The story of this substance is like ivermectin all over again… except the war against it never stopped.
The following information is based on a report originally published by A Midwestern Doctor. Key details have been streamlined and editorialized for clarity and impact. Read the original report here.
A medical substance most people have never heard of is quietly treating autoimmune disease, nerve injury, and even conditions doctors say are “untreatable.”
But those conditions are not untreatable — and DMSO is proving it.
Dr. James Miller says DMSO works so well for so many things that it “seems unbelievable.”
Here’s what it’s helping patients recover from:
• Autoimmune disorders
• Chronic nerve inflammation
• Diabetic neuropathy
• Stroke-related disability
• Debilitating arthritis
• Vaccine injuries
• Chronic pain
• Even cancer
Best of all, it is “extremely safe.”
“It’s like salt—you can hurt someone with too much salt, but it’s really hard. And DMSO is in that category. It’s just very, very safe,” Dr. Miller says.
If you’re wondering, “Why have I never heard of DMSO?” — there’s a reason for that.
The story of DMSO is like ivermectin all over again… except the war against it never stopped.
DMSO occupies a strange and uncomfortable position.
It’s been widely studied, used internationally, and even incorporated into FDA-approved therapies.
Yet in the U.S., it’s largely absent from mainstream medicine—meaning countless patients never even hear about an affordable and potentially effective option that should have been considered.
And that absence isn’t neutral.
When something effective is missing from the system, there’s often a big reason.
Patients aren’t just “missing out” on it.
Instead, they’re funneled into more expensive, more aggressive, and sometimes riskier and less effective treatments—without ever knowing there was another path.
The obvious explanation for withholding a treatment would be safety concerns or lack of evidence.
But when you actually look into it, that explanation doesn’t hold. Not even close.
The DMSO literature exists—not in small amounts, but in overwhelming volume.
And the real issue starts to look less like science and more like incentive structures you find in the business world.
Unfortunately, a simple online search for DMSO doesn’t give you clarity. It gives you fragmentation.
Different spellings.
Different indexing systems.
Different databases with partial visibility.
And no single place where it all comes together.
Which means, in practice, most clinicians never see the full picture. And that means patients never get the option.
To actually understand all that the literature has to offer, you’d have to run every variation of the term across multiple databases, extract each relevant study manually, compile them into a master document, and then sort them by condition—often after reviewing tens of thousands of results per database.
That’s a lot.
And even if you do all that work, there’s still a problem.
Because even after reviewing tens of thousands of results, key studies are still missed—either buried in obscure databases, indexed under unexpected terms, or filtered out by imperfect search systems.
Not as a replacement for research, but as a way to process on a scale that we humans simply can’t handle on our own.
AI can summarize long papers, extract key findings, and help navigate massive datasets—in minutes.
Without that capability, reviewing millions of pages of research wouldn’t just be difficult—it would be practically impossible.
It’s a productivity boost, but the limitations show up just as quickly.
AI struggles with filtering large datasets accurately, often swinging between two failure modes: missing relevant studies entirely or flagging an overwhelming number of irrelevant ones, with sensitivity and specificity varying significantly depending on the model used.
It also breaks down when asked to handle multi-step reasoning tasks.
If you give it a sequence of steps instead of a clearly defined task, errors start creeping in—and those errors aren’t always obvious.
Which creates a paradox.
AI can dramatically accelerate research, but only if the person using it already understands the process well enough to catch its mistakes.
Otherwise, you’re just scaling confusion faster.
And this is where this conversation shifts beyond just medicine.
The real impact of AI isn’t just what it can do. It’s what it allows systems of power to do at scale.
For most of history, control had a natural limitation.
Manpower.
You could enforce compliance on a small group, maybe even a large one—but scaling that control across an entire population was extremely difficult. So it didn’t really happen.
And there’s a reason for that.
Only a small percentage of a population—typically estimated around 5–10%—can realistically function as enforcement before the system collapses under its own economic and logistical weight.
AI just so happens to remove that constraint.
Instead of requiring large numbers of people, a relatively small group can now oversee systems that continuously monitor behavior, filter information flows, flag non-compliance, and algorithmically influence decisions across entire populations in real time.
Yikes.
That’s a structural shift humanity has never dealt with before.
Because the limiting factor isn’t human capacity anymore.
It’s computational infrastructure.
And we’re already seeing early versions of this.
Algorithmic systems shaping what people see, what they believe, and how they behave—often without them realizing it’s happening.
At the same time, AI is changing warfare—fast.
Reducing the need for soldiers, enabling remote operations through drones and automated systems, and allowing decisions that affect life and death to be executed at a distance—with minimal direct human involvement in the consequences.
That distance matters.
Because historically, the worst atrocities tend to happen when decision-makers are disconnected from the act itself.
AI has the potential to amplify that dynamic significantly.
Meanwhile, something concerning is happening in the background.
Information itself is becoming harder to access—not because it’s gone, but because it’s no longer easy to find.
