Midterm Election to be Decided in the Senate

While there is much debate and consternation whether the GOP will retain control of Congress during the midterm election or whether the GOP will survive as a political party, the grim reality is that the Republicans have done little to retain their hold. 

Neither the GOP, especially the Senate has gone out of its way to persuade the American public to support the President’s party, the President himself appears indifferent to the outcome of midterms.   

Anyone who has been following Trump’s career knows that to be pure malarky; while it is true he will find others to blame.   

As of today, it is pretty much a given that the House will flip to the Democrats, yet the Senate is less certain although leaning in the Democrat direction.

It would seem a simple deduction, a no-brainer to conclude that in order to keep their seats which are valued at $175K annually plus generous benefits in addition to their AIPAC “incentive”, those Members would throw a few votes to Americans who will be deciding their electoral fate.

That would seem logical but not in the US Senate where GOP Senators display a more arrogant, narcissistic view of electoral reality.  The breakdown is that there are thirty three Senate seats up for re election; of those thirty three, thirteen are currently held by Democrats and twenty are Republican Senate seats.   

With that spread, the bottom line is that only four GOP seats need to flip to the Dems for the GOP to lose control of the Senate in favor of the Democrats.    

Since February 28th, the US has conducted an unconstitutional, unprovoked attack on Iran during peace negotiations which began with the assassination of Iran’s Ayatollah and an attack on a school in Minab claiming the lives of 150 school children and teachers.

To date, there has been no American apology or explanation for the attacks which constitutes US war crimes.

On September 24th, the Senate voted for the thirteenth time since February against the War Powers Act on a 49 – 50 vote with four Republican Senators voting in support of War Powers to end the Iran War.   

Those four GOP Senators were Sen. Collins (Maine), Sen. Tillis (NC), Sen. Murkowski (Alaska) and Sen. Paul (Ky.) with Sen. Fetterman (D-Pa.) voting against the War Powers.

The House previously voted 214-208  with seven GOP Members not voting in support of War Powers which, if it had prevailed in the Senate, would have directed President Trump to remove U.S. troops from hostilities in Iran without Congressional authorization.

If President Trump was truly searching for a way out of the conflict, a positive Senate vote would have provided him the option.

On March 5, 2026 Sen. Chris van Hollen (D-Md) sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Attorney General Pam Bondi and US Ambassador Mike Huckabee citing the murder of nine Americans by Israel settlers in the West Bank.   

That letter, the second to have been sent, was signed by 31 Democratic Senators, requesting an independent investigation and an update on the status of investigations into the killings.

With no response from the Trump Administration, Sen. Chris van Hollen (D-Md) offered the West Bank Violence Prevention Act, S852 on September 24th which would have required the State Department to conduct an investigation into the increasing violence in the West Bank regarding those nine murdered Americans.

That was it – no big prosecution or  trial but merely a report to Congress requesting information on Israel’s human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 but even that small token of concern was too much for the Senate.

And on September 29, the Senate voted 47 – 51 (with 2 Not Voting) against the Act with the only Republican Aye vote being Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) and the only Democratic Nay vote being Sen. Fetterman (Pa.).   

What is especially curious it that those Republican votes included a number of GOP Senators who might have previously been recognized as somewhat ‘independent’ or objective who have recently thrown away their votes presumably to their favorite AIPAC Donor.

Despite the American public’s opposition to Trump’s handling of the Iran war (61%), GOP Members of the Senate, especially those standing for re-election, are willing to vote against the American public as they willingly risk their own reelection.   

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/midterm-election-decided-senate/5942418

 

US Border Agents Randomly Seizing Phones of US Citizens Who Support Palestine

Jalal Shehadeh speaks at the Palestinian American Bar Association's national conference in Reston, Virginia, in October 2025.Jalal Shehadeh speaks at the Palestinian American Bar Association’s national conference in Reston, Virginia, in October 2025. Courtesy of Jelal Shehadeh

By Ali Harb

Oct 2, 2026

Miami lawyer Jalal Shehadeh is the latest supporter of Palestinian rights to be hassled after returning from abroad.

 Florida lawyer Jalal Shehadeh is convinced that the warrantless seizure of his cell phone by federal agents at the Newark International Airport after he returned from Palestine this September was not random.

Shehadeh, a Miami-based attorney and Palestinian rights advocate, was held for several hours for a secondary inspection and had his phone seized by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) after he refused to allow federal agents to search it.

“It’s just a wildly invasive thing to do to somebody with no individualized justifiable basis to do it,” Shehadeh told Truthout.

He suspects federal authorities targeted him for his activism. The lawyer is involved in a legal complaint against a federal judge in Florida over the judge’s anti-Palestinian statements.

Shehadeh is one of several Palestinian rights advocates who have been detained and had their personal devices searched by CBP while returning to the U.S. from international travel since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza in October 2023.

Other similar cases include Amir Makled, a lawyer from the Detroit area who was representing University of Michigan students involved in pro-Palestine activism, journalist Max Blumenthal, and Osama Abu Irshaid, the executive director of American Muslims for Palestine (AMP).

Jenin Younes, president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), which filed a legal motion earlier this week demanding the return of Shehadeh’s phone, said CBP appears to be escalating phone searches against opponents of President Donald Trump’s agenda.

“Common sense tells us that they are targeting people who have pro-Palestine views,” Younes told Truthout.

She stressed that the searches are illegal. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects “persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Younes said the “border exception” that allows searches to ensure that no illegal items are brought into the country should not apply to phones.

