Giambologna Colossus of the Apennines 1579-80 (35ft tall)
https://twitter.com/maggiewise111/status/2069164671114875120?s=20 https://twitter.com/warDaniel47/status/2069156702872609230?s=20 https://twitter.com/QuantumGuard17/status/2069155203358531893?s=20 https://twitter.com/ConstitustionX/status/2069152887578722549?s=20
https://twitter.com/GOP_is_Gutless/status/2069034108278243491?s=20 https://twitter.com/MCarbonaraFL/status/2069403989624398334?s=20Classic Vance dry humor:
— TRUMP SUPPORTER (@_Postive_Vibes) June 22, 2026
Vince: “How are you doing the job differently than Kamala did it?”
VP JD Vance: “Well, I don’t have four shots of vodka before every meeting.”
pic.twitter.com/hnA8WJNFtp
Trump adapts to Iranian tactics by just making statements no matter what they are, just like they do..
NOTE: according to Tehran, the US gives in on every single issue. Why would it?
Tehran just shouts things .. and far too many in the west take their word for it.
• Trump Insists Iran Agreed to ‘Highest Level’ of Nuclear Inspections (ZH)
Despite Washington pressure and warnings, it appears Oman is still on board with cooperating with Iran to extract Hormuz Strait transit fees, or tolls, over and against repeat objections from the White House.Alongside nuclear inspectors, this remains a top disputed issue, despite the MoD framework having been signed. But the two sides are likely to leave the details to be hashed out during the 60-day ‘technical negotiations’.Read more …
Iran and Oman said any future arrangements for the Strait of Hormuz must respect the sovereign rights of the two coastal states, adding that they plan to charge fees for ships transiting the waterway.
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) June 23, 2026
Following talks in Muscat, the two sides agreed to form a joint working group… pic.twitter.com/3EAkdDFVAH
With a number of issues still up in the air, amid claims and counter-claims coming after Switzerland – from nuclear inspectors accessing Iran to how Tehran is able to use its soon to be unfrozen funds – President Trump heightens the drama by issuing a Tuesday morning Truth Social message regarding the negotiations Trump insists that Iran has agreed to the “highest level” of nuclear inspections, calling it a guarantee of “Nuclear Honesty” and stressing that there would have been “no further negotiations” without such a commitment. He also says the US will allow the Strait of Hormuz to remain “OPEN” and is not pursuing a naval blockade, though military assets remain in place if conditions change.According to Trump, any sanctions relief or released Iranian funds will be held in US-controlled escrow and can only be used to purchase food and medical supplies from the United States, including “Corn, Wheat, and Soybeans from our great American Farmers.”Trump now characterizes the situation in Iran as a “humanitarian crisis” and concluded that “Talks are going well!!”.
Trump says "Iran has fully and completely agreed to highest level Nuclear inspections long into the future" and yet adds "If they did not agree to this, there would be no further negotiations"
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 23, 2026
Iran has repeatedly said it has not agreed to this pic.twitter.com/SI82IXb1hfIran Touts $12BN in Frozen Assets to Be Released, Will Use How it Pleases
Among the biggest latest developments in the immediate wake of the Switzerland meeting is that Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has announced an agreement has been reached for the United States to release $12 billion in frozen Iranian assets. It also comes after the US Treasury Department announced temporary sanctions relief, namely freeing up Iranian oil and petrochemical sales until August 1st. Concerning the frozen asset partial release, Tehran is now emphasizing that it alone will decide how the funds will be used.
But this may be another area where the headlines and declarations are too far out front, given Washington has sought to impose some caveats which likely remain unacceptable to the Iranians side. For example Vice President JD Vance made clear his stance Monday that Iranian assets had not yet been unfrozen as part of the deal, describing that if there were, they must be limited in use and implementation – to purchase US agricultural goods. He has emphasized – perhaps wishing to address American domestic criticisms – that the funds would not be used to support terrorism.
A swarm of 1,000 small ones, the size of a fingernail? Why not?10,000?!
• So a ‘Jellyfish’ Drone Swarm Might Have Shot Down Our F-15 Over Iran (Green)
“Multiple drones interconnected and moving as one with smaller drones below the bigger drones like legs,” shot down a U.S. Air Force F-15E strike fighter over Iran in April, according to a CNN source familiar with the apparently bizarre shootdown. “Real alien s***,” they called it. As you may recall, both the pilot and the backseat weapons systems officer ejected safely, but the WSO’s rescue 36 hours later in hostile territory was the stuff of Hollywood movies. But it wasn’t until today that we learned the movie looked more like Independence Day than Behind Enemy Lines.Read more …
A second source confirmed the almost unbelievable claim, telling CNN that the downed pilot described witnessing a “minefield of drones” in the air. Exactly how the drones either attacked the F-15E Strike Eagle or enabled an attack by ground forces is either not yet understood, or at least not revealed. “US intelligence officials disagreed on how to interpret what the F-15 pilot described, and whether the pilot could recount the incident clearly,” according to CNN, and a concussion he reportedly suffered during the crash could have affected his memory. But things get weirder still.While the pilot’s name still hasn’t been released, he’s believed to be one of the same Eagle pilots accidentally shot down by Kuwait in a friendly fire incident earlier in Operation Epic Fury. According to the Washington Examiner, the unnamed pilot is “believed to be the first fixed-wing Air Force pilot since the Vietnam War era to survive being shot down twice in the same conflict.”He’s either extraordinarily lucky or extraordinarily unlucky. Or maybe both. Take your pick. Let’s get back to that alleged drone swarm.