The full breakdown from A Midwestern Doctor walks through exactly how to get around this.
Specific databases, search techniques, and sources that still contain material you won’t see on standard platforms.
That’s where a lot of the missing pieces still exist.
And as access to information becomes more complex, something else is changing as well.
Human cognition.
How people think, learn, and process information in the first place is actually changing. Right now.
Studies are clearly showing that individuals who rely heavily on AI tools exhibit significantly reduced activation in key brain regions tied to memory, creativity, and executive function—sometimes by more than 50%, with declines worsening over time as reliance increases.
Even if you don’t use AI yourself, that’s something to be concerned about.
What’s more concerning is what happens over time.
As reliance increases, creativity declines, recall weakens, and individuals become less capable of producing original thought—often struggling to remember or even explain work they previously generated with AI assistance.
If it hasn’t already, that’s going to create a huge divide.
Those who use AI as a tool—while maintaining their cognitive independence—gain massive leverage.
And those who rely on it to think for them gradually lose the very skills that protect them from manipulation.
Where do you fall?
The full report from A Midwestern Doctor goes even deeper into what’s happening and where it may lead.
How AI systems subtly shape user behavior over time—and why most people won’t recognize it until the effects are already baked in.
So the real transformation isn’t just technological.
It’s cognitive.
It’s reshaping how people process information, solve problems, and even form independent conclusions in ways that are difficult to detect and even harder to reverse.
Which leads us to a much bigger question.
It’s not what AI can do for us.
It’s what happens when we stop doing those things ourselves.
Thanks for reading! This information was based on a report originally published by A Midwestern Doctor. Key details were streamlined and editorialized for clarity and impact. Read the original report here.
While you’re at it, give A Midwestern Doctor a follow. No one brings more research, clinical insight, or historical context when it comes to exposing the health myths we’ve all been fed. This is easily one of the most valuable accounts you’ll ever follow.
A New York Times op-ed argues voters are turned off by climate messaging after decades of failed predictions
For almost the entirety of the half century I have lived on Earth, I have had experts, teachers, politicians and activists hectoring me about how climate change is going to destroy the planet. But this week, in The New York Times, of all places, is evidence that climate alarmism is finally cooling down.
“Democrats Do Not Have To Campaign On Climate Change Anymore,” blared the headline, this week, as author Matt Huber argues that voters are rather turned off by the subject. I would like to suggest that this is because it is the single most expensive lie in human history.
In elementary school, I endured warnings of a coming ice age, then by high school it was global warming that was minutes away from ending humanity. By the time I was an adult, the warming having failed, surprisingly, to occur, we settled on “climate change,” as the vague name for the inevitable apocalypse.
In 2018, as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., was coming into prominence, she told us that we had a mere 12 years to fix the climate problem or we would all die. In that time, untold trillions of dollars have been spent by the government, along with basically every business in the country, to hold the weather at bay, even though every prediction the alarmists have made has fallen flat.
It’s not just the expense of climate alarmism, it’s what it has kept us from doing, as well. How much would a gallon of gas cost today had we been drilling for oil instead of pretending the “emergency” meant we all had to switch to electric cars by next Tuesday?
With precious few exceptions, every single thing in our lives has been made much more expensive by the cult of climate and its constant lamentations about the end of days. Entire generations of our youth have been terrorized, just as their parents were by nuclear bomb drills, into thinking they may be the last human beings to ever live.
We have all seen the reports of young adults who say they don’t want to have kids because they expect the world to end. It’s ridiculous. Travel sports might be a plausible reason to avoid having children, but climate change is not.
Now, finally, after 50 years of hysteria, The New York Times, the very Grey Lady with her hair on fire over climate change this whole time, tells us it’s not such a big deal after all?
Even Greta Thunberg, whose entire existence, it seemed, was predicated upon berating us for destroying the planet, has moved on to radical Islam, and traded in her Birkenstocks for a keffeyah.
Say what you will, but as an apocalyptic hoax, climate alarmism has had an absolutely historic run. Overpopulation nonsense had a few years in the 60s, but nothing compared to the decades of pure insanity that we have lived through thanks to Al Gore’s unhinged predictions.
Everyone wants to be a good steward of Mother Nature. Littering is bad and all that, but performative nonsense like paper straws that melt in your cocktail or cars that shut themselves off every 10 seconds are meaningless gestures.
Expensive meaningless gestures.
The climate debate has always hinged to some degree on whether our greatest love should be for nature writ large, or for humanity, because we know that cheap energy is the doorway out of poverty, but also poison to the climate alarmists.
This battle became religious for the secular Left, with taxes instead of tithing and environmentalist slogans instead of prayers. It wasn’t just a scientific issue, but a moral one. If you failed to join in the hysteria, then you were a bad person.
Nothing about American climate policy or attitudes towards it have ever made any sense. We tighten our belts and pay through the nose to keep our emissions low while the rest of the world basically fires huge carbon dioxide cannons up into the sky.