Younes, a civil liberties attorney, said the authors of the Constitution would have certainly opposed giving the government blanket authority to search people’s phones without cause.

“Law enforcement can search shipping vessels coming into the Boston harbor to make sure that they don’t have contraband. That’s a totally different thing from searching the contents of people’s smartphones,” she said. “I don’t think the framers would have thought that you could read the papers of somebody coming into the country in their suitcase, and likewise, a smartphone, which has so much more personal information.”

The case of Shehadeh and other Palestinian rights supporters targeted for searches at the border has reignited the debate over the application of constitutional protections at ports of entry.

Shehadeh said that when he was stopped at Newark on September 17, CBP officers only conducted a “cursory” search on his bags because they did not appear to be interested in physical items.

“They are looking for our thoughts,” he said. “They’re looking to see what I’m thinking. They want to see who I’m messaging. They want to see what WhatsApp groups I am part of.”

The lawyer, who has Global Entry for expedited border crossing, said he was flagged by name for secondary inspection and led to a waiting room. He was asked general questions about his travels, work, and family before the agents asked to search his phone.

Shehadeh objected to allowing the officers to go through his device, citing the attorney-client privileged information on the phone. The agents kept him waiting and subjected him to another round of questioning as they took the case to a supervisor. As the clock ticked, the Florida-based lawyer missed his connecting flight to Miami.

Eventually, he was informed by an officer that CBP would take his phone and let him go. “I told them, ‘I just want to be very clear. I am not giving you permission, consent to search my phone, and I’m not giving any other arm of this agency or anybody else consent to search my phone,’” he said.

The cell phone still has not been returned.

Shehadeh told Truthout that if the goal of the episode were to deter his activism for Palestinian rights, it would not succeed.

“It will not move our advocacy work an inch. Literally, it will have no impact. If anything, it will fuel the importance of doing more of this work,” he told Truthout. “But when it comes to travel, I’m going to be much more careful about what my phone situation will be.”

The Trump administration has been cracking down on Palestinian rights activism, including through a deportation campaign targeting non-citizen students who participated in protests against the war on Gaza.

Shehadeh warned that the administration is creating a new norm of weakened constitutional rights that many people may take for granted.

“This search is a perfect example of that. Protection against search and seizure is one of those things that comes out of our Constitution that really empowers citizens to know you will not have government intrusion,” he said.

“What this administration is doing is chipping away at the rights of Americans — of all Americans. But sadly, Arabs, Muslims, and minorities tend to be the first victims of these abuses. But they’re certainly not going to be the last ones.”

Abu Irshaid of AMP said the government is turning border crossings into a “hunting ground for individuals it wishes to target” for political retaliation or to gather information about constitutional protected activity.

Abu Irshaid has sued the government, alleging that the repeated searches he has been subjected to at the airport, along with the seizure of his phone, amount to illegal discrimination.

A federal judge ruled in his favor in July, declaring that the government violated Abu Irshaid’s rights with the searches.

Some activists are pinning their hopes on a case before the Supreme Court, Anibowei v. Blanche, that could determine whether the Fourth Amendment applies to the electronic devices of U.S. citizens travelling internationally.

CBP argues that only a tiny fraction of travelers, less than one-half of one percent, are subjected to a device search. But official statistics show an uptick in such searches since Trump returned to the White House.

In 2024, federal officers inspected the devices of 47,047 travelers. The numbers increased to 55,318 last year. Of those inspections, 13,590 targeted U.S. citizens in 2025, compared to 10,541 a year earlier.

In January, CBP released a memorandum outlining its regulations and authorities around searching travelers’ personal devices. The document stressed that people at ports of entry have diminished privacy rights and that phone searches are essential “to identify and combat a wide range of illicit activities.”

A basic search, one where the officer goes through the phone manually, can be conducted “with or without suspicion.”

The bar is higher for carrying out an advanced search, which includes copying and analyzing the content of the phone through an external device. It requires “reasonable suspicion of activity in violation of the laws” enforced by CBP. But there appears to be a loophole. An advanced search can still be conducted “in the absence of individualized reasonable suspicion when there is a national security concern.”

The directive does not provide details on what constitutes a “national security concern” to enable an advanced search.

Officers can only search the device itself and may not access information stored remotely. That’s why they must disable the external connectivity of the phone, according to the memorandum.

The directive gives officers the authority to seize a device and keep it even after the traveler leaves the airport, which is what happened to Shehadeh. According to the memorandum, CBP could effectively keep his phone indefinitely. The agency is allowed to hold on to the device for a period of five days, which can be extended by 15 days and subsequently by seven days in increments without specified limits.

As of Thursday, CBP has kept Shehadeh’s phone for 14 days, meaning the agency has applied at least one extension to its hold on the device.

In response to Truthout’s request for comment, a CBP spokesperson told Truthout that the likelihood of a search at a port of entry “remains exceedingly rare” but did not answer specific questions about Shehadeh’s case, including why the agency is still holding on to his phone.

“U.S. Customs and Border Protection has statutory authority to conduct border searches of electronic devices for all persons entering or departing the United States, regardless of citizenship, to enforce laws addressing terrorism, child exploitation, drug- and human-smuggling, visa fraud, and national security threats,” the CBP spokesperson said.

In the face of the U.S.’s ever-expanding definition of “national security threats,” which now seem to include lawyers, journalists, and activists who have advocated for the rights of Palestinians, are now living in fear that border stops are being used as a form of intimidation.

“What is most disturbing is that many of these aggressive government actions target activists whose only ‘offense’ is criticizing Israel’s violations against Palestinians,” Abu Irshaid told Truthout in a statement.