“Had he witnessed a mature capability that US intelligence wasn’t aware of?” CNN’s Zachary Cohen and Katie Bo Lillis asked. “A beta test? A mirage in the desert?” At least for the sake of argument, let’s dismiss the suggestion that the pilot’s recollection — at least as reported by CNN’s sources — was any kind of mirage or a concussion-related hallucination. Losing an F-15E Strike Eagle is serious business, and it deserves to be treated seriously. Also, whatever caused that shootdown required one of the biggest and most complicated rescue missions in history.
So we need answers, not dismissals. My initial gut reaction — and it’s nothing more than that, so appraise accordingly — is that China used Operation Epic Fury to test at least one of its new systems. There are reports, also unconfirmed, that Tehran used or attempted to use Chinese-made anti-ship missiles on U.S. Navy targets during the conflict, and I’d almost be surprised if they hadn’t.
If Beijing also possesses some sort of drone-swarm antiaircraft capability, Epic Fury would have been a sweet opportunity to put it to a real-world test. Performing that test well inside Iranian territory also makes sense, given that any survivors — i.e., witnesses — would be less likely to live long enough to get the word out. But we’re unbelievably good at getting our people out, as I detailed back in April. Another option is that Tehran’s homegrown drone technology is already advanced enough to destroy American fighters. If that’s the case, the Pentagon needs to recalibrate how best to handle any future conflict not just with Iran, but with any country Iran might sell to. As of today, we just don’t know.
“The British people are celebrating the prime minister’s resignation, the former MP has told RT..”
• Starmer Turned UK Into ‘Authoritarian Hellhole’ – George Galloway (RT)
Outgoing British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has turned the UK into an “authoritarian hellhole,” with more people being jailed and arrested for social media posts than in any other country in the world, former MP George Galloway has told RT. Starmer announced on Monday that he would step down as prime minister and Labour Party leader by September, citing a widespread internal revolt against his leadership. Speaking to RT’s Rick Sanchez, Galloway, who was expelled from the Labour Party in 2003 for his vocal opposition to the Iraq War, welcomed the move.Read more …
“I danced on his political grave,” he said. “He has turned the United Kingdom into an authoritarian hellhole.” Galloway argued that Starmer, who assumed office in July 2024, had made the UK subservient to the interests of Israel, Ukraine and the EU. The British people were “rejoicing” at his departure, Galloway said, suggesting that Starmer’s plunging approval ratings had made him a liability for Labour. Only 18% of Britons viewed him favorably in mid-June, according to YouGov.“He’s a creature of the deep state,” Galloway said, referring to Starmer’s work as Director of Public Prosecutions and head of the Crown Prosecution Service prior to his election to Parliament in 2015. He added that Starmer had “a whole string of deep-state preoccupations,” citing what he described as “the injustice to Julian Assange” and the decision not to prosecute BBC presenter and serial sex offender Jimmy Savile.“That doesn’t mean the next fellow will be better,” Galloway said.
Andy Burnham, the newly sworn-in MP for Makerfield, is widely seen as the frontrunner to become the next prime minister. “It’ll be a coronation… this is a democratic outrage,” Galloway said. In 2024, Starmer became the UK’s first Labour prime minister since 2010 and the sixth person to hold the office in the span of a decade. He decided to leave office after more than 100 Labour MPs urged him to step down and several key ministers resigned from his government.
The Right went before the Left did.
Now, Farage is in the waiting room.
Burnham will first continue on the broken path.
Burn, baby., burn!
• Starmer’s Gone, But UK’s Right May Have Little To Cheer About (RMX)
The deeply unpopular British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, announced his resignation on Monday morning, but despite his upcoming departure, the right may have little to cheer about. During a speech outside Downing Street, Starmer announced he was stepping down after holding office since July 7, 2024. In that election, his Labour Party won 412 seats, securing a comfortable majority and decimating the Tories, who had governed Britain since 2010.Read more …
Starmer revealed on the morning of Monday, June 22, that he had already spoken with King Charles III to inform him of his decision. The Labour Party’s National Executive Committee will now develop a timetable for the election of a new leader, who will also become Prime Minister. He stressed that this process should be completed by the end of the summer holidays. Until then, Starmer will remain at the helm of the British government. According to Reuters, the main favorite to replace Starmer is the former Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, who won a seat in the House of Commons during the Makerfield constituency by-election in northwest England on June 18, defeating Nigel Farage’s party.The right now has a challenger
Burnham may pose a grave challenge to Restore Britain and Reform UK, the two main right-wing parties running against the British left. Under Starmer, multiple polls predicted a strong majority for Reform UK, with some even forecasting a blowout election victory. However, the rise of Restore Britain had already siphoned off a number of voters from Reform UK, narrowing Farage’s lead.Now, with Starmer gone, some polls show Reform UK barely leading Labour in a general election. A new poll from Politico shows Farage winning 27 percent of the vote versus 20 percent for Labour under Starmer’s current numbers – but when tested against Burnham, Labour’s chances receive a significant boost. Some within Labour even describe Burnham as a “Reform Slayer,” as he polls better against Farage than anyone else in the party.
