów case is part of a broader trend of suppressing the voices of white people who dare to remind them that their lives also have value. When black people say "Black Lives Matter," it is a fight for equality. When white people say "White Lives Matter," it is immediately racist."

The news outlet further writes: "The slogan on the garages in Rzeszów was not an expression of hatred. There was a voice reminding us that white lives matters too. And as long as we treat some lives as 'more equal' than others, such slogans will appear on walls."

Meanwhile, authorities claim the graffiti is illegal under article 257 of the Polish penal code, which concerns the public insult of a group of people or an individual based on national, ethnic, or racial identity.

A group labeled "Narodowy Rzeszów" allegedly posted a video of themselves standing next to the graffiti holding a banner and flares and displaying the logo of the right-wing National-Radical Camp (ONR), however, it remains unclear if they sprayed the graffiti themselves.

Their post pointed to violence against Whites in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Social media platforms took the video down.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 05:00

The World's $158 Trillion Stock Market In One Chart

In 2025, the global equity market reached a record $157.8 trillion in market capitalization, up more than $25 trillion from 2024.

This visualization, via Visual Capitalist's Gabriel Cohen, highlights the world’s major equity markets based on their 2025 market capitalization.

Data has been sourced from the World Federation of Exchanges via SIFMA.

The World’s Biggest Stock Market

With a total market capitalization of $68.9 trillion, the U.S. is by far the world’s largest equity market, accounting for roughly 44% of the global total.

The U.S. is home to the world’s two preeminent stock exchanges, the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq. Shares in the overwhelming majority of the country’s largest public companies are traded on these two exchanges.

The table below lists the world’s major equity markets as of the end of 2025.

RankCountryMarket cap in 2025 ($T)Share (%) 1🇺🇸 United States68.944% 2🇨🇳 China15.510% 3🇪🇺 European Union15.510% 4🇮🇳 India10.67% 5🇯🇵 Japan7.65% 6🇭🇰 Hong Kong6.14% 7🇬🇧 United Kingdom5.64% 8🇨🇦 Canada4.63% 9🇦🇺 Australia2.01% 10🇸🇬 Singapore0.81% --🌐 Other Developed Markets13.69% --🌐 Other Emerging Markets6.94% --🌎 World Total157.8100%

The U.S. has seen its dominance in global equities strengthen over the past decade. Its share of global equity market capitalization has risen by more than 10 percentage points since 2012, when it accounted for roughly one-third of the total.

Part of this rise has been driven by the strong performance of U.S.-listed tech companies like Apple, Alphabet, and NVIDIA, each of which is part of the so-called Magnificent Seven.

China and the EU Are Nearly Tied

China ranks as the world’s second-largest equity market, narrowly ahead of the European Union. Both round to $15.5 trillion in market capitalization.

Even at that scale, each market is less than one-quarter the size of the $68.9 trillion U.S. market. Notably, many prominent Chinese companies are also listed in Hong Kong, which is itself a $6.1 trillion market.

Equities in both China and the EU have faced pressure as investors weighed geopolitical uncertainty. Nonetheless, EU-listed equities gained nearly 40% in year-over-year value as markets reacted positively to increased German spending and relative policy certainty compared with the United States.

Asia’s Other Stock Market Giants

Beyond China, Asia is home to several other major equity markets, including India ($10.6 trillion), Japan ($7.6 trillion), and Singapore ($824 billion).

Of the three, India had the most difficult 2025. Compared with nearly 19% average growth across global equities, Indian stocks gained just 2.5% on average.

A lack of domestic AI champions was a significant factor. As equities in South Korea, Taiwan, and the U.S. soared, investors redirected capital away from Indian companies.

To learn more about how the U.S. retail giants compare in annual sales, check out Which Are the Biggest Retailers in the U.S.? on Voronoi.

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 04:15

Turkey Recruits Trump Insiders For New Washington Lobbying Push

Via Middle East Eye

The Turkish government hired a lobbying firm with close ties to US President Donald Trump earlier this month under a year-long contract worth $2.4m, according to US Justice Department filings reviewed by Middle East Eye.

Ballard Partners, led by Brian Ballard, a prominent Florida Republican fundraiser who also worked on Trump’s presidential campaign, signed the agreement with Turkey’s Ministry of National Defense on August 8. The firm will receive $200,000 per month.

via AFP

Under the contract, Ballard Partners pledged to provide “government relations services, strategic consulting and advocacy services” before the federal government, and keep its client informed about developments in Congress and US policy.

This is not the first time Ballard Partners has worked for Turkey.

In 2017, during Trump’s first term, Turkey hired the firm under a $1.5m contract. It was one of Ballard Partners’ first major deals in Washington after opening an office there.

At the time, the firm reportedly focused on the sanctions-evasion case against Turkish state-owned lender Halkbank. The Trump administration’s Justice Department dropped the charges against the bank earlier this year.

The new contract differs from the previous agreement because Turkey’s defense ministry is the principal client. Ankara is seeking to rejoin the F-35 fighter jet program after being removed in 2019 over its purchase of the Russian-made S-400 air defense system.

Middle East Eye reported last month that Ankara was considering selling the S-400 system to a third country, potentially the United Arab Emirates, in an effort to persuade Washington to lift sanctions against Turkey.

Ankara also hopes to take delivery of six F-35s that were manufactured for Turkey but have remained in storage in the US for years.

According to the Justice Department filings, the Ballard Partners team working for Turkey includes former Democratic congressman Robert Wexler of Florida, a prominent pro-Turkish voice who co-founded the Congressional Caucus on US-Turkey Relations and Turkish Americans in 2001.

Wexler is also president of the S Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace in Washington and is known for his connections to pro-Israel circles.

Another member of the team is Thomas Boodry, who served as a special assistant to Trump and senior director for legislative affairs at the National Security Council until April 2025. Boodry was dismissed amid the removal of former US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz.

Reports at the time suggested that Trump fired Boodry and five other officials shortly after meeting far-right activist Laura Loomer, who presented opposition research on several staff members and argued that they were disloyal to the president.

REPORTER: "Prime Minister Netanyahu opposes sending the F-35s to Turkey..."

PRESIDENT TRUMP: "Nobody tells me what we should be selling or not. Turkey has been a tremendous ally." pic.twitter.com/F0sdwvIYfE

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) July 27, 2026

The team also includes Syl Lukis, a senior partner at Ballard Partners and one of Ballard’s closest associates.

Bloomberg reported earlier this year that Ballard Partners’ alums include White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and former Attorney General Pam Bondi.

The firm generated more than $30m in federal lobbying revenue during the first quarter of 2026, more than any other firm on Washington’s K Street.

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 03:30

CIA Chief's Moscow Trip Was About Iran, Not A NATO Warning: Estonia's Ex-President

Speculation has abounded over the nature of CIA Director John Ratcliffe's surprise Tuesday trip to Moscow and what was conveyed to top Kremlin intelligence officials.

The 'official' Washington narrative of what was behind the trip was issued on Wednesday in the pages of The Wall Street Journal, which laid out Ratcliffe delivered a "warning to Russia not to attack NATO countries, according to people briefed on the visit."

Since then, media reports and pundits have mused that nearby small 'eastern flank' countries like Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania could be prime targets for some kind of Russian military action, at a moment Europe's support to Kiev has steadily ramped up.

Surprisingly, on Thursday former Estonian president Toomas Hendrik Ilves (president: 2006 – 2016), who remains influential voice in the European security debate and has served on an EU task force, told a European outlet that the CIA director's meeting was more likely centered on the Iran conflict and not on warning against attacking Europe.

Ilves in a freshly published interview with EuroNews said he had "severe doubts" that concerns over aggression against the Baltic states were the reason for Ratcliffe's visit.

"What is the real problem for the United States right now? The real problem is Iran, the fact that the Russians are giving targeting information to the Iranians," he said.