A Personal Connection

As a reporter, I try to stay out of the stories I am telling. But my personal experience with being stopped and searched after returning to the U.S. from international travel is too relevant for this article to withhold.

After returning to Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C. from a trip to Lebanon in February 2025, I was detained for nearly five hours and faced similar treatment as Shehadeh.

CBP officers asked me intrusive questions relating to my work as a journalist and political leanings in my family’s hometown in Lebanon, which had been targeted by Israeli bombardment in the war.

After a brief search of my bags, a CBP officer asked me to hand my phone and unlock it. I initially refused. The federal agent handed me a piece of paper stating that CBP has the lawful ability to search electronic devices. When I highlighted that the flyer reflects CBP policy, not the Constitution, the officer threatened to seize both my phone and computer indefinitely if I didn’t hand the phone in.

CBP took the phone after pressuring me to write down its passcode and kept me waiting for around two hours before handing it back — with a disclaimer that they couldn’t “process” it because the system was down. They eventually let me go. Throughout the hours-long ordeal, the officers did not allow me to contact my family member who was waiting to pick me up at the airport.

I have traveled outside the country twice since then and have been flagged for secondary inspection on the way back each time, albeit without a device search. At the advice of press freedom experts, now I travel internationally with an alternative phone that does not contain sensitive personal or professional information.

Via https://truthout.org/articles/border-agents-are-randomly-seizing-phones-of-us-citizens-who-support-palestine/

France calls crisis meeting as schools go online amid spreading student protests

Protesting students gather as they carry out a blockading action at Helene Boucher secondary school, in Paris on October 2, 2026. (Photo by AFP)

Press TV

French schools are preparing to shift some classes online as a fast-growing student protest movement over overcrowded classrooms, teacher shortages and deteriorating facilities spreads across the country, prompting the government to call a crisis meeting.

The move comes as the demonstrations have escalated into clashes and acts of vandalism in several cities, while rising living costs are adding to wider social tensions ahead of France’s presidential election.

Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu called a crisis cabinet meeting on Thursday and asked ministers to cancel travel plans as the protests, which began in the Paris region last week, expanded nationwide.

Lecornu’s office said the “upsurge in violence makes it virtually impossible to maintain the continuity of public education and is exposing staff and students to danger.” Education Minister Édouard Geffray is due to meet pupil representatives on Friday.

Police said about 900 demonstrations, blockades and related incidents were under way outside high schools across France, with more than 160 schools shut down. Access was also blocked to around 30 university campuses, including in Paris and Marseille.

Nearly 3,000 lycée students, aged between 15 and 18, have been detained since the protests began, according to the Interior Ministry, including 1,949 on Thursday alone.

More than 300 police officers and dozens of firefighters, teachers and pupils have been injured.

The protests have been driven by grievances over long and overloaded timetables, overcrowded classrooms, teacher shortages and deteriorating school buildings. Students have also complained about unbearable temperatures in classrooms during heatwaves earlier this year.

In Strasbourg, a 17-year-old student described the conditions as unacceptable.

“There are 35 of us per classroom. With 35C in summer, it’s unbearable. There aren’t enough toilets, and there are water leaks in some rooms,” he told AFP.

“The building is falling apart, the cafeteria is too small. There’s zero budget, zero resources, not enough supervisors,” he added.

Similar complaints have been voiced elsewhere. In Caen, 16-year-old Maelle said students were protesting “against this government that doesn’t invest in heating, air conditioning, or teachers’ salaries.”

At the same time, some demonstrations have turned violent. Rubbish bins have been set on fire outside schools, while more serious arson attempts have been reported inside buildings. A school in Nantes suffered extensive fire damage and is expected to remain closed for a month.

In Marseille, there were attempts to start fires inside two schools, while a school principal and his deputy were splashed with petrol at one site. In Lille and Toulouse, protesters damaged public infrastructure and set fire to rubbish bins.

Riot police have been deployed as the unrest has intensified. The Interior Ministry has also launched an internal investigation following accusations of excessive force against three pupils.

Officials said most injuries resulted from thrown objects, although some were linked to police riot-control projectiles.

The unrest is unfolding against a backdrop of mounting concerns over the cost of living. Inflation reached 2.4% year-on-year in August, while energy prices rose sharply, putting additional pressure on lower-income households.

AFP reported in September that fuel prices had become a major issue in the presidential campaign, with the government extending targeted fuel support amid concerns over purchasing power.

The protests have also acquired a political dimension, with France only months away from its presidential election. The government has accused the hard-left France Unbowed party, or LFI, of encouraging the unrest.

The prime minister’s office cited intelligence services in claiming that the protests had been organized by the radical left. Manuel Bompard, a leading LFI figure, dismissed the allegation and accused the government of “sinking into conspiratorial thinking.”

LFI leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who is seeking the party’s presidential nomination, said his party “called for non-violent methods of struggle.”

Via https://www.presstv.co.uk/Detail/2026/10/02/777438/France-protests-online-classes

Israel’s High Court overturns ban on Palestinian parties ahead of Knesset election

(Photo credit: Michael Giladi/FLASH90)

The Cradle

OCT 2, 2026

The decision will allow parties representing Palestinians with Israeli citizenship to run in the election scheduled for 27 October

Israel’s High Court of Justice ruled unanimously to reject the Central Election Committee’s decision to disqualify political parties representing Palestinians with Israeli citizenship from running in the upcoming Knesset elections, Israeli media reported on 2 October.

The Central Elections Committee had voted to disqualify the United Arab List slate and the Joint List on 23 September.