Nevertheless, the Politico article also describes an uphill battle for Burnham, given how far Labour has fallen out of favour with British voters during Starmer’s rule. Notably, Burnham is described as more left-wing than Starmer, who is categorized as a “centrist.” Although the Tories are still seen as a formidable election force, they have long since discarded any semblance of right-wing politics. Nevertheless, they are also siphoning voters away from both Restore Britain and Reform UK, retaining voters who might lean personally to the right but still vote Conservative out of habit.
The combined effect of vote-splitting on the right and Burnham leading Labour could deliver a shock upset in favor of Labour, ending Farage’s dream of winning the office of prime minister. British commentators point out that Starmer’s position has been weakening for months. More than 100 Labour MPs – around a quarter of the parliamentary party in the House of Commons – had publicly stated they wanted the prime minister to resign or set a timetable for his departure. Labour Party members pointed to a total loss of trust in the head of government and his leadership abilities. The government had recently been rocked by a number of high-profile resignations, including Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Defence Secretary John Healey.
Polling also showed that Labour members overwhelmingly wanted Burnham, nicknamed the “King of the North” after winning three consecutive mayoral terms. He is currently Labour’s most popular politician. His recent victory in the Makerfield seat also bodes poorly for Reform UK and Restore Britain; the constituency is predominantly white and working-class, representing the exact demographic that these two right-wing parties are seeking to win over from Labour.
“[..] .. tragically, not one of his comedies..”
“If you can look into the seeds of time; And say which grain will grow and which will not.”
• There’s A Shakespearean Tone To Current Developments (ZH)
There’s a Shakespearean tone to current developments: tragically, not one of his comedies. The US has introduced a temporary waiver (until August 21) for Iranian oil sales that undoes 40 years of sanctions. Iran can sell what it likes to who it likes, including the US, and receive US dollars. Two months isn’t enough time to sell much, but if the White House wants to show Iran it’s serious about offering new opportunities that’s been achieved. Equally, Iran says an agreement has been reached to release $12bn in frozen funds, but disputes Trump’s claim it will buy food exclusively from the US with it.Read more …
More importantly, VP Vance said Iran has agreed to nuclear inspections from the IAEA, a huge concession. However, Iran responded that’s not the case and it didn’t negotiate nuclear matters so far in Switzerland. On Hormuz, the Iranian view remains it will manage the strait and charge for passage within months: Trump’s is the polar opposite. That’s as transits seem to be running at around a quarter to a third of normal levels, at best. Indeed, the squeeze in bunker fuel is still evident in rising ocean carrier freight rates.On Lebanon, a new deconfliction mechanism is floated that excludes Israel, as PM Netanyahu, Defence Minister Katz, and IDF head Zamir reiterated a pledge to “continue to act decisively” and hold their security zone there, including the 1km-long, 25-metre deep underground Hezbollah missile and drone base in Ali Taher ridge, evidence of how much Iran has ploughed into its proxy. Separately, the Israeli and Lebanese governments will meet in Washington to discuss normalization and elusive Hezbollah disarmament; and in the background, Syria has signaled that, after Trump’s suggestion, it will only engage Hezbollah if Lebanon requests it.
The Saudi paper Asharq Al-Awsat reports Hamas held a top-secret meeting with French officials to discuss a possible return to ‘1967 borders’, which they’ve floated before as a temporary truce, that could unlock Trump’s Board of Peace and ‘Gaza-Lago’ redevelopment plans. Yet the Jerusalem Post reports new Mossad boss Gofman is taking the agency “by storm” and is ramping up plans to topple the Islamic regime. So, what’s it to be in the Middle East, beyond the current calm?
“Something wicked this way comes” UK PM Starmer resigned, as former Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham sealed his doom by coming to high Done-inane, swearing in as an MP in Westminster after not being one a week ago. The UK press is abuzz with discussions of who will be in his cabinet, like what’s-his-face and that-one-from-a-few-years-ago. There’s a natural market focus on who’ll be the Thane of Cawdor Chancellor: Burnham needs to reassure Gilts that fiscal rules will be adhered to and his leftwing backbenchers that he’s offering something new enough that his popularity won’t follow the same rapid downwards trajectory as that of Starmer, Sunak, Truss, Johnson, and May.
One immediate impact is that the July EU-UK summit has been postponed: nobody knows what Burnham’s view re: the EU will be, but he has previously backed rejoining. “If you can look into the seeds of time; And say which grain will grow and which will not.” In Asia, India launched three warships as a show of force to China in the Indian Ocean, as the US Department of War renamed its Indo-Pacific Command back to the Pacific Command, signalling a de-prioritisation of the area matching Europe re: NATO and the Middle East re: Iran and Israel. In East Asia, where the US is outsourcing its Taiwan-focused efforts to Japan and the Philippines, China says it warned off multiple Japanese ‘provocations’ during its recent aircraft carrier drills.
This doesn’t concern one country; it’s an entire continent with open borders.