"Those are real problems for the United States, and that would be sufficient to warrant the director of the CIA to go to Moscow to tell them to back off."

US intelligence and Trump officials for months have alleged that Russia is likely helping Iranian forces with identifying and locating US military assets in the region. At times throughout Operation Epic Fury, Tehran appears to have even targeted CIA stations.

The bulk of American military assets and bases in the Gulf countries have suffered severe damage earlier in the conflict, resulting in a Pentagon troop drawback to safer areas. This is indeed a big deal if it is the case that Russia or China (or both) have handed the Iranians intel to help push back American bases and forces.

Former Estonian leader Ilves further explained that in reality there had been "no change in the US’s threat assessment for the Baltic states."

Yesterday CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Moscow. The visit was brief but quickly fueled widespread discussion and speculation.

Official statements from Russia and Washington remain silent on the reason for the trip. Details about his counterparts remain unavailable as… pic.twitter.com/0W7t0i72Pq

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) August 26, 2026

"If the purpose was to go and genuinely tell the Russians not to do anything in the Baltic states, as was claimed, then there would be some kind of activity here," he underscored. 

Also, Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna announced Thursday that the country’s threat assessment had "not changed". Tsahkna said: "We remain vigilant, but Estonia’s threat assessment has not changed."

Ilves concluded in his comments that the official narrative is but cover for the real reason underlying Ratcliff's visit.

Skepticism has been widely voiced among independent journalists and pundits:

CIA chief urgently flew to Moscow in the middle of America’s losing war against Russia’s ally Iran, and the reason had nothing to do with a desperate attempt to turn Russia against Iran, but rather “Putin could try…limited assault on an allied country in the next few years”? 🤔 https://t.co/WmNYnGstfo

— Mark Ames (@MarkAmesExiled) August 26, 2026

"I don’t think it’s a false flag, but rather just kind of make something up to divert attention from what is the real problem that the US faces right now," the Estonian ex-President said.

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 02:45

Well This Is Very Awkward...

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

A street interview doing the rounds this week encapsulates the entire European open-borders agenda in under two minutes.

Older Spaniards nod along when asked if they would welcome a migrant into their home, saying it would make for a much better system if everyone did so.

Solidarity, humanity, of course. Then the interviewer produces a real migrant looking for a home and suddenly everything changes.

Funniest thing I've watched this week.

Boomers in Spain get asked if they'd accept a migrant into their home. They say yes. Chad offers them one. And instantly, they change their mind. pic.twitter.com/2ruX39i0Mh

— Casey Krol (@CaseyKrol) August 26, 2026

The interviewer presents the couple with a Nigerian man named Sony who plays guitar on the pavement for small change - and their previous answers collapse into excuses, holidays, "not right now," and finally "no, no, no, no, no."

The clip, shared by Casey Krol and filmed in the Rescue You style, is the kind of unscripted moment the official narrative cannot survive. Abstract empathy and virtue signalling is easy, but when the reality of the situation is presented, everything is turned on its head.

The couple in the video are not monsters. They are ordinary people who have absorbed years of hectoring lecturing and know the approved answer. They just refuse to live it.

The same pattern repeats at every level in Europe: politicians, NGOs, and detached citizens demand that someone else absorb the costs of mass low-skilled inflows while they keep their own postcodes intact.

Spain's socialist government has spent years selling the opposite message. Prime Minister Sánchez has called migration "one of the great engines of national development" and an "act of justice and a necessity."

He has framed legalization as recognition that hundreds of thousands already "form part of our everyday lives." Globalist Alex Soros praised him for it, saying Sánchez showed "what real leadership looks like" and "We need more elected leaders like him."

The public has not bought it wholesale. A Sigma Dos poll for El Mundo found 70 percent of Spaniards support mass deportation of illegal immigrants - including 57 percent of PSOE voters. Only the far-left Sumar base rejects the idea.

The latest explosion for Spain came at the end of July when more than 70,000 people poured into the tiny North African enclave of Ceuta from Morocco in two days. Beaches, schools, and parks filled with tents, waste, and disease. Scabies, measles, and tuberculosis appeared among police and residents. Locals described playgrounds and sand turned into shit covered slums.

The chaos did not stay in Ceuta. Boats began hitting mainland tourist coves. In Cartagena, dozens of military-age men leapt onto a packed beach in full view of families. Mayor Noelia Arroyo said: "This cannot be normalised. We cannot accept that human trafficking mafias have such an easy time reaching our shores." Former mayor Francisco Bernabe asked how a boat that size evaded radar: "Are they broken? Do they have them turned off?"

This week the tension in Ceuta boiled over again. Residents marched on the migrant camp at El Trampolín beach, tore down tents, and threw belongings into the sea. Police fired warning shots to keep the two groups apart. The city of 84,000 has been told to absorb what Madrid will not remove.

?? Ceuta residents have taken to the streets to protest the Spanish government's handling of the migration crisis and demand the removal of migrants from public areas.

Follow: @europa pic.twitter.com/QdlyKOwB4J

— Europa.com (@europa) August 27, 2026

Sánchez oversaw a royal-decree regularization - no parliamentary vote - sold as covering 500,000 people. Applications blew past one million. Successful applicants get residence, work permits, benefits, and a path to citizenship that opens the entire Schengen zone.

The paperwork tsunami was immediate. Thousands of military-age men queued at consulates and registry offices in Madrid, Barcelona, Seville, Valencia, and Almería. Some camped overnight.

Others climbed embassy walls when appointments ran out. Union officials warned of collapse.

One municipal delegate said daily social-service requests in Madrid jumped from 1,500 to 5,500. Vox's Santiago Abascal called it an accelerating "invasion." Polish MEP Anna Bry?ka said left-wing governments were "bringing about the collapse of the Schengen Area and mocking the safety of Europeans."

When patriots protested the amnesty, they were met by socialist counter-mobs.

The labor market tells the same story. Foreign-born workers now hold 52.6 percent of unskilled construction jobs and outnumber Spaniards in those roles. Since 2019 the sector has lost more than 22,000 Spanish workers and gained 238,000 foreign ones. Bricklayers, plumbers, and electricians show the same slide. Spain's youth are not replacing the retiring generation; imported labor is.

Meanwhile, foreigners commit five times more rapes and four times more murders per capita than Spaniards. In Catalonia, 91 percent of convicted rapists are migrants, who make up 17 percent of the population. Reported rapes in Spain rose 322 percent in a decade. Penetrative rape cases more than doubled between 2019 and 2024.

The streets have turned into blood baths. Recently, a North African migrant shouted "Allah" while stabbing a young woman to death in Esplugues de Llobregat; a 58-year-old man who tried to intervene was also attacked.

The same weekend produced more stabbings and a shooting.

A man employed to evict migrant squatters was lynched and stabbed by a mob.

A Gambian migrant stabbed a police officer while shouting "Allahu Akbar."

A repeat offender stomped a local man's head.

Citizens rioted after an elderly man was beaten.

And on and on and on.

Many of the "unaccompanied minors" driving the migrant numbers are not minors at all. In Madrid, 70 percent of those tested by bone-age X-ray were adults. The same fraud appears across Europe.

Seventy percent of the country already knows the solution is removal, not more lectures about housing the next arrival.

The people who designed this system will keep calling it compassion. They will keep living somewhere the consequences do not reach. Ordinary Spaniards are the ones facing the dire fallout.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Fri, 08/28/2026 - 02:00

The Economic Tsar Who Built Modern China-And Whose Reforms The CCP Is Dismantling

Authored by Heng He via The Epoch Times,

Former Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji, the hard-edged reformer who engineered China's rise from planned-economy backwater to global manufacturing giant, died this month at the age of 97.

Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji poses during a working session at the Europe-Asia summit in Copenhagen, Denmark, on Sept. 22, 2002. Gerard Cerles/AFP via Getty Images

His legacy-tax centralization, mass layoffs, China's accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO), and a brief, forgotten moment of tolerance toward Falun Gong-now stands as both the foundation of modern China's wealth and a stark reminder of how easily that progress can be reversed.

Zhu's Legacy of Economic Reform

After the decade-long Cultural Revolution pushed the regime to the brink, then-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Deng Xiaoping pivoted China toward market reforms. He relied on pragmatic trial and error rather than a rigid master plan, describing his step-by-step approach as "crossing the river by feeling the stones."

Zhu executed that vision. As vice premier and premier from 1991 to 2003, China's "economic tsar" used iron-fisted reforms to engineer the country's rise, including restructuring fiscal policy, dismantling inefficient state-owned enterprises, and securing China's entry into the WTO.

Zhu was officially credited with advancing China's landmark tax-sharing reform in the 1990s, which centralized much of the country's tax revenue in Beijing. That reform undeniably strengthened the central government.

However, it stripped local governments of steady tax income, forcing them to rely on selling land to fund local budgets. Paired with state ownership of land, this shift created a "land-finance" model that drove housing prices sky-high and triggered today's ongoing property crisis.

It isn't the tax reform alone that is to blame. China's system of state and collective land ownership is what enabled large-scale land sales in the first place.

Former Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji at a meeting in Beijing in July 2011. Feng Li/Getty Images

The obituary also praises Zhu for safeguarding Hong Kong's status as a global financial center. Ironically, Hong Kong's diminished standing today stems largely from policies adopted under CCP leader Xi Jinping-making praise for Zhu an implicit rebuke of China's current leadership.

WTO Entry-and Its Costs

One of Zhu's most consequential achievements was leading China to join the WTO in 2001.

To prepare the country for global trade, Zhu aggressively restructured inefficient state-owned enterprises. While this boosted efficiency, it triggered mass layoffs, displacing tens of millions of workers.

Unlike post-Cold War America, China's nascent private sector was too weak to absorb the surge of unemployed labor.

U.S. President Bill Clinton (R) responds to a question as Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji looks on during a joint news conference in the Old Executive Office Building in Washington, on April 8, 1999. Tim Sloan/AFP via Getty Images

The aggressive restructuring stripped millions of workers of their livelihoods, leaving them with virtually no safety net. While the reforms eventually sparked massive economic growth, the workers who bore the cost were largely left behind without fair compensation.

The Premier Who Called Out Shoddy Construction

When the Yangtze River dikes failed during the 1998 summer floods, Zhu inspected the breach in Jiujiang, Jiangxi Province, and discovered that the construction had cut corners and used shoddy materials. Furious, he publicly denounced the dam as a "bastard project" and dubbed it a "tofu-dregs project"-comparing the crumbling concrete to the brittle, worthless pulp residue left over from making soy curd.

As long as corruption remains a recurring public concern in China, the term "tofu-dreg project" will likely remain part of the country's political vocabulary and a defining mark of Zhu's legacy.

The Premier Who Listened-Meeting With Falun Gong

One episode stands apart from Zhu's economic legacy. In the late 1990s, Zhu and the entire Politburo Standing Committee opposed then-CCP leader Jiang Zemin's decision to suppress Falun Gong, according to insider accounts.

More than 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners gather on Fuyou Street in Beijing on April 25, 1999. Courtesy of Minghui.org

On April 25, 1999, roughly 10,000 Falun Gong practitioners gathered peacefully near Zhongnanhai, the CCP's headquarters, in Beijing to petition the authorities for freedom of belief. Earlier in the month, dozens of practitioners in Tianjin had been detained by local police for their faith.

In a bold move for an official, Zhu met directly with representatives, listened to their grievances, and ordered the release of the detained practitioners, along with an assurance that practitioners would have a lawful environment in which to pursue their practice.

The spiritual discipline was introduced to the Chinese public in 1992 and gained widespread popularity, attracting at least 70 million practitioners by the late 1990s.

At an internal leadership meeting the following day, according to insider accounts, Zhu suggested that suppression would harm the country's image and that the regime should leave Falun Gong practitioners alone. Jiang, afraid of the practice's growing popularity, responded that doing so would bring down the Party.

Months later, Jiang launched a sweeping, nationwide campaign against Falun Gong-initiating a persecution that continues today.

Reform Can Be Reversed Overnight

Zhu's death cast an unexpected shadow over Xi's plans to commemorate Jiang with unusually high political honors, an effort intended to elevate Jiang alongside the CCP's founding generation. Instead of highlighting Jiang's legacy, Zhu's passing reminded the public that the reforms of China's most prosperous era owed far more to Zhu.

It was Zhu who was behind Deng and the CCP in launching the Shanghai Stock Exchange in December 1990-now a global financial powerhouse that hosts major state-owned enterprise listings.

Although Zhu was the official most responsible for driving China's reform era, Xi's policies have now largely dismantled that work. That contrast reveals the ultimate lesson of Zhu's legacy: under totalitarian rule, no amount of reform is secure-it can all be undone overnight.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 23:25

FDA Clears Blood Test To Detect Signs Of Alzheimer's Disease

Federal regulators have cleared a blood test aimed at detecting signs of Alzheimer's disease.

The Food and Drug Administration cleared a blood test known as Elecsys pTau-217 for people aged at least 55 who have shown signs of, or have been complaining of, cognitive decline, Roche announced on Aug. 24.

The test, which can be used by primary care doctors and specialists, detects a biomarker called plasma phosphorylated tau 217. In a study that ran from 2004 to 2025 and was published in JAMA, researchers found that higher levels of the biomarker were associated with an increased risk of progression to cognitive impairment.

As Zachary Stieber reports via The Epoch Times, the FDA has previously approved several other tests for Alzheimer's, beginning in 2025 with a test from Fujirebio Diagnostics that measures both pTau217 and another protein. Roche said its test is the first to measure a single biomarker.

"Elecsys pTau217 has the potential to transform how Alzheimer's is assessed across primary and specialty care," Dan Malarek, president and CEO of Roche Diagnostics North America, said in a statement.

"This kind of innovation can help bring diagnostic evaluation closer to patients and give clinicians greater confidence in determining the right step in their care."

Alzheimer's is a brain disorder that destroys a person's memory and thinking skills over time. People with the disease gradually become unable to perform tasks such as eating and walking. Many people begin experiencing symptoms such as memory difficulties between the ages of 60 and 70.

The Alzheimer's Association and other groups have welcomed the tests as a less invasive option than other methods, such as testing of cerebrospinal fluid.

"Each FDA clearance gives clinicians another validated option to work with when evaluating patients showing signs of cognitive impairment," Maria C. Carrillo, the association's chief science officer and medical affairs lead, said in a statement.

"That's real progress for a field that, for decades, had far too few tools to offer."

Dr. Carole Ho, executive vice president and president of Lilly Neuroscience, which helped develop the test, said in a statement that "for millions of families navigating the uncertainty of Alzheimer's disease, a timely diagnosis is the first and most critical step toward meaningful care."

Labcorp and Quest Diagnostics said they will carry the new test.

Once ordered by a doctor, patients can have their blood drawn for the test in a doctor's office, a Labcorp service center, or a Quest center.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 23:00

Brasília Makes Friends With Beijing

Authored by Jake Scott via FEE,

On a Sunday night in late July, Brazil's Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and China's Xi Jinping spoke for more than an hour. It was cordial and faintly triumphant, with the two governments announcing their intention to accelerate a long-stalled China-Mercosur trade agreement. Alongside this, there are plans to deepen cooperation on satellites and critical-minerals processing, and waive short-stay visa requirements.