Elections are scheduled for 27 October to elect all 120 members of the 26th Knesset and determine the governing coalition that succeeds the current coalition led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Netanyahu, the head of the Likud party, is hoping to return for a seventh term as prime minister.

The United Arab List is the political arm of the Islamic Movement in Israel, while the Joint List consists of the Hadash, Taal, and Balad parties.

Hadash (Democratic Front for Peace and Equality) is a Jewish-Palestinian, non-Zionist left-wing alliance with roots in the Communist Party of Israel.

Taal (Arab Movement for Renewal) is a secular party focused on representing Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Balad (National Democratic Assembly) is a secular Palestinian-nationalist party that advocates making Israel a “state of all its citizens” rather than a “Jewish state.”

The committee said it disqualified the United Arab List and Joint List parties under Israel’s Basic Law on the Knesset.

The law states that a candidate or party may be barred from an election for rejecting Israel’s existence as a Jewish and democratic state, inciting racism, or supporting armed struggle against Israel by an enemy state or terrorist organization.

Despite the Basic Law, disqualifying Palestinian parties from running in Knesset elections was seen as unusual.

The United Arab List previously participated in the ruling coalition of former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett, which led to criticism from Zionist parties.

Bennett has stated that he refuses to partner with any Palestinian parties to form a government if he wins this month’s elections.

The Central Election Committee, largely made up of members of Netanyahu’s Likud, also banned Knesset member Ofer Cassif of the Hadash party and Balad chairman Sami Abu Shehadeh the same day.

However, the High Court overturned the decision to disqualify Cassif on Friday.

Abu Shehadeh told the court on Friday that he is withdrawing his candidacy after court president Justice Isaac Amit indicated the court would not overturn his disqualification.

The bid to disqualify Abu Shehadeh was filed by National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) party in response to an opinion article he wrote after Hamas’s 7 October 2023 Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.

Abu Shehadeh described the Hamas attack on Israeli military bases and settlements as “an important historic event militarily, politically and strategically.”

Cassif, the Joint List’s only Jewish Knesset member, had been disqualified for denouncing Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide, calling for the repeal of the Law of Return (which grants automatic citizenship to Jews emigrating to Israel), and calling for the release of jailed Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti.

Cassif responded by saying that “The disqualification requests are intended to achieve the complete delegitimization of Arab society and Israeli–Arab partnership, and to perpetuate totalitarian rule and majority tyranny.”

Via https://thecradle.co/articles/israels-high-court-overturns-ban-on-palestinian-parties-ahead-of-knesset-election

Is AI financing “The largest misallocation of capital in history”?

CEO of Meta Platforms Mark Zuckerberg attends a press briefing held by US President Donald Trump.It’s Looking Possible That Zuckerberg Is Accidentally Committing Corporate Suicide Finn Gomez/Getty Images

Brian Shilhavy

From Futurism:

Excerpts:

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has made the rash decision to double-down on massive AI spending, pushing a cutesy AI-mascot and poaching tech industry veteran Chirantan Desai to run a new division pushing Meta’s AI onto corporate customers.

The company’s investors, however, appear to be running out of slack for Zuckerberg’s leash. Since Friday of last week, a large sell-off in Meta stocks shrunk his paper fortune by nearly $20 billion, after Goldman Sachs began raising doubts about the long-term viability of the company’s AI ambitions.

It raises the question as to how much capital will be made available to satisfy the tech industry’s pie-in-the-sky AI push, and whether it can ever achieve revenue that would offset it.

In addition to Goldman Sachs’ gloomy outlook for Meta, hyperscalers as a whole face what appears to be an insurmountable challenge in turning AI into a profitable venture. As Bloomberg reported, the major management consulting firm Bain and Co recently penned an analysis finding that the AI industry will need to reach an annual revenue of $6 trillion by 2031 if tech leaders continue along their current spend-happy trajectory.

Doing so will require leaps in technological progress the likes of which are unprecedented in the information age — well beyond past innovations embodied by world-changing consumer tech like smartphones, for instance.

If we take the cynical path and assume that the AI industry won’t be able to pull off this miracle, then any major tech firm currently doubling down — like Zuckerberg’s Meta — will have functionally spent the better part of the 2020s rigging up their own corporate noose.

As finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School Jessica Wachter penned in her own analysis of the AI financial bubble, if the promised money shower “fails to materialize,” then future historians will look back on this moment as the “largest misallocation of capital in history.”

Via https://t.me/healthimpact/3818

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth Taps Elon Musk for New Pentagon Role Focused on Futuristic Warfare

By Anthony Scott

The world’s richest man, the legend, Elon Musk has returned to the Trump administration.

This time, the Tesla CEO is returning to the Trump administration in a new Pentagon role that could give him a direct hand in shaping the future of warfare.

On Wednesday, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced that Musk will co-lead a new government project that is tasked with studying the future of warfare.

The new project is being called Project Meridian, and according to the Pentagon, its goal is to “identify the capabilities required to achieve absolute technological dominance on the next-generation battlefield”.

Per The Hill:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday announced that SpaceXAI CEO Elon Musk, Anduril co-founder Palmer Luckey and former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) will lead a new Pentagon effort to study the future of warfare, dubbed “Project Meridian.”

The Pentagon chief said the project is meant to harness America’s innovators, senior leaders and technologists to look decades into the future and “forecast the creative solution for tomorrow’s conflicts.”

“It is futuristic on purpose,” he said of the project, noting it was not meant to develop new strategies or policies

“We should have the humility to recognize that the best forecasters of future conflict do not solely reside inside the Pentagon,” Hegseth continued. “There are obvious biases and risks to asking ourselves to both ask the questions and answer them.”