• So, How’s Spain’s Mass Amnesty Working Out? (Aaron Hanscom)
Half a million. That’s the number that made headlines in April when Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s Socialist government approved plans to grant legal status to 500,000 illegal migrants. But a leaked police report warned that the true number could be much higher, estimating that between 750,000 and 1 million illegal migrants living in Spain could apply for amnesty, in addition to 250,000 to 350,000 asylum seekers. The report described the amnesty plan’s “very intense media impact, especially in Latin America” and warned of a “highly relevant pull factor,” which we will return to in a moment.Read more …
The conservative Popular Party (PP) also disputed the government’s estimates, saying the true number could be double and calling the plan an “outrage.” Sanchez, whom The Economist has called the leader of Europe’s anti-Trump resistance, anticipating such criticism, wrote in a New York Times op-ed in January that “MAGA-style leaders may say that our country can’t handle taking in so many migrants — that this is a suicidal move, the desperate act of a collapsing country.”Well, the numbers are starting to come in and, just as Joe Biden’s weak border enforcement in the U.S. created a “pull factor” that led to average monthly border crossings of over 100,000, Sanchez’s policies are having a similar magnet effect, far exceeding his government’s estimates.
Even though the asylum application window remains open until June 30, 900,000 applications have already been submitted, a record number for Spain. The European Conservative reports that “approximately 350,000 additional applications have been submitted since the start of June, a surge that has caught authorities off guard.” The publication notes that these numbers are much higher than the last time mass amnesty was tried in Spain, in 2005 under the Socialist government of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who these days spends his time in court as the subject of a graft probe. Zapatero’s program granted 576,000 residence permits from 691,000 applications received.
Sanchez, of course, looks at every new immigrant as a potential future voter who won’t care about the mind-boggling corruption within his Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE). As increasing numbers of Spaniards take to the streets to demand the prime minister’s resignation, Muslim migrants are among his most loyal supporters. In the video below, we meet a Muslim store owner a minute in, with a poster of Sanchez on his shop wall, who says Muslims are “100%” going to vote for the prime minister if they become citizens. Why? Because he “stands with Iran and Palestine.” Indeed he does.
You’d be hard-pressed to find a poster of Santiago Abascal, the leader of the rising populist/conservative Vox party, in any Muslim-owned shops in Spain. Abascal, who has said that it is “inhumane to tell all of Africa and all of America that they can fit into Spain,” warned in April that mass amnesty will increase crime in the streets of Spain and accelerate the country’s housing and public healthcare crises.
And it’s not just Spanish politicians who are criticizing Sanchez’s policies. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni told Sanchez in a closed-door meeting in Brussels last week that his amnesty plan negatively affects all EU countries. It was at that EU leaders’ meeting in Brussels that Sanchez opposed, along with French President Emmanuel Macron, plans for offshore migrant deportation hubs. Politico reports:
The disagreement comes days after the EU approved legislation allowing members to establish deportation hubs in third countries as part of a push to ensure failed asylum-seekers leave the bloc. While it’s still unclear how many capitals could take advantage of the rule change, 19 of the EU 27 signed up to a joint Danish-Italian letter, first reported by POLITICO, calling for swift action on deportations. “Countries are now working … to implement the new possibilities, including hubs in third countries. We will personally lead the way to make sure our visions are brought to life,” the letter circulated Friday morning reads.
Spain opposes EU plans for offshore deportation hubs, arguing they raise legal and humanitarian concerns, while other countries including Italy and Denmark view the hubs as a key tool to deter irregular migration and speed up removals. What Sanchez calls a humanitarian immigration policy, an increasing number of European politicians, including Abascal and Meloni, see as an invitation to invasion. Watch the video below and decide for yourself:
She’s got it wrong. On the one thing Ukraine didn’t do.
• AfD’s Alice Weidel Demands Ukraine Pay Reparations To Germany (Korybko)
Europeans and especially Germans have borne enormous costs to perpetuate the Ukrainian Conflict while receiving absolutely nothing of tangible benefit in return. AfD co-leader Alice Weidel responded to Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s proposal to grant Ukraine associate membership in the EU, which was analyzed here and here, by declaring that “We need to know how this state-terrorist act against the most important infrastructure we had, namely the Nord Stream pipelines, came about and what role Ukraine played in it. The flow of payments should actually be moving in the opposite direction.”Read more …
She then added that, “Ukraine must pay reparations to the Federal Republic of Germany, because we have suffered enormous damage – and so has Europe as a whole – from the loss of cheap Russian fossil fuels.” Weidel made a solid point about the economic damage that the Ukrainian Conflict has caused to Europe, even independently of the Nord Stream terrorist attack, which she implied was committed by Ukraine like Berlin suggested but which the famous Seymer Hersh cited sources to blame on the US.To elaborate a bit more on the background of Berlin’s innuendo, it sought the extradition from Poland last year of a Ukrainian suspect but was rebuffed by the judge for the reasons explained here, which lent credence in a lot of the public’s mind to the claim of Ukrainian culpability. Nevertheless, that narrative was already counteracted here, here, and here over the years long before the extradition request was made and rejected, but Weidel, many Germans, and a lot of folks across the West in fact still believe it.
In any case, having clarified the context of her implied accusation against Ukraine and circling back to her reparations demand, the EU spent hundreds of billions of dollars on aid for Ukraine and its refugees. When calculating the higher cost of fuel since then, including that which it still purchases from Russia, the total credibly approaches $1 trillion and might even surpass it by some estimates. The most that the EU might receive in exchange is arms and reconstruction contracts for only a handful of companies.