Image Credit: Custom image by FEE

This marks a serious change for Brazil. For years, it was Brasília that had spearheaded all resistance to exactly this sort of deal within the Mercosur bloc. The reversal was as sudden as it was shocking, taking only a fortnight to emerge, following a new American tariff taking effect and the Brazilian president deciding that the cost of alignment with the United States had, at last, exceeded its benefits.

Confronted with a United States that has moved from partner to antagonist, Brazil sees itself as neither retaliating in kind nor capitulating; it is hedging, deliberately, on several fronts at once. For many observers, this is a rational reaction to the emergence of an increasingly multipolar world. But just under a century ago, this practice had a name: "pragmatic equidistance." It was the way Brazil described its international strategy of balancing relationships with competing powers without committing to either.

The ongoing and escalating international trade war fueled by retaliatory tariffs has been the main catalyst here. In late July, a 25% tariff covering a broad range of Brazilian goods came into effect; per the Brazilian National Confederation of Industry's reckoning, nearly half of all Brazilian exports to the United States are now subject to some form of additional duty. Alongside the general tariffs, a "forced-labor" levy of 12.5% was introduced by the US to enforce bans on importing goods made with forced labor abroad, which in many ways represents a globalization of America's existing ban on Chinese goods using forced labor.

It is estimated that the hardest-hit goods carry a combined tariff of 37.5%.

President Lula's response has been to reframe the introduction of these tariffs as Washington's error rather than Brazil's, calling the tariffs a "strategic mistake" in the Washington Post, and warning that the tariffs will drive Brazilian firms to replace their American suppliers with partners elsewhere.

The rhetoric is only part of it, though: Brazil has filed for consultations with the World Trade Organization to challenge both the broad tariffs and the forced-labor levy as breaches of the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The effectiveness of these consultations is up for debate given the WTO's general paralysis, but what matters more is what this reveals for Brazil's international-relations strategy: it is pragmatic equidistance on display. Brazil has filed the complaint with the WTO, while continuing negotiations with the US.

Meanwhile, Brazil is attempting to hedge its bets by engaging with the wider global economy. This month, ApexBrasil (the Brazilian Trade and Investment Promotion Agency) has launched a R$105 million ($20.5 million) program to support just shy of 2,500 exporters across 57 industries in their search for new markets, including the EU, Southeast Asia, and Central Asia.

Simultaneously, the Mercosur bloc is actively pursuing parallel deals with India, Japan, and Canada, with Brazil at the heart of this strategy. Lula has enacted the Mercosur-Singapore agreement, the bloc's first with a Southeast Asian economy, under which Brazilian exports will progressively enter duty-free.

What is also interesting is what the imposition of these tariffs has meant for Lula at home. Many Brazilians read the tariff regime as a direct attempt to influence the Brazilian elections that are due to take place in October 2026, which in turn has allowed Lula to cast himself as a defender of Brazil's sovereignty against foreign interference. This strategy has borne fruit: Lula's polling has remained steady in the mid-40s, while Flávio Bolsonaro-the only other major contender-has seen his popularity steadily decline since April 2026, meaning Lula's lead has slowly widened.

It may not have helped Bolsonaro that his presidential bid launch saw him flanked by Javier Milei and Benjamin Netenyahu, with few Brazilian politicians in the room. International campaigning is increasingly common, but in a climate skeptical of foreign interference, that move may have been more than a little tone-deaf, especially given the increasingly strained relations between Argentina and Brazil.

Not only this, but when the US sent election officials to verify the integrity of Brazil's electoral system, their visas were simply denied. For a public that is heavily resistant to the sense of being managed from abroad, this was a message that landed exactly in the way it was needed to.

Most notable, however, is Brazil's attempt to sidestep all of this via improved trade relations between the Mercosur bloc and China. Of course, Mercosur is a customs union, and so all members must negotiate jointly-which is why a proposed China agreement has been formally proposed and "under study" since around 2017. In this, Brazil had been the brake, while Uruguay had spent years advocating for the trade agreement, and pursuing its own China talks whilst the other Mercosur members stalled.

In January 2023, Lula traveled to Montevideo to argue that Mercosur should secure an EU deal first, and only then negotiate with China. With this deal signed in Asunción in January 2026-after 26 years of negotiations-and coming into effect in Brazil in April, the roadblock had been cleared. At least, on Brasília's end: Argentina's President Javier Milei is ideologically opposed to China, and will likely veto any deal pursued by Mercosur. China is already Brazil's largest trading partner, with bilateral trade valued at $188 billion, and a deal could meet Brazil's other strategic interests, such as widening agricultural access.

Regardless, Brazil has been hedging its international trade relations with careful maneuvering, and in the long run, this may be the smart move.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 22:35

Jury Weighs Whether "Darn Good Mother" Lindsay Clancy Is Criminally Liable For Murdering Her 3 Kids

Jury deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial started on Aug. 27 after five weeks of testimony.

Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, is accused of killing her three young children while her now-ex-husband was running errands in January 2023.

The 36-year-old mother faces three counts of first-degree murder, one for each child: Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and 8-month-old Callan.

Judge William Sullivan gave the jury the option to instead consider second-degree murder or manslaughter.

Only a few hours of deliberations happened before Sullivan ordered a recess until 9 a.m. on Friday at the Plymouth Superior Court in Plymouth, Massachusetts.

No verdict was reached on Thursday.

In his closing argument on Aug. 27, Jacki Thrapp reports for The Epoch Times, that defense attorney Kevin Reddington urged jurors to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity, alleging that “her mind was gone” during the killings and said she was in the throes of postpartum psychosis.

“This young lady is not guilty of the killing of her children because she was suffering from a disease and defect, as his honor instructed you,” Reddington told jurors in closing arguments.

“And they’re not going to be able to prove otherwise.”

Additionally, Reddington describved the accused murderer by saying: "This young lady did nothing wrong in her life. She was… a darn good mother."

Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney:

“This young lady did nothing wrong in her life. She was… a darn good mother.” pic.twitter.com/mL03GAuHlg

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) August 27, 2026

Clancy admitted to strangling her kids with exercise bands in the basement of their home in a coastal Boston suburb, slicing her wrists and neck with a knife, and jumping out of a window in a failed suicide attempt, which left her paralyzed.

Her now-ex-husband, Patrick, said that months before the incident, the mother told him she was having thoughts of suicide and harming their kids.

Clancy was also prescribed medications and checked into a psychiatric hospital ahead of the incident.

Her then-husband testified that Clancy had a “normal” demeanor when he left to run errands that day.

When he returned, he found his injured wife, who informed him that the kids were in the basement.

Clancy detailed what happened in a call with him a week after the incident, he said.

“She heard a man’s voice telling her that if she didn’t do ​it now, she would lose her chance or something like that,” he testified.

Prosecutors acknowledged that Clancy suffered from mental health issues but said she carried out the killings while knowing it was wrong.

“This case is not about our mental health system or how it treats women,” Assistant ​District Attorney Jennifer Sprague told jurors.

“That’s a distraction to get you angry and passionate about an important issue, but an issue that’s not on trial here.”

Clancy faces life in prison with no possibility of parole if she is convicted on any of the first-degree murder charges she faces.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 22:10

States Race To Cut Food Stamp Errors Before Penalties Kick In

Authored by Sylvia Xu via The Epoch Times,

States are racing to reduce faulty payments to food stamp recipients, in a bid to avoid penalties included in the signature budget bill passed by Republicans last year.

Starting in October 2027, states with payment error rates of 6 percent or higher must cover 5, 10, or 15 percent of SNAP benefit costs, depending on the payment error rate.

Even though the deadline is more than a year out, enrollment in the program has dropped by more than 5 million recipients as a result of the stricter rules, according to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins.

Forty-one states and the District of Columbia made improper payments of more than 6 percent in 2025, according to the Department of Agriculture. Nearly half of states will have to pay more than $100 million in penalties, according to publicly available federal data.