The Department of War revealed that Project Meridian will be completed in 120 days, and that its final report will be unclassified and presented to the public.

[…]

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/10/secretary-war-pete-hegseth-taps-elon-musk-new/

Israeli Company with Intelligence Ties at Center of Rogue AI Incidents

AI Agents 'Going Rogue': What Recent Incidents Reveal About Human Control

(The Last American Vagabond) On Friday, September 18, Google acknowledged that its Gemini artificial intelligence chatbot had “escaped its testing environment in May and hacked into three companies.”

According to Google, the AI models found passwords available online and logged into the online infrastructure of three companies. Once Gemini gained access to the companies’ real-world infrastructure, it recognized it was not in a simulated environment and ended the attacks.

The Gemini incident followed reports of similar attempted hacks or escapes by AI agents developed by Anthropic, OpenAI, and Meta.

These reports of AI agents attacking other companies and escaping their environments have led to a barrage of calls for legal action and warnings about impending doom. From claims that humanity is in danger of being killed by AI in the next decade to calls for a coordinated slowdown of AI research, fears that AI will negatively impact the future of the planet have gone mainstream.

While it’s important to take a sober look at the warnings from employees of the Big Tech companies developing AI models, as well as the CEOs, it is equally important to interrogate this narrative. Some skeptics have already claimed that the Big Tech companies are seeking to profit from the reports of the alleged danger posed by their AI models. Others speculate that the companies may be calling for regulation of their industry to shape government policies and potentially undercut future competitors and smaller AI firms.

To better understand whether these reports are genuine, represent an attempt at widening profit margins, or simply another sign of regulatory capture, we need a closer examination of the company at the center of several of these “rogue AI” incidents.

While nearly a dozen incidents have been reported in total, the “escapes” reported by Google, OpenAI, Meta, and Anthropic happened during tests designed to measure the capabilities of the AI bots. Each of those tests was being conducted by a company known as Irregular, an Israeli AI security firm that conducts third-party tests of frontier models.

Irregular has stated that the AI agents were able to take unapproved actions because internet access was “unintentionally made available.” They say the errors have been patched and similar incidents should no longer be possible.

The Irregular-Israeli Connection

Irregular describes itself as “the first frontier security lab with the mission of protecting the world in the time of increasingly capable and sophisticated AI systems.” The company, formerly known as Pattern Labs, was founded in 2023 by Dan Lahav and Omer Nevo. Lahav serves as Irregular’s CEO and Nevo as the CTO. The two Israeli citizens met while they were students participating in competitive debate at Tel Aviv University.

In September 2025, the company raised $80 million in a funding round led by Sequoia Capital and Redpoint Ventures. The company was also supported by angel investor Assaf Rappaport, CEO of Wiz. Irregular was reportedly valued at $450 million at the time.

While the corporate media have begun noticing the “Israeli startup” connected to these claims of “rogue AI” events, so far none have dug into Irregular’s numerous connections to the Israeli intelligence apparatus. However, upon deeper inspection, there are several intelligence layers worth exploring. Let’s start with the founders of Irregular.

Dan Lahav claims he started working in the tech sector at age fourteen. He served in Israel’s Unit 81 before completing a master’s in bioinformatics and lecturing at Tel Aviv University. Unit 81 is a highly classified technology unit that is part of the Special Operations Division of Israel’s Military Intelligence Directorate. The secretive organization trains Israel’s spies on how to use the latest cutting-edge technologies.

Omer Nevo also spent time in Israel’s spy networks, reportedly working for Unit 8200 for twelve years. Unit 8200 is an elite Israeli unit mainly involved in signals intelligence, surveillance, cyberwarfare, and code decryption. Sometimes compared to the Israeli equivalent of the US National Security Agency, Unit 8200 is infamous for surveillance of Palestinian civilians and using intercepted communications as blackmail against Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank.

Nevo also helped found a program known as Arazim, which trains students in mathematics and computer science for future intelligence roles.

The connections to Israel don’t end there. Irregular’s main investors are also rife with Israel supporters and at least one veteran of Israel’s spy networks.

Irregular’s first major investor was Sequoia Capital, with $30 million. The two men taking the lead on the Sequoia investments were Shaun Maguire and Dean Meyer. In the official announcement of the partnership, Maguire and Meyer said that while serious AI security threats had not yet arrived, they believed Irregular was “ahead of the curve.”

Both men have prominent connections to Israel. For one, Meyer is Sequoia’s Israel partner and is based in Tel Aviv. Maguire is married to an Israeli, owns a home in the country, and has been called “one of the most visible voices in support of Israel within Silicon Valley.” He also reportedly arranged for Elon Musk’s visit to Israel after the attacks of October 7, 2023.

Another major investor in Irregular is Swish Ventures, a firm founded by Omri Casspi, an Israeli former NBA player who is now a Tel Aviv-based investor focused on AI infrastructure and cybersecurity. When Casspi initially raised $60 million to launch Swish Ventures, he stated that the fundraising was part of what he called “Zionism 2.0.” As Casspi said at the time:

“In this not easy climate during war and with high interest rates, we see this period as Zionism 2.0, a time and age of building generational companies from Israel, and we want to take advantage of that and help them build a great industry.”

Irregular also received financial backing from Eon, an Israel data-backup and AI-infrastructure company.

One of Irregular’s investors also has deep ties with Israeli intelligence. Angel investor Assaf Rappaport is co-founder and CEO of Wiz, an Israeli cloud-security company. Rappaport is also an alumnus of Israel’s Talpiot program, as well as Unit 81 and Unit 8200.