That nowhere near justifies the enormous costs that the EU has paid to perpetuate the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine, which highlights the ideological motives behind this policy. The liberal-globalists that rule the bloc are hellbent on inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia through NATO-backed Ukraine, to which end no cost is too high to pay, especially since it’s average Europeans and not them that are paying it. This cynical policy is already backfiring in Germany by turbocharging the AfD’s rise.
It’s now the most popular party in the country by far and its appeal continues to grow since it’s one of the few forces apart from the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance that’s speaking truth to power about this conflict and its crushing economic consequences for Europeans. Germany in particular has been hit exceptionally hard with growth crawling to a halt and many suspecting that the bloc’s largest economy is actually already in a recession that might soon be confirmed and then spread throughout the EU.
Weidel knows very well that Ukraine will never pay reparations to Germany and that even the hypothetical cession of its key industries to her country wouldn’t come anywhere near compensating the costs that Germans have already paid. Her rhetoric was thus meant to draw attention to these same costs. The more that Germans dwell upon them and realize that their country received nothing of tangible benefit in return, the more likely they are to support the AfD in a bid to bring about real change.
“..once we break our historic reference connecting ‘intelligence’ and the generalized term ‘smart’, we can properly address the question you present.”
I previously saw an interesting discussion with NVIDEA Jensen Haung where in the context of AI he was asked: who is the smartest person you ever met? Jensen Haung paused for quite a few moments thinking about the question before he answered. Haung then redefined the word “smart.” ‘Smart’ is a word we have historically used in reference to ‘intelligence’. If a person was intelligent, we say that person is smart. However, in this era of AI at your fingertips, we must break this connection.Intelligence, the assembly of knowledge about a particular matter of discussion, is no longer limited to educational or real-life training or study by people who focus intensely on subject material.Read more …
All of the knowing about a system, any system, process, history or discussion topic is now available almost instantly to anyone in this era of artificial intelligence. The NVIDEA CEO then continued, therefore, once we break our historic reference connecting ‘intelligence’ and the generalized term ‘smart’, we can properly address the question you present. Who is the smart man? Or, in the context of the originating question, “who is the smartest person?”With this baseline established, Jensen Haung then outlined the traits of the smartest person. The smartest person is not the person with the greatest knowledge; the smart individual is the person who can tune into the frequency of the universal moment, look at the human reality of what is factually taking place that has not yet become an input into the AI capture record, and then predict the material outcome – the destination of knowledge that has not yet arrived.
Essentially, Haung explains the smart person is alone, tuning themselves into the vibration that is the consequence of human activity, financial interests, geopolitical movement, social transformation, economic shifts and cultural modifications. Then, positioning their interests at the place in the future where they predict all the activity will arrive. The accuracy of prediction, or predictive positioning, then determines the scale of smart. The more accurate a person is under this perspective, the smarter they are. I agree with this perspective. All of human knowledge is now being assembled into AI databases for exploration by anyone with a keen interest or stake in the subject matter.
Knowledge is no longer the valuation of ‘smart.’ The ability to predict the next step, phase or moment is the smart attribute. With this context, we can now look back over the past few decades, not looking for the most intelligent voice, but rather looking at the accuracy of current position, contrast with the outline from the voices who make the predictions. This interview about the ramifications of cultural change in Europe was given in 2010, sixteen years ago, centered on a book written by Mark Steyn and the context within the questioning is looking forward over a period of about 20 years.
Remember, this is 2010, written before the “arab spring, long before Brexit, well before President Donald Trump and the MAGA agenda as policy and before the U.K churned through seven prime ministers’ in a decade. Remarkably, Steyn discusses/predicts what would happen if Islam tried to reform; if the U.S. pulled NATO resources out of Germany; if the U.K doesn’t radically alter direction and much more. Watch the discussion or put the interview on play while listening to it in the background as you go about your tasks. Remind yourself at moments throughout the roughly 30 minutes, that the interview took place fifteen years ago.
Mark Steyn, a writer, political commentator, and friend of the Treehouse outlines his 2010 prediction about the destination of the Western world during a discussion with Peter Robinson.
Next up, some AI model will build a government.
“Five Eyes cyber agencies have warned that frontier models could soon transform offensive hacking capabilities.”
• AI ‘Months Away’ From Taking Down Governments – 5 Eyes Intel Group (RT)
Advanced artificial intelligence models could soon give hackers the ability to cripple governments, businesses, and critical systems, cyber agencies from the Five Eyes intelligence group have warned. In a rare joint statement published on Monday, cyber security leaders from Australia, the US, the UK, Canada, and New Zealand said frontier AI models are developing faster than expected and are “anticipated to exceed current industry expectations, fundamentally transforming both offensive and defensive cyber capabilities.”Read more …
“The timeline is not years, it is months,” the agencies said, adding that “cyber risk can no longer be treated as a purely technical issue. This is a core business risk and leadership responsibility.” The statement said AI will help improve cyber defense over time, but is also lowering the barrier for malicious actors, increasing the speed and complexity of attacks, while shrinking the window between vulnerability discovery and exploitation. The agencies urged organizations to strengthen their digital defenses, update outdated software more quickly, limit access to sensitive systems, and prepare for cyberattacks before they happen.While the Five Eyes statement did not name any single model or company, the recent debate over AI security has centered on US developer Anthropic, which has faced scrutiny over its latest and most advanced systems. Earlier this year, the company said one of its flagship models, Mythos, was too powerful to be released to the general public and limited access to a small group of trusted organizations. The company later introduced Fable 5, a more restricted version of the technology, but both models were subsequently taken offline after the US government ordered that foreign citizens be barred from using them, citing national security concerns.