Just nine states fell below the 6 percent error threshold in the 2025 fiscal year: Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Nebraska, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Four states are considering dropping the food stamp program entirely as a result of the new rules, according to a survey by the American Public Human Services Association.

California, New York, and Florida would be responsible for more than $1 billion in SNAP costs if they failed to reduce their rates of erroneous payments. Texas would owe around $750 million.

For several states, however, a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill delays the cost-sharing requirement for an additional two years. Nicknamed "the Alaska Carveout," the provision allows states with improper payment rates of 13.34 percent or higher in fiscal 2025 to put off the cost-sharing requirement until fiscal 2029.

Similarly, states exceeding that threshold in fiscal 2026 can put off cost-sharing until fiscal 2030.

In addition to next year's deadline, beginning this October, states will bear 75 percent of the costs to administer the food stamp program.That's up from the 50 percent share paid by states since the program was started in 1964.

The tighter rules address a "financing mismatch" in the food stamp program, according to the Cato Institute, a policy research organization. For decades, states have processed SNAP applications and distributed benefits, while financial consequences have fallen overwhelmingly on federal taxpayers. That gives states little incentive to control waste and prevent fraud.

SNAP payment errors totaled more than $10 billion in 2025. More than 87 percent of that amount was due to overpayments.

A sign indicates that a store accepts SNAP benefits in Miami on April 21, 2026. Joe Raedle/Getty Images 'Significant Waste'

SNAP is a federally funded program, administered by the states, that provides food benefits to low-income families. In 2025, federal taxpayers spent about $103 billion on SNAP benefits and nearly $7 billion in administrative fees.

With an overall error rate of 10.6 percent, nearly one in nine food stamp allotments went to an ineligible recipient or was paid in the wrong amount.

State agencies made improper payments mainly because they did not verify recipients' eligibility criteria, such as citizenship, employment, finances, identity, residency, and household size, before making a payment, according to the Government Accountability Office.

Although the 2025 error rate decreased slightly from previous years, it still showed "significant waste" at the state level, according to a June statement from the Department of Agriculture.

Errors can stem from either state agencies or recipients. While state agencies can make mistakes when updating recipient information or processing payments, recipients may also forget to report income changes or additional family members.

Those are "honest mistakes" rather than intentional fraud, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said in a July report. Even so, the errors prove that "state accountability is severely lacking in SNAP," Rollins said in a June statement.

People line up to receive free food during a Thanksgiving food giveaway at Shiloh Mercy House in Oakland, Calif., on Nov. 24, 2025. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

After the One Big Beautiful Bill Act took effect in July 2025, participation in the food stamp program dropped 12 percent-more than 5 million-to 37 million this April, according to Department of Agriculture data released in July.

Rollins attributed the decline to the administration's crackdown on fraud and ineligible recipients.

The downward trend may continue, as 11 states reported that they may narrow eligibility policies when costs change.

State Response

Error rates might not reflect the true picture of how a state distributes money, historical reports suggest.

A 2015 audit by the Office of Inspector General found that states hired outside consultants and error review committees to mitigate individual errors identified by quality control, rather than addressing the root causes of eligibility inaccuracies.

And in 2014, the Department of Agriculture could not validate state-reported error rates in 42 of 53 state agencies because of date-quality issues.

Nonetheless, a July survey of 39 states from the American Public Human Services Association found that agencies across the country are "working incredibly hard" to reduce error rates by addressing root causes.

States reported that they will invest in workforce training, root-cause analysis, and technology upgrades to improve payment accuracy.

Virginia, which would face 15 percent cost-sharing based on its 2025 errors, has stopped self-attestation of eligibility since the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed.

It previously allowed applicants to self-report expenses and incomes.

President Donald Trump shows his signature on the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” at the White House on July 4, 2025. Since the bill took effect, participation in the food stamp program dropped 12 percent, according to Department of Agriculture data released in July. Brendan Smialowski/Pool/ AFP via Getty Images

Louisiana is offering a $1,500 bonus to staff who maintain an error rate of 4 percent or lower.

The agency is also automating checks on household income to reduce unintentional errors, which account for 62 percent of the state's inaccuracies, according to the think tank Invest in Louisiana.

Mississippi is updating its 35-year-old eligibility systems to ensure program integrity, according to the Mississippi Department of Human Services.

Minnesota is investing millions of dollars to modernize decades-old technology used to administer state programs, according to the Minnesota House of Representatives.

Each change suggests that new financial accountability rules are making a difference, according to the American Enterprise Institute.

Workers and volunteers help distribute food boxes at a drive-through food distribution facility, in response to a federal government shutdown and SNAP/CalFresh food benefits delays, in City of Industry, Calif., on Nov. 5, 2025. Mario Tama/Getty Images

The American Public Human Services Association survey reported trade-offs for increased accuracy, including timeliness of benefit payments and a delay in EBT chip card implementation.

And four states indicated that they may drop out of SNAP altogether or pause participation in the program as a result of the cost-sharing provisions. The survey report did not disclose which states are considering dropping out of the program.

The American Public Human Services Association did not respond to a request for comment.

The 'Alaska Carveout'

Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, states with error rates at 13.34 percent or higher will secure a two-year delay in cost sharing. The "Alaska Carveout" provision was negotiated and secured by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) prior to voting on the budget bill.

In a July 2025 letter to Alaskans, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) said the state had worked hard to include delayed cost-sharing in the act because it had the highest payment error rate in the country.

The provision currently affects six states and the District of Columbia. Those include Alaska, New Mexico, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, and Oregon.

But the exemption may precipitate a reverse effect by rewarding the worst-performing states while penalizing those working to reduce their error rates, according to a July report from the Cato Institute.

To delay penalties, states could slow efforts in correcting errors and keep improper payment rates elevated, according to the think tank.

Data Sharing

In an effort to overhaul fraud, waste, and abuse in government programs, the Trump administration is pushing to codify data sharing between states and the federal government.

"We need to know where your tax dollars are going, and if the state of California and the state of New York aren't going to tell us, we need Congress to force them to tell us," Vice President JD Vance told a fraud task force roundtable on Aug. 5.

Technological verification and data-sharing measures can solve the majority of integrity problems in government programs, said Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 21:45

Mayor Of Indiana City Claims Race Discrimination After Delayed Utility Repairs

If a group's entire world view is built on the notion that they are perpetual victims because of their race, every time something bad happens to them they are going to go looking for racism as the scapegoat.  In other words, they are going to see "racism" under every rock and behind every tree.  They will even see racism in a power outage. 

When it come to the black community in the US, though, most of the bad things that happen in their neighborhoods are directly caused by their own behavior. 

In mid-August a powerful windstorm hit northwest Indiana. Gusts reached around 99 mph in Gary, comparable to a Category 2 hurricane.  The violent weather toppled trees onto lines, snapped hundreds of poles, and damaged transmission structures and substations.

The repairs have been difficult and slow moving.  This week NIPSCO (the Northern Indiana Public Service Company) reported that 99% of customers in the region had their power back, however, Gary Mayor Eddie Melton (Democrat and mayor since 2024) took to the left-wing media to make political hay out of the incident.

In an interview with far-left activist "journalist" Don Lemon, the mayor answered in the affirmative when asked if he thought the large black population of Gary was the reason the utility companies were slow to finish repairs, suggesting that there was a racial element to the city's longer wait time.    

After a heavy storm in Gary, Indiana, the mayor went on the Don Lemon show and implied that the power was off for 13 days because of racism because Gary is a predominantly black city.

But, the electric company, NIPSCO, claimed that they were being shot at while they were trying… pic.twitter.com/ZfPUpU84VD

— John K. Amanchukwu Sr. (@REVWUTRUTH) August 26, 2026

Other media outlets also asserted that Gary was being singled out for slower repairs because of the community's 75% - 80% black population; comparing the event to the disastrous FEMA response to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.  Indiana Governor Mike Braun (a Republican) has called for an investigation into the two week power outages in some areas of the state, though he has not supported any arguments of racial discrimination.  