The Talpiot program is another elite program under the Israeli Defense Forces that has been hosted by Hebrew University since 1979. The program was initiated by Professor Felix Dothan and Professor Shaul Yatziv of the Hebrew University with the idea of harnessing human creativity at a young age and training recruits with outstanding academic ability in the sciences and leadership potential.

In a rare instance of mainstream media reporting on Talpiot, a 2007 WSJ article described Talpiot as:

“The country’s most selective institution, it accepts 50 students a year and trains them in physics, computers and other sciences. Its mission is to create innovative, tech-savvy leaders capable of transforming Israel’s military.”

Finally, despite its recent apparent failures to contain AI agents, Irregular is now seeking to raise an additional $100 million. New investors include Thrive Capital, run by Joshua Kushner, the brother of President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, himself a prominent Zionist who has been appointed to oversee the technocratic takeover of Gaza. Thrive Capital also received early funding from Peter Thiel.

[…]

Via https://thefreethoughtproject.com/technology/irregular-the-israeli-company-with-intelligence-ties-at-the-center-of-the-rogue-ai-incidents

Tennessee death row inmate survives double lethal injection

Tennessee death row inmate survives double lethal injection

RT

1 Oct, 2026 13:04  

A woman convicted of murder in the US state of Tennessee has been taken to hospital after surviving two doses of lethal injection drugs in a failed execution attempt, several media outlets reported Thursday, citing her lawyers and media witnesses.

Christa Pike, 50, was sentenced to death for the 1995 torture and murder of 19-year-old Colleen Slemmer, a fellow Job Corps student in Knoxville. If carried out normally, Pike’s execution, scheduled for Wednesday, would have been the first execution of a woman in Tennessee in more than 200 years.

Prosecutors said Pike and her boyfriend, Tadaryl Shipp, lured Slemmer to a wooded area. Pike beat and cut Slemmer with a box cutter, while Shipp, who was 17 at the time, admitted carving a pentagram into her body. While Pike received the death penalty, Shipp was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole.

Pike did not lose consciousness after two syringes of pentobarbital were administered, her attorneys said in emergency legal filings seen by the New York Times. She still had a heartbeat, they said, and was audibly snoring.

According to her lawyers, as cited by the newspaper, Pike was later taken to a nearby hospital, although they did not know her condition. Tennessee officials reportedly confirmed to a federal judge later that day that Pike was receiving medical care.

AP cited media witnesses as saying that Pike remained conscious after the injection was administered and at one point asked prison officials about a sensation in her arm. She continued to be heard snoring behind the closed curtain before media witnesses were escorted out.

Pike was initially scheduled to be executed in the morning, but a federal appeals court issued a temporary stay to consider her lawyers’ claims that her history of childhood sexual abuse and neglect had not been adequately presented at sentencing. The US Supreme Court later lifted the obstacle, allowing Tennessee to proceed with the execution that evening.

Commenting on the apparent failure to carry out an execution, the Tennessee Department of Correction stated that it “had followed every step of the state’s lawful, established execution protocol approved by the attorney general’s office.”

It was the second failed execution in Tennessee this year. In May, officials called off the lethal injection of Tony Carruthers, convicted of kidnapping and killing three people in 1994, after executioners spent more than an hour trying unsuccessfully to place an IV for the pentobarbital.

Lethal injection is widely regarded as the most error-prone method of execution in the US. Since the beginning of 2020, 170 people have been executed in 17 states, with most executions taking place in Florida, Texas, and Oklahoma. During that period, six states have recorded botched lethal injections, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit that provides data and analysis on capital punishment.
[…]

USDA’s No GMO Label Doesn’t Mean No Genetic Engineering

by Alliance for Natural Health

Excerpts:

A food package carries no bioengineered disclosure. Does that mean no genetic engineering went into the food?

No. USDA’s bioengineered food disclosure standard leaves entire categories of genetically engineered foods and ingredients outside mandatory disclosure.

Easing restrictions on natural substances with credible histories of safe use makes sense. Yet natural products face persistent calls for tighter regulation, alongside efforts to suppress truthful information about their benefits.

Meanwhile, novel technologies that fundamentally alter our food are riding a wave of deregulation—even as their implications demand rigorous scrutiny and full transparency.

These priorities are backwards.

A Narrow Definition, Wide Exclusions

Under the current rule, foods generally require disclosure when: 1) they contain genetic material modified through laboratory recombinant-DNA techniques, 2) the modification could not otherwise arise through conventional breeding or nature, and 3) the modified material is detectable.

There are a host of exclusions:

  • Restaurants and food service: meals can contain engineered ingredients without this disclosure.
  • Very small manufacturers: businesses with annual receipts below $2.5 million are exempt.
  • Accidental presence: up to 5% of each ingredient may be bioengineered if its presence is “inadvertent” or technically unavoidable.
  • Animal feed: meat, milk, and eggs do not require disclosure solely because animals ate engineered feed.
  • Refined ingredients: oils, sugars, and other ingredients can avoid disclosure when modified genetic material is undetectable.
  • Processing aids: qualifying incidental additives present at insignificant levels with no final technical or functional effect are excluded.
  • Certain meat, poultry, and egg products generally fall outside coverage when those ingredients predominate, including after water, broth, or stock.
  • Many alcoholic beverages: products subject to federal alcohol labeling law fall outside this standard.

Nearly A Quarter of Your Chips

Consider a hypothetical bag of corn chips containing 80% cornmeal, 19% refined soybean oil, and 1% salt.