The developments come amid broader warnings from researchers, technology leaders, and security officials that AI capabilities are advancing faster than governments and institutions can adapt. Experts have increasingly cautioned that systems designed to boost productivity and strengthen cyber defenses could also be used to automate attacks, lower barriers for malicious actors, and amplify the impact of small groups.
Kentaji Brown Jackson is the Biden admin’s one woman wrecking crew in the Supreme Court. You can pack the court, and/or you can wreck it from within.
• Justice Jackson’s Curious Call to Overturn Bruen (Turley)
Since her confirmation in 2022, Justice Kentaji Brown Jackson has established a legacy that is fast becoming one of the most radical in the Court’s history. Her sole dissents have drawn sharp criticism from both her conservative and liberal colleagues. However, for critics of some of these decisions, Justice Jackson continues to publish opinions that are not just, as she describes it, cathartic but chilling. Worse yet, the latest judicial jump scare was shared by her colleague, Justice Sonya Sotomayor, in her concurring opinion in United States v. Hemani.Read more …
At issue in the case was an effort to prosecute Ali Hemani for recreational use of marijuana, a prosecution that threatened up to 15 years and to strip him of his gun rights under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch ruled that the provision was not “consistent with the Second Amendment.” Gorsuch noted that Hemani was not alleged to be a drug addict or to have used his guns in a menacing manner. Gorsuch wrote that the “historical laws on which it relies targeted different kinds of people, did so for different reasons, and operated in different ways.”However, Jackson used the concurrence to argue for overturning NYSRPA v. Bruen, a case critical to laying the foundation for interpreting the Second Amendment based on historical precedent. Jackson lashed out at the”‘history and tradition’ metric” and called for the Court to “revisit” the case. Declaring Bruen “unworkable,” Jackson called for the restoration of the “means-end scrutiny—the approach courts applied before we adopted Bruen’s ‘history and tradition’ metric—offers a more rational way of assessing the constitutionality of firearm regulations.”
The reason for undoing Bruen? According to Jackson, “it imposes on judges the unfamiliar and difficult tasks of sifting through centuries-old evidence in order to answer ‘contested historical questions,’ and ‘applying those answers to resolve contemporary problems.’” Justice Jackson added that “Given those challenges, it is unsurprising that Bruen’s test is vulnerable to inconsistent and arbitrary application, as judges draw different conclusions from the same historical evidence and reach divergent assessments of the same laws.”
The burden of actually seeking to understand the intended meaning of a constitutional provision is certainly greater than the more free-style approach of Jackson who focused on how to “resolve contemporary problems” under a living Constitution. However, to suggest that her outcome-determinative approach is less inconsistent and arbitrary is only true when you control the Court with justices who have like-minded “solutions” for contemporary problems.That is precisely what many Democrats have in mind as they openly pledge to pack the Court with an insistent liberal majority if they can retake power.
Moreover, Jackson is often cited as the model of the left, a justice who is unburdened by the language and history of constitutional provisions. Just last week, liberal Wisconsin State Supreme Court justices heralded Jackson’s approach in arguing for the restoration of race-based gerrymandering. The state jurists lamented not being able to interpret the Constitution to address the “harms this country has caused to those who are marginalized, disempowered, or disenfranchised,” including the “preference for White Americans and to burden Black Americans and those of other disadvantaged races or backgrounds.”
These federal and state Supreme Court opinions are a glimpse into what awaits the country if Democratic leaders carry out their threat to take over the Supreme Court by adding four liberal justices in the image of Justice Jackson. It is not simply the desire to immediately overturn prior cases but to establish a largely untethered jurisprudence driven by judicial fiat and impulse. It is certainly an easier way to write opinions and would clear the way for a stated agenda on the left to maintain power indefinitely. Before voters “unburden” these jurists, they need to seriously consider the costs of eviscerating an institution that has been vital in maintaining this Republic for the last 250 years.
“Six Fired and 45 “sent back to their home agencies” ..
I must say I wonder why Tulsi didn’t do the removing while she was there.
• Acting DNI Pulte Removes 51 from Agency (CTH)
CBS is reporting on events within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. As CTH previously outlined, Acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte is following a very predictable path. The part of the CBS report that tells the story is: “Six career and political intelligence staff were terminated and 45 were sent back to their home agencies, according to three sources familiar with the personnel moves.” … “One source characterized the cuts as thoughtful and methodical. No staffers have been removed from the counterterrorism group.”Read more …
So, who was removed? Well, I’m certainly not the Nostradamus of USIC, but if I were to hazard an educated guess it looks like the National Intelligence Council – Directorate of Analysis, just lost six political staff, and 45 people from the various liaison desks were ‘sent back to their home agencies.’ As we noted last year, Tulsi Gabbard took the National Intelligence Council (NIC) out of the CIA – fired the heads, then putting the assembly back under the control of the ODNI. However, highly political operatives within the former CIA-controlled Directorate of Analysis (the former home of Eric Ciarmella) were still problematic. It looks like Director Pulte just eliminated the remaining DoA rats.The 45 returned to their ‘home agencies‘ were certainly from the liaison desks inside the DNI. I’m not sure if that represents 45 from across all the desks, or the complete elimination of some overstaffed liaison desks. That said, given the nature of the leaking was recently to CNN (State Dept leaks to CNN), I am somewhat confident the State Dept liaison office inside the DNI is now empty office space. [Just a hunch.] Please remember, our predictive public discussions at CTH are in the strictest confidence.