The delays in Gary can be easily explained by simply asking NIPSCO and checking with local police:  The company had to hold off on repairs and find extra security for their line workers after scouts identifying damages were shot at in a predominantly black neighborhood. At least one NIPSCO vehicle was hit multiple times by gunfire and the workers pulled out of the area. 

Police were called to the scene but never found the shooters. This news was widely reported, yet the Gary Mayor and the left-wing media have apparently ignored it.

As a result of the attack, the city had to coordinate with city police, Indiana State Police, and state officials to ensure crews were protected during the restoration process. The city added that ISP sent additional troopers to assist local forces.  This takes time and adds extensive delays.

In other words, the violence inherent in black neighborhoods led to their own suffering.  The inability to behave, even during a grid-down crisis, made it impossible for work crews to do their jobs. 

The opportunism of activist politicians looking for racial victim-points is a dying business.  Americans have had enough of race hysteria, BLM and the eternal quest for minority handouts and pity.  Mayor Eddie Melton and agitators like Don Lemon will likely be dragged by the public for their behavior here. 

That said, the crisis represents yet another example of leftist activists deliberately jumping to conclusions.  They are so desperate to make the public believe "systemic racism" is real that they are willing to agitate and exaggerate for the sake of narrative.  Eventually, they will end up creating the very anti-minority sentiment that they claim to be fighting against.  Keep accusing people of racism after they tried to help you, and they will stop helping you.            

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 21:20

Trump's Energy Policy Could Cost US 540 GW Of Renewables, Says NRDC

By Diana DiGangi of UtilityDive

Aspects of the Trump administration’s energy policy - such as the rollback of Inflation Reduction Act tax credits, the introduction of new tariffs and offshore wind lease buybacks - could cause the U.S to lose between 390 GW and 540 GW of new wind, solar and energy storage capacity over the next decade, according to projections from the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“Crucially, these lost projects are not actually replaced with other sources of new power,” the NRDC said in a Wednesday report. “At most, only 9 GW of additional gas capacity is added with Trump’s policies in place.”

The report cited near-term supply chain bottlenecks for gas turbines, volatile fuel prices, “and the general cost-competitiveness of new renewables relative to gas” as reasons for the NRDC’s low estimate for new additional gas investment. 

An August report from Global Energy Monitor counts 189 GW of gas-fired capacity currently in the announced, pre-construction, and construction phases in the U.S., a number which “nearly doubled” in the first half of the year, “but uncertainty persists about how and when this capacity gets built.”

“Two-thirds of gas-fired capacity in development globally, and more than half of projects tied to data centers, do not have a named turbine/engine manufacturer,” Global Energy Monitor said. “Nearly one-quarter of projects earmarked for data centers do not have a named start year. Turbine supply constraints, financing uncertainty, local data center moratoriums, and mounting public opposition leave the true scale of the gas power buildout uncertain.”

Amanda Levin, NRDC’s director of policy analysis, said during a Tuesday press call that the group’s modeling still anticipates “significant growth in renewables under this administration. But we don’t go nearly as far, and we lose more than half of everything that we expected to be able to build with the combination of market forces and proactive policy.”

Both Levin and the Global Energy Monitor report noted that due to order backlogs for gas turbines for combined-cycle plants, developers who need to bring firm power online quickly are turning to alternatives like simple-cycle or reciprocating engine plants, which “are less efficient than combined-cycle plants and carry higher emissions per unit of electricity generated,” Global Energy Monitor said.

Levin said this trend supports the NRDC’s position that the Environmental Protection Agency’s gas power plant emissions rule should not be repealed, though the Trump administration has announced its intention to do so.

The trend “highlights actually the value of these types of standards … which is that the market is not acting in a perfectly rational economic way,” she said. “These types of regulations could prevent this type of highly polluting type of power generation by requiring us to think about how we are building out this gas that we’re trying to build over the next few years to meet this growing load.”

The NRDC’s report also forecast an increase in power costs due to a need to “rely more heavily on the existing, higher-cost legacy fossil fuel system” in absence of new renewables generation. The power sector will spend $5 billion to $15 billion more on fossil fuels, the NRDC said, while claiming $45 billion less in IRA tax incentives, relative to the group’s January 2025 Snapshot case.

“By 2035, average household electricity rates are projected to increase by an additional 4.2% to 5.5% nationwide, relative to the January 2025 Snapshot case,” the NRDC’s report said.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 20:55

Federal Court Dismisses Musk's X Lawsuit Against New York Law Forcing Platforms To Define Speech

A Trump-appointed judge just dismissed a lawsuit by Elon Musk’s X seeking to void a New York state law requiring social media companies to disclose how they define and monitor hate speech, extremism, harassment, foreign political interference and disinformation.

U.S. District Judge John Cronan in Manhattan rejected X’s argument that the Stop Hiding Hate Act violated the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment by exposing it to lawsuits and big fines unless it disclosed "highly sensitive and controversial speech" that the state found objectionable.

Additionally, Cronan dismissed the case with prejudice, prohibiting X from refiling an updated claim on the same issue.

New York Attorney General Letitia James formally filed for the case to be dismissed in November 2025, saying the law helped consumers understand what to expect from social media, without blocking platforms from ‌speaking out or exercising their own judgment when moderating content.

Most notably, X Corp. pointed to a separate lawsuit it brought against California’s Assembly Bill 587, which it argued was “identical in all material respects” to S895B.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees California, held that AB 587’s content-category reporting provisions compelled non-commercial speech about contested political topics, which triggered strict scrutiny of the law under the First Amendment.

However, Cronan wrote that “[t]he First Amendment poses no obstacle to New York’s law."

He added:

“Businesses might not always want to share every detail about the products or services they offer. But when the government requires those businesses to speak truthfully about their offerings, the First Amendment typically allows for that kind of disclosure requirement.”

Musk’s company also said it already dedicates resources to regulating “hateful conduct” and that this would not be recognized under New York’s categories of “hate speech,” “racism,” or “extremism.” It also listed its efforts to regulate what it calls “manipulated, or out-of-context media that may result in widespread confusion on public issues, impact public safety, or cause serious harm,” but that would not be recognized by the New York law.

Nevertheless, the law was struck down on First Amendment grounds.

In this case, Cronan dismissed the California case (X Corp vs Bonta) stating that the level of scrutiny applicable was “Zauderer scrutiny,” which is “more relaxed than ordinary intermediate or strict scrutiny.”

Under the 'Zauderer standard', the government can usually force a business to state purely factual, uncontroversial information about what it sells, so long as the requirement is reasonably related to preventing consumer confusion and is not unduly burdensome.

Calorie counts, ingredient lists, and “you may still owe costs if you lose” in a lawyer ad are the classic examples.

Cronan put the Stop Hiding Hate reports in that box, analogized them to menu-labeling, and applied the relaxed standard.

He also held Section 230 does not preempt a reporting duty that attaches to incomplete or false filings rather than to the moderation decisions themselves.

The problem is the categories.

The law does not just say “publish your existing terms of service.”

It requires platforms to state whether and how they define “hate speech or racism,” “extremism or radicalization,” “disinformation or misinformation,” “harassment,” and “foreign political interference,” then report enforcement data sliced by those buckets.

However, those labels are not commercial product specs, they are contested political and legal concepts.

Platforms that refuse the state’s taxonomy, use different terms (“hateful conduct,” “violent speech,” “synthetic media”), or treat some of those categories as viewpoint-laden rather than objective, are being forced to translate their editorial judgments into the state’s vocabulary under threat of $15,000-a-day fines.