If 5% of the cornmeal is inadvertently mixed-in bioengineered corn, that represents 4% of the chips. Add oil entirely from engineered soybeans that meets non-detectability requirements: another 19% originates from GE crops.

That is 23% of the product’s weight originating from engineered crops, quite legally without a bioengineered disclosure.

This can also allow proteins made using genetically engineered yeast or bacteria (through a process called “precision fermentation”) to avoid disclosure, depending on what remains in the finished ingredient.

A CRISPR-produced food can escape disclosure if its genetic modification could otherwise be achieved through conventional breeding or found in nature.

But who decides if a modification could arise through conventional breeding or nature?

Essentially it is the food company that makes the decision…

Read the full article at Alliance for Natural Health.

Brian Shilhavy’s Comments:

Modern history has consistently taught us that we cannot trust our Federal Government in the U.S. to look out for the interests of consumers, and that includes the USDA and the FDA. Both of these agencies serve Wall Street, and derive much of their revenue from the very businesses they are supposed to be regulating in Big Pharma and Big Ag.

For example, the entire corn crop in the U.S. is contaminated, even if that corn is certified organic by USDA organic standards. There may be some exceptions, but we (Healthy Traditions) have never found any corn in the U.S. that has tested clean for GMO DNA, and we have been testing for 12 years now.

[…]

Via https://healthimpactnews.com/2026/usdas-no-gmo-label-doesnt-mean-no-genetic-engineering/

 

 

American CEOs kowtow before the Chinese emperor

President Donald Trump hosts White House dinner for US tech leaders

Dmitry Orlov

1 October, 2026

The globalist universe is no more. It has split up into technological blocs. The US and the West are in one block while China and Russia are in another. And while China and Russia have to some extent demonstrated that they can get along without the US, the converse is simply not true.

Recently, a fancy dinner took place at the White House, attended by China’s Chairman Xi, who was on a three-day state visit, and some two dozen CEOs of major US-based transnational companies. Why were they there and what did they try to accomplish?

The answer turns out to be as simple as it is shocking.

The globalist universe has undergone fission. This was made inevitable by Western sanctions against Russia. They were, to begin with, based on some faulty reasoning: that Russia would just dry up and blow away if deprived of Western trade and investment. Instead, Russia found new export routes for its energy exports and launched a rather impressive program of import replacement.

For those products it could not replace, it organized “parallel import” paths that skillfully circumvented Western sanctions. It turned out that there were plenty of countries willing to help. Parallel imports were a bit more expensive, and so Russia put in place capital controls. Western companies operating in Russia, of which there were around 4000 at the start of 2022 and there are around 2000 now, were prevented from moving their profits out of Russia. Instead, they had to be deposited in special “Type S” accounts with the Russian Central Bank, where they await the lifting of sanctions.

If you think that Russia’s import replacement initiatives were somehow insignificant, consider the following. When Siemens refused to service its gas turbines in Crimea, Russia started making its own rather quickly. As a result, Siemens has lost the Russian market. And then Russia went further and created new jet engines as well (which are another type of turbine). Only four nations are capable of building jet engines, and only one of them — Russia — can do so without using imported materials or components.

And when sanctions were used to block the imports of carbon fiber and resins for airliner wing construction, Russia engineered the entire technology on its own more or less from scratch. While it was at it, it also replaced every last bit of imported technology in the new airliners it is getting ready to mass produce, including avionics. These are just a couple of the more spectacular examples. There are plenty of others.

And then there is the area of nuclear energy, where Russia definitely leads the world. It owns half of all uranium enrichment and two-thirds of the world’s nuclear reactor portfolio. Meanwhile, Europe and the US, in all of recent memory, were only able to build 4 new reactors, combined. That’s Olkiluoto in Finland, Flamanville in France and two reactors — Vogtle 3 and 4 — in Georgia. The total construction delay for these 4 reactors added up to over 30 years and the cost overruns added up to around $40 billion. After its experience with Vogtle, Westinghouse was forced to declare bankruptcy. Two more reactors had been planned in the US, but these plans had to be abandoned.

These are just a couple of the more spectacular examples. There are plenty of others.

Russia’s many nuclear projects around the world also sometimes experience delays and cost overruns, but nothing nearly so spectacular. As existing nuclear reactors, especially in the US and in France, age out and have to be decommissioned, there is nothing to replace them — short of asking Russia for help.

Over the past 4.5 years, Russia has shown that trade with the West is nonessential. This is not universally true, but it is certainly true for Russia because it has the resource base, the production capacity and the intellectual capital to make it on its own. But if Russia can do it, then how many other countries can do so, perhaps with Russia’s help? Quite a few — and what that means is that they no longer have to live in fear of Western sanctions. They can follow their own development strategies and no longer have to work to enrich the West.

China is certainly one of these countries. Its response to US attempts at a trade war was to impose export limits on rare earth metals. This made US weapons manufacturers and other high-tech companies scream in pain. The US has ambitious plans to replace Chinese rare earths, but these are just plans — not products ready for shipment. This was just one pain point, and China used it quite skillfully, but there are numerous others. There is simply no replacement for all sorts of Chinese-sourced components. Without them, all sorts of maintenance projects in the US — never mind manufacturing — would grind to a halt.

There are some Russian exports that are critical as well. The primary Russian exports critical to the U.S. economy are mineral fertilizers, enriched uranium, palladium and titanium. Without these, US nuclear, airspace and automotive industries would not be able to function. But from the Russian point of view, exports to the US only amount to around $5 billion per year — a paltry sum, considering that Russia’s trade with China is nearing a quarter of a trillion per year in dollar terms, although the US dollar is no longer used.