“(via CBS) Just over 50 career and political intelligence staff at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence have been removed from their roles since Bill Pulte became the agency’s acting director, Friday. Six career and political intelligence staff were terminated and 45 were sent back to their home agencies, according to three sources familiar with the personnel moves. Pulte has been asking deputies and other directors for suggestions about cuts. Some of the ODNI deputies pushed for more cuts, but Pulte said that the 51 was enough for now, one of the sources said.
One source characterized the cuts as thoughtful and methodical. No staffers have been removed from the counterterrorism group. No further firings are planned for now, two of the sources said. The cuts follow hundreds of staff reductions last year by former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who stepped down last week. Last year’s planned downsizing sought to bring the office’s headcount from 2,000 to around 1,300. President Trump has pushed for further cuts, directing Pulte to “execute the immediate and needed downsizing of the office” in a Truth Social post earlier this month.
[…] Sen. Mark Warner and Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrats on the Senate and House intelligence panels, warned Pulte against making large-scale staff cuts, calling it an inappropriate course of action for an acting official without national security experience. (more)
Senator Warner haz sad. Meanwhile in related news: “This sets up a stalemate as several Democrats have said they will not support reauthorizing Section 702 while Pulte remains Trump’s acting DNI pick.”
No FISA (702)? As Winnie the Pooh would say, “Oh, bother!”
Enjoy your last few years of driving, before the car takes over.
• The Media Is Still Trying to Smear Tesla (Margolis)
Earlier this week, a Tesla Model 3 driver in Katy, Texas, a Houston suburb, left the roadway at a “high rate of speed” and slammed into a brick home, killing a 76-year-old woman. The driver, Michael Butler, cooperated with investigators, showed no signs of intoxication, and claimed the car’s automated driving feature was engaged at the time. That claim was all the media needed. The New York Times ran with the headline “Tesla Driver Using Autopilot Crashes Into Home, Killing a Woman, Officials Say.” The Associated Press reported that “the top U.S. auto regulator opened an investigation Monday after a Tesla using an automated driving feature slammed into a Texas home at high speed and killed a 76-year-old woman standing inside.”Read more …
Notice the framing. The driver’s word was treated as fact. Tesla’s culpability was treated as settled. Did it occur to a single reporter that a driver facing potential liability for killing someone might have an incentive to point the finger at the car instead of himself? I’ve owned a Tesla for over a year now, and roughly 95% of my driving happens with Full Self-Driving (Supervised) engaged. Whether it’s quick runs to the store or long road trips to Boston, I love using it. It’s a remarkable piece of technology, and it works extremely well. So when this story broke, I was skeptical right away, and so were plenty of other Tesla owners on social media.Anyone with real experience behind the wheel of a self-driving Tesla could tell almost instantly that this had the fingerprints of driver error, not a software failure.= Sure enough, Tesla and Elon Musk have since confirmed exactly that. Ashok Elluswamy, Tesla’s head of AI, revealed that the company’s data shows the driver manually overrode the self-driving system by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%. The car reached 73 miles per hour, and according to Elluswamy, the accelerator was still pressed “even after the crash.”
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026My experience with FSD has shown me that FSD always errs on the side of safety. Just today, it waited much longer to take a left turn on a busy main road than I would have. Is it perfect? No. But is it a safer driver than a human? You bet. A few weeks ago, it broke fast for a child who was running into the road in the opposite lane before I’d even seen him. This is not the first time the media has rushed to hang a crash on Tesla’s self-driving technology, and I’m sure it won’t be the last.
the NYT reporter who wrote this obviously false story is refusing to update it or append any correction, in response to multiple emails. https://t.co/aAOtU064tT pic.twitter.com/Pk7TV8aEfh
— Gregg Re (@gregg_re) June 22, 2026The data tells a story the press doesn’t want to print. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety have both ranked Tesla models among the safest cars on the road. Even left-wing influencer Brian Krassenstein bought a Cybertruck specifically because of its safety record. None of this fits the narrative the media wants. Musk is a political target, and Tesla is the easiest way to come after him without saying his name. So every crash becomes an opportunity, every unverified driver claim becomes a headline, and every correction gets buried below the fold, if it runs at all.
The press had a chance to wait for the facts before running the story. They chose the smear instead.
As a -former- Montrealer, i’m interested of course.
The guy seems to have hated just about everyone.
“According to him, athletic white men get all the advantages, and women overwhelmingly have better mental health than men..”