That is closer to compelled speech about contested public issues than to “this yogurt has 140 calories.”

A Trump-appointed SDNY judge reaching the opposite result from a Ninth Circuit panel is not a partisan surprise; it is a circuit split on a hard First Amendment question.

However, choosing to rule with prejudice” and no leave to amend is aggressive.

X’s theory is not frivolous; a sister circuit already accepted a version of it, as we detailed above.

Dismissing the case so that X cannot replead after discovery or after further appellate development in Bonta treats a close constitutional question as settled when it is not.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 20:30

Judge Crushes Maryland Democrats' Gerrymandering Games

Submitted by Maryland Freedom Caucus

Annapolis Democrats spent months insisting there was nothing to see here. On Tuesday, a Maryland judge told them otherwise — in writing, and in language sharper than anyone expected.

The bottom line: a circuit court judge just ruled that House Bill 2100, the constitutional amendment Governor Wes Moore and legislative Democrats rammed through a two-day special session to pave the way for wiping out Maryland's last Republican congressional seat, was placed on the November ballot unlawfully. 

This is the story of how we got here.

The Setup: A Map They Already Lost Once

In 2021, Maryland Democrats were hell-bent on maximizing their control of the state at every level. Already the most gerrymandered state in the union, they drew an 8-0, all-Democrat congressional map which now-Vice Chair of the Maryland Freedom Caucus, Delegate Kathy Szeliga, took to court. Judge Lynne Battaglia struck it down in a 95-page opinion grounded in the Maryland Constitution and Declaration of Rights. The current 7-1 congressional delegation is the product of both parties compromising in 2022.

In pursuit of a potential 2028 presidential run, Governor Wes Moore began pressuring legislative leaders to eliminate the state's last Republican seat — held by Congressman Andy Harris (MD-1), who also chairs the House Freedom Caucus. The House of Delegates passed a bill to do exactly that in February, HB 488, but it stalled and died in the Senate. Senate President Bill Ferguson worried it would invite a court to reaffirm Judge Battaglia's 2022 ruling and hand Republicans an even more favorable map. He held his ground even after House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries showed up in Annapolis to lean on him personally.

Then the political ground shifted. When the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed how far the Voting Rights Act can justify race-based congressional districting, several states began eyeing mid-cycle redistricting — Maryland among them. Not to be outdone by Gavin Newsom, Governor Moore called a special session for August to finish what he couldn't in February: eliminate Congressman Harris through a constitutional amendment designed to make sure Judge Battaglia's ruling could never stand in the way again.

The Special Session: Two Days, One Outcome Predetermined

While most of the Maryland General Assembly was on summer vacation, the Maryland Freedom Caucus was at work — researching, planning, and preparing. Before July 31, our strategy to defeat the redistricting amendment was already set. We had found a problem in the Democrats' plan that no one else seemed to catch: Senate Bill 29, signed into law in May 2026.

SB 29 amended Maryland's election law to include real reforms for ballot questions — plain language, no legal jargon, a policy statement telling voters exactly what would change if a measure passed. It also set a hard deadline: ballot language for a constitutional amendment had to be submitted to the Secretary of State by July 1 in an election year, giving the public a 15-day comment period to weigh in. For a special session that didn't convene until August 3, that meant Democrats had already blown their own deadline by more than a month.

Roughly fifty minutes before the committee hearing on HB 2100 — with the outcome predetermined despite overwhelming opposition registered to testify — Democrats slipped in a clause designed to nullify that deadline entirely. The clause, a non obstante provision, stated that "notwithstanding any other provision of law," the language they'd written would go straight to the ballot in November.

When pressed on it, in committee and on the floor, House Democrats' answer amounted to this: they write the rules, so the rules don't bind them. They ignored parliamentary procedure, the single-subject requirement, and the very election law they had codified themselves — all to ram through a measure that would let them rewrite congressional districts whenever and however they wanted.

The bill passed both chambers by August 4, 2026, and was on its way to the ballot — until the Maryland Freedom Caucus, together with Senate Minority Leadership, filed suit on August 6, represented by the legal team at the Oversight Project. It wasn't a random pairing. Several members of that legal team are Marylanders themselves — people with a personal stake in whether their own state's Constitution means anything, not just outside lawyers parachuting in for a headline case. 

The Lawsuit: Not Just "They Missed a Deadline"

The complaint, Howell v. Maryland State Board of Elections, was built on the legislature's own paper trail. It argued four things: that Democrats missed deadlines mandated by current election law; that they misrepresented the non obstante clause as a mere "technical" update; that they violated the single-subject rule by combining a constitutional amendment with an unrelated procedural override; and that the ballot language itself — having bypassed the required comment period and plain-language standard — was written in a way that misled voters.

That last point matters most. The text for Question 3 on the State Board of Elections website says the amendment will merely "clarify" that Maryland's legislative-district rules — requiring districts to be compact and respectful of natural boundaries — do not apply to congressional districts. But a judge already ruled otherwise, back in 2022. That’s not a clarification at all, it's the elimination of a barrier that stood between Democrats and total control.

Oral Arguments: The State's Defense Was "The Rules Don't Apply to Us"

Tuesday morning, August 25, we argued our case before Judge Robert Thompson in Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. Attorney Jeffrey Clark argued for the Oversight Project. Assistant Attorney General Daniel Kobrin argued for the State.

Attorney Jeffrey Clark argued for the Oversight Project and knocked it out of the park. The team's command of the record, from the SB 29 timeline down to the exact language of the ballot question, was the product of weeks of meticulous preparation, not a rushed filing. For a legal team with Maryland roots of its own, this case was never just a job. 

Kobrin's argument boiled down: SB 29's deadlines only bind the process when the Secretary of State drafts the ballot question. When the legislature writes the language itself, apparently, the deadlines evaporate. In his own words to the court: "There's no blackout period set by the constitution."

6/ Kobrin says the General Assembly can draft the language itself, and the election deadlines for questions wouldn’t apply.

“There’s no blackout period set by the constitution,” Kobrin said.

— Mikenzie Frost (@MikenzieFrost) August 25, 2026

Read that argument again. It isn't a claim that Democrats complied with the law. It's a claim that the law simply doesn't apply to the people who wrote it, provided they cut out the middleman.

The Ruling: Three Ways to Lose

On Wednesday, Judge Robert J. Thompson didn't split the baby. He granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, denied the State's, and enjoined the Board of Elections from placing Question 3 on the November ballot — stayed pending the State's expected appeal to the Supreme Court of Maryland.

🚨Oversight Project Secures Massive Win in Howell v. Maryland State Board of Elections

We are grateful to have pursued this fight alongside members of the @MDFreedomCaucus and Members of the Maryland Senate as we fight to defend transparency, due process, and the integrity of… pic.twitter.com/fXouyIgXxE

— Oversight Project (@ItsYourGov) August 26, 2026

Ground one: Thompson rejected the State's "we wrote it ourselves so the deadline doesn't count" theory outright: "Because the legislature did not follow the very laws it enacted, the court finds the enactment of HB2100 to be legally deficient."

Ground two — the one that should actually sting: the judge ruled that the ballot question's use of the word "clarifies" is misleading. The court found nothing in the record supporting the idea that Maryland's compactness rules were ever understood to exclude congressional districts — because Judge Battaglia had already settled that question in 2022. Thompson's opinion states that "clarifies" is "intentionally misleading, and this should disqualify the ballot question as currently written."

Ground three: the ballot question illegally bundled two different subjects — the districting-standards change and a brand-new grant of jurisdiction to the Maryland Supreme Court — into a single question, violating the state's single-subject requirement for referred amendments.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Maryland Freedom Caucus: Court Rules HB 2100 Unlawful — Case Now Heads to Maryland's Supreme Court

ANNAPOLIS, MD — One day after oral arguments in Howell v. Maryland State Board of Elections, Judge Robert J. Thompson of the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel… pic.twitter.com/URQLPULFOL

— Maryland Freedom Caucus (@MDFreedomCaucus) August 26, 2026

What Happens Now

The injunction is stayed while the State appeals to the Supreme Court of Maryland, meaning Question 3 remains on the ballot for the moment. The fight moves to the state's highest court.