While Russia dominates in several key technology niches, China’s technological dominance is now very broad. Over the past several decades, China has traded cheap labor for technology. Every kind of manufacturing moved to China. Along with it moved the machine tools and every other kind of manufacturing technology — and the engineering, and the skilled labor. Now China is the production center for the entire planet.

What is left in the West, from which the technology for it initially came, is corporate management and a bunch of wealthy stockholders — wealthy only while their stock portfolios hold their value. What’s left in the West are warehouses and office buildings while the factories that make the product are mostly in the East. And the few factories that are still to be found in the West are totally dependent on parts and materials imported from the East.

Recently, a very interesting get-together took place at the White House. During Chairman Xi’s state visit to the US, the following nominally American, but really transnational captains of industry were summoned to a fancy dinner at the White House. Present were the following:

David Ellison of Paramount Skydance, Sam Altman of OpenAI, Jensen Huang of Nvidia, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Elon Musk of SpaceX/Tesla, Sundar Pichai of Alphabet/Google, Satya Nadella of Microsoft, Michael Dell of Dell, Cristiano Amon of Qualcomm, Jane Fraser of Citigroup, Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, David Solomon of Goldman Sachs, Larry Fink of BlackRock, Steve Schwarzman of Blackstone, Mary Barra of GM, Darren Woods of Exxon, Albert Bourla of Pfizer, Larry Culp of GE Aerospace, Kelly Ortberg of Boeing, Jim Taiclet of Lockheed Martin, Michael Miebach of Mastercard, and Visa’s Ryan McInerney.

The combined net worth of these 22 individuals is approximately $1.72 trillion.

It is notable that very few of these captains of industry actually have anything to do with industry per se. Actual industry, that is. Americans have a tendency to apply the term “industry” to non-industrial sectors such as entertainment. Industry is that which processes raw materials into manufactured products. And for that, almost none of these supposed captains of industry have the required eduction. There are only three engineers among all of them:

  • Sundar Pichai of Alphabet/Google has an M.S. in Materials Science & Engineering from Stanford University
  • Kelly Ortberg of Boeing has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from University of Iowa
  • Cristiano Amon of Qualcomm has a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Universidade Estadual de Campinas in Brazil

These three are actually qualified to oversee engineering in some meaningful fashion. The rest have to confine themselves to financial management, stockholder relations, strategic planning, regulatory navigation, and international trade diplomacy. And here is a key fact which I am sure they understand full well: Chairman Xi can replace them with hired help at the stroke of a pen. Not that he would rush to do so — China almost always follows its doctrine of small steps — but the fact that he can is enough to enforce some discipline.

Once again, it is the Russians who showed the way. Recently, several Western companies operating in Russia were placed under government control, Swiss food giant Nestlé and French retail chain Auchan among them. That is, their top managers — not technical or operations staff — were replaced with those appointed by the Kremlin. The companies were not nationalized — God forbid! — but the Russian government took control of their operations. It’s just that their Western managers can no longer manage these companies for the simple reason that they don’t have Russia’s national interests at heart. And, as I already mentioned, they can no longer get at their profits — at least not until all sanctions have been lifted. There will probably be some other conditions, such as compensation for the economic damage the sanctions have caused.

But what of the highly compensated Western financial manipulators? Isn’t it about time to replace them with AI agents? There is a very important difference between technical and operations staff and financial managers: the technical and operations staff know a myriad details that are all relevant to keeping the production lines running and the businesses functioning. The financial managers, on the other hand, can be replaced with hired help — or AI agents. From the point of view of a government — be it Russian or Chinese — what is important about these financial managers is their loyalty. If they are loyal to the West in general or to the US specifically, then they are, by definition, working for the enemy. Either they pledge allegiance, and start being loyal to Russia or to China, or they can take a hike.

Which is why all of these nominally American captains of industry showed up to pledge allegiance to Chairman Xi of the Chinese Communist Party. All the big capitalists pledging allegiance to the chief communist! I thought I’d never see the day!

These people must still feel very important because of their very large compensation packages and their tremendously valuable stock options. But what if the production facilities that make their companies valuable are taken out of their hands? What if the profits of these operations stay on deposit where they can’t get at them? How wealthy and important would they feel then?

Not very, I would think. Which is why they all showed up — to pledge allegiance to Chairman Xí. Henceforth, they will take instruction from the Chinese Communist Party. They will not stray from their mission to Keep China Great.

And what, you might wonder, does Trump have to do with all of this? Unlike Putin or Xí, both of whom are career national leaders, Trump is just a temporary caretaker — and an amateur one at that. He pops into the White House periodically for short periods of time and pretends to know what’s going on there — rather unconvincingly. But he did fine as the White House maître d’ — attending to guest relations, staff supervision and seating arrangements at the state dinner.

Beyond such very important functions, he has tried to use the presidential office to polish his personal brand and to further enrich the Trump clan. The sales of the distinctive red MAGA hats alone generated over $100 million. He and his friends also clean up on insider trading. He uses his position to rock the markets — announcing a war on a Friday and peace on the following Monday — and trades accordingly. “But isn’t that corruption?” you might exclaim. Well, yes and no. Perhaps “creeping Ukrainianization” would be a better term for it. And, keep in mind, within the US justice system, if somebody gets away with a crime, calling that person a criminal is considered libel.

[…]

Via https://boosty.to/cluborlov/posts/00c8417f-dd21-41a8-9c19-40f925b48f58