• Deadly Montreal Shooter Hated Capitalism, Women, White Men, and Jews (Salgado)
The Montreal shooter’s manifesto makes it clear that he was a deranged leftist who was bitter against women, blaming capitalism and “white men” for the problems in his life, and that he was also antisemitic. Hatfield was a philosophy student at the University of Lethbridge, according to Rebel News.Read more …
Seth Hatfield from Alberta murdered a police officer, Constable Mohamed Lamine Benredouane, and a local Jewish man, Michael Mizrahi, on Monday in a crazed shooting spree in a Jewish section of Montreal. Police ended up killing Hatfield, too, during the shootout. Hatfield apparently left behind him a long, angry, and rambling manifesto condemning private property and the capitalist system, raging against women, and railing against Zionism. It is a very woke manifesto that glorifies Communism.For instance, footnotes in the manifesto with Hatfield’s name include the claim, “The influence of Zionist Jews upon the western bourgeoisie is in fact so strong that in my other works I sometimes refer to the western ruling class itself as the Judaeo-bourgeois class… it is very important not to fall into the absurd delusion of thinking that all Jews globally are somehow the participants in the globalist/imperialist scheme that the elite Zionists and their western bourgeois allies are so desperately trying to enact in present times.” He therefore had a particular hatred for Jews who support having a single Jewish nation in the world.
In fact, Hatfield framed the Allies’ defeat of the “National Socialist enemies” — the Nazis — as a turning point in the triumph of what he sees as an evil capitalist system, and the destruction of a supposedly happier world. Hatfield specifically called out President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher — the great warriors against the Soviet Union — for criticism. The shooter mourned the collapse of the Soviet Union and how few Communist countries exist at the present day. Ignoring the horrendous massacres by the Soviets and the total and deliberate undermining of marriage in Soviet Russia, Hatfield described their society as “culturally healthy and largely monogamous” under “communist leadership.”
The extremely lengthy manifesto includes rambling about vertebrates, human copulation, and how supposedly monogamy benefits women and weaker men but not stronger men. Capitalism is therefore a sinister plot of strong, handsome men to obtain endless sex partners. Hatfield’s standard was entirely based on how many sex partners an individual can find with whom to reproduce, not on any sense of religious duty in marriage or love.
He also asserted that capitalism undermined monogamy, even though it is actually socialist ideologies that have encouraged sexual licentiousness across the modern world. Soviet Russia, his supposedly ideal state, encouraged the most widespread divorce and sexual immorality. “By middle class I mean both the petty bourgeois class and the labour aristocracy together as one broad group,” Hatfield claimed. “… capitalism as a system was not a creation of the common man… capitalism was the creation of a smaller or more privileged male clique.”
Ironically, just after making this assertion, Hatfield acknowledged the connection between capitalism and classical liberalism and admitted, “liberalism and capitalism operate under the assumption that all men are created equal.” But he insisted, “This assumption is blatantly and demonstrably false.”
Hatfield also condemned the idea that humans ought to be autonomous and allowed to make their own decisions. This obviously comes from his misunderstanding about what liberalism and capitalism actually mean. America’s Founders never believed there could be equality of outcome or opportunities or talent. They argued for the equality of basic human rights given by God. But it seems pretty obvious the shooter did not believe in God — or in the inherent value of human life, of course.
In the manifesto, Hatfield went on to rant against women in the workforce and the importation of cheap migrant labor, not for the reasons that a traditional conservative might criticize them, but simply because he mysteriously attributed these changes to capitalist exploitation leading to women selecting only the most attractive partners. He went on at great length, claiming that women have the power in our society to abuse men and not make themselves attractive to men, without acknowledging that our society, in fact, corrupts both men and women, and that out-of-wedlock births are least beneficial to women. The shooter did not even understand how he himself had fallen prey to the very propaganda that created the modern relationship crisis.
Hatfield also claimed “Caucasian-looking features” give white men an advantage in dating. Even while admitting that modern society leads to sexual abuse of women, he again attributed this to the supposed power that “capitalism” has given tall white men. According to him, athletic white men get all the advantages, and women overwhelmingly have better mental health than men, both of which statements are patently false. Hatfield also griped about “bourgeois courts” and said “dispossessed males” can only find comfort in online forums with other bitter men.
Without realizing it, Hatfield was both a product of modern socialist propaganda and the source of his own problems. Instead of trying to turn to God and become a better man, he blamed all of his problems on rich white men, the Jews, and “capitalism.”
“Government funded non governmental organizations are one of the biggest sources of fraud in the world. This is a gigantic fraud loophole.”
— DogeDesigner (@cb_doge) June 23, 2026
— Elon Musk pic.twitter.com/11veBjJLio
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 22, 2026
https://twitter.com/naomirwolf/status/2069171513056752051?s=20 https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/2069408180518432997?s=20 https://twitter.com/ThierryTout/status/2069092549013467462?s=20 “50 years from now, on this map the West has already nearly disappeared ..”Every single parent, grandparent and even great grandparent must not comply with these unproven “jabs” that can do severe damage to our children.
— General Mike Flynn (@GenFlynn) June 22, 2026
This is madness!
I trust this man @RobertKennedyJr
I DO NOT TRUST the many “sick care” practitioners who pay homage to the Big… https://t.co/4lqV6Y3SFE
Every Baby Born Last Year Drawn To Scale
— Truth Troll Official™️ (@truthtroll_X) June 22, 2026
By econcoaching. com pic.twitter.com/dGwqm2pIU2
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