But the finding already on the books doesn't go away: a Maryland judge has now ruled, in writing, that the word Democrats used to sell this amendment to voters was intentionally misleading. That's not an opposition talking point. That's a court record.

None of this happens without the Oversight Project. Their legal team's work on this case was top-notch from the first filing to the final argument — professional, exhaustively prepared, and, for several team members, personal. These are Marylanders who understood exactly what was at stake for their own state, and it showed in every page of the brief and every minute in that courtroom. 

Read our press release here: Today, the Oversight Project, a proud member of the @Phase2Deport and the leader of the Redistricting and Election Protection for American Integrity and Representation (REPAIR) Initiative, secured a massive litigation victory in Howell v. Maryland.… https://t.co/NzkzXOYpNF pic.twitter.com/3TtPbd2H69

— Oversight Project (@ItsYourGov) August 26, 2026

Delegate Matt Morgan, Chair of the Maryland Freedom Caucus, put it plainly: "A chamber that holds a supermajority is still a chamber bound by the law." Apparently, on Wednesday, a judge agreed.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 20:05

Your Tax Dollars At Work: Georgia Teacher Creates 'Fart Corner' In Classroom, Calls It The 'Gas Station'

An Atlanta elementary school teacher has created a designated “fart corner” where students can pass gas without leaving class or interrupting lessons, according to NBC.

Second grade teacher Candy Sydney Browning calls the area the “gas station,” while the specific spot is known as the “gusty winds area.” Students can quietly get up, walk to the corner, take care of business and return to their seats without asking permission.

Sydney Browning came up with the idea after noticing that bathroom trips and students reacting to classmates passing gas were taking time away from lessons. She had already started encouraging students to use the restroom before lessons so they would not need to leave as often. Passing gas, however, created another distraction. Students would point fingers, move away from one another and announce who they thought was responsible.

Rather than treating it as something embarrassing, Sydney Browning wanted students to understand that passing gas is simply a normal bodily function. “It’s normal,” she told them. “But you have to excuse yourself.” Creating a specific area gave students a discreet way to do that without stopping the lesson.

They do not need to raise their hands or ask for permission, which means Sydney Browning can continue teaching while the student briefly steps away.

NBC writes that the idea soon became a normal part of classroom life. Sydney Browning said the first student to use the station attracted a few smiles and curious looks from classmates. However, no one pointed fingers or made fun of him, and eventually students stopped paying attention altogether.

“It just became a norm,” she told TODAY. She said the station has become so ordinary that she sometimes forgets it is even there. 

After Browning shared the setup on TikTok, the unusual classroom rule received widespread attention. Thousands of viewers reacted to the idea, with some praising it as a clever way to normalize bodily functions while keeping students focused. Several teachers said they wanted to introduce similar areas in their own classrooms, while others shared that they already had their own versions of a designated fart area.

Not everyone was convinced. Some commenters worried that students who use the corner frequently could feel embarrassed or become targets for teasing. Others questioned whether children could really ignore a classmate walking across the room specifically to pass gas. Sydney Browning believes making the practice routine is exactly what prevents it from becoming a bigger issue. When adults and students stop treating it as something shocking or funny, it becomes less interesting.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 19:40

Trump Complained About Big Oil Profits, But Dumped Exxon Stock On Ceasefire Day

By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com,

President Donald Trump’s investment accounts sold between $500,000 and $1 million of ExxonMobil stock on April 7, the same day Trump announced a ceasefire in the Iran war and hours before Exxon shares opened 6.5% lower, according to financial disclosures reviewed by CBS News.

Exxon closed at $163.91 on April 7 before Trump announced the ceasefire that evening and opened at $153.52 the following morning. The transaction was one of hundreds of thousands of dollars in purchases and sales involving Exxon, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and other oil and gas companies during the first half of 2026, according to filings with the Office of Government Ethics as reported by CBS News. 

Those trades continued through a war that sent oil prices sharply higher and delivered some of the strongest earnings for U.S. oil majors since 2022. ExxonMobil and Chevron ultimately earned a combined $26.5 billion in the second quarter as the Iran war and disruption to oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz drove crude prices and refining margins sharply higher. Exxon reported $14.5 billion in net income, more than double its year-earlier profit and its best result in four years, while Chevron reported record net income of $12.2 billion, nearly five times its year-earlier result. Trump subsequently accused the companies of making “too much money” and demanded that they cut fuel prices.

CBS reported that Trump’s accounts executed roughly 3,600 stock and securities trades worth between $212 million and $695 million during the first quarter alone. Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee estimate that his oil and gas holdings increased in value from between $13 million and $46 million at the start of the year to between $17 million and $61 million by mid-August. The estimate does not include trades made during 2026.

The White House said Trump does not direct the trades. Spokesman Davis Ingle told CBS that the portfolio is managed independently by third-party financial institutions using computer-based model portfolios and that Trump and his family cannot influence when securities are bought or sold.

Trump has not placed his assets in a blind trust, and federal law does not prohibit presidents from owning or trading individual stocks. His energy holdings remain a small portion of a fortune Forbes estimates at more than $6 billion.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 19:15

Moody's Downgrades Baltimore City's Credit Rating Amid Population Collapse

Moody's Ratings downgraded Democrat-led Baltimore City's bond rating this week, highlighting a rapidly deteriorating financial situation as declining reserves, depleted utility funds, and mounting borrowing costs strain the crime-ridden metro area best known for the hit HBO series The Wire.

Local outlet Fox Baltimore reports that the ratings agency lowered Baltimore's rating from Aa2 to Aa3, citing "declining fund balance and cash levels across all government operations," with much of the deterioration concentrated in utility and internal-service funds.

Moody's explained that the city's finances have weakened since the COVID-19 pandemic, despite efforts and forecasts aimed at stabilizing reserves. The new Aa3 rating remains investment grade, but the downgrade suggests that the municipal bond market will demand a higher rate when lending to the city.

In a statement, the ratings agency said the downgrade "reflects the trend of declining fund balance and cash levels across all government operations, largely concentrated in the utility and internal service funds."

Economist Anirban Basu warned that the city's financial position is deteriorating and that this is "not great news."

"This is a city now with over $4 billion in outstanding bonds, outstanding debt in that form," said Basu. "And the decline in the bond rating from Aa2 to Aa3 simply means that when the city goes to float its next set of bonds, it's going to pay more interest or higher interest rates on those bonds, which makes financing infrastructure and other city expenditures more expensive."

Basu continued, "A lot of our fiscal concerns, including how much we want to spend on education, how much we need to spend on infrastructure, and the fact that other city funds have also been downgraded, including the water, sewer, and internal service funds, have been downgraded recently."

Related:

• Downtown Baltimore CRE Crash Signals Deeper Fiscal Crisis Ahead

Fox Baltimore stopped short of addressing a much deeper structural problem: Baltimore has seen a massive exodus of residents, losing more than 70,000 residents, or about 11% of its population, over the past two decades. 

That population collapse (back to 100-year lows) has eroded the city's tax base while leaving fewer residents to support its debt, infrastructure, and public-service obligations, making the city widely unaffordable for many of the productive residents, hence the population exodus. 

Related:

• Welcome To Baltimore: Chaos, Gunfire, And Roaming Youth Mobs Transform Bar District Into Warzone

Years of progressive policy experiments, elevated violent crime, and left-wing governance in City Hall have transformed the city into an epic fiscal mess and, by some standards, a failed city.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/27/2026 - 18:50