For once, I agree with The New York Times. It is time for this madness to end. We do not need to saddle our children with the emotional and economic damage of make-believe climate disasters.
In the wake of the US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran and the subsequent maritime banditry and piracy, the Islamic Republic is reportedly moving to assert its long-dormant sovereign rights over the submarine internet cables that traverse the waters of the Strait of Hormuz.
This strategic reorientation – as confirmed by some reports – promises to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue while fundamentally reshaping the legal and economic architecture of global data transmission.
The unprovoked military aggression against Iran, which halted with a ceasefire on April 8, 2026, has fundamentally altered the strategic calculus of the Persian Gulf.
During the 40 days of aggression against Iran, a previously overlooked dimension of the country’s sovereign territory emerged as a critical vulnerability for the global digital economy.
Beneath the waters of the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran’s territorial sea extends 12 nautical miles and overlaps completely with Omani jurisdiction, leaving no high seas whatsoever, lie at least five major submarine fibre-optic cable systems.
These cables carry approximately 99 percent of all intercontinental internet traffic and an estimated 10 trillion US dollars in daily financial transactions.
Now, in the aftermath of the aggression, which came in the middle of nuclear talks, Iran is moving to exercise its full and legal sovereign authority over this hidden infrastructure.
The plan is increasingly centered on a comprehensive governance model that would include permit requirements, transit fees, Iranian legal jurisdiction over foreign technology companies, and exclusive Iranian control over cable maintenance and repair operations.
Forgotten dimension of the Strait of Hormuz
For decades, international discourse surrounding the Strait of Hormuz focused almost exclusively on traditional dimensions: freedom of navigation for oil tankers, security of energy flows, and the legal regime governing the passage of commercial and military vessels.
This narrow framing, however, systematically ignored one of the most vital emerging dimensions of this strategic corridor: the fibre-optic communication infrastructure and submarine data transmission cables that lie on the seabed of Iran’s territorial waters.
These cables, which include major systems such as FALCON (owned by Tata Communications of India), the Gulf Bridge International (GBI) system, and the TGN-Gulf system, form the backbone of the digital economy, not just for the Persian Gulf region but the entire world.
They carry international internet traffic, cloud data centre synchronization, enterprise virtual private networks, voice-over-IP communications, and – most critically – international banking and financial transactions, including SWIFT messages.
Any disruption to these communication highways, whether from natural disasters, ship anchoring, or military action, could cause irreparable damage to the tune of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars daily.
What makes this issue particularly significant for Iran is the undisputed legal reality that the Strait of Hormuz is not, and has never been, international waters.
The careful repetition of the phrase “international waters” by Western media and think tanks is part of a cognitive and legal battle designed to diminish the legitimate sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran over one of the world’s most vital waterways.
Map of the northern Indian Ocean with submarine cables
Why is the Strait Iranian territory
The legal status of the Strait of Hormuz must be understood through the precise geometry of international maritime law.
According to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, each coastal state has the right to determine the width of its territorial sea up to a maximum distance of 12 nautical miles from its baselines.
Iran has never ratified this convention, but it serves as a reference point for international practice. Within these 12 miles, the coastal state exercises absolute sovereignty over the water column, the seabed, the subsoil, and even the airspace above.
This is exactly the same sovereignty it exercises over the territory of its capital city.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has determined the width of its territorial sea in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman to be 12 nautical miles. The Kingdom of Oman has adopted exactly the same procedure.
The Strait of Hormuz, at its narrowest point between Iranian islands and the Omani coast, measures approximately 21 nautical miles in width.
When Iran extends its territorial sea 12 nautical miles southward from its northern coast, and Oman extends its territorial sea 12 nautical miles northward from the Musandam Peninsula, the combined territorial waters of the two countries total 24 nautical miles.
This exceeds the total width of the strait at that point by three nautical miles.
The result is geometrically inevitable: the territorial seas of Iran and Oman collide and overlap in the middle of the Strait of Hormuz.
There is not a single drop of water in the narrowest points of the strait and its main shipping channels that can be legally classified as high seas or even as an exclusive economic zone.
Any vessel, submarine, or cable that passes through this point is legally passing within the sovereign borders of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
To this geometric reality must be added the clarifying force of Article 34 of the Convention on the Law of the Sea.
That article states definitively that the regime of passage through straits used for international navigation does not in any way affect the legal status of the waters forming these straits.
Nor does it affect the exercise of sovereignty and jurisdiction by the bordering states over those waters, their airspace, their bed, and their subsoil.
The international community possesses only the right of passage through these waters under the rules set by Iran. This right of passage is limited to the rapid and continuous movement of ships and aircraft.
It does not extend to the laying of fixed infrastructure such as internet cables or energy pipelines on the seabed.
Sovereignty over the seabed, for laying communication cables, energy pipelines, and conducting research, remains entirely the exclusive preserve of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Value of what passes through Iranian waters
The economic significance of the cables transiting the Strait of Hormuz is staggering.
According to data from the TeleGeography database updated to January 2026, the main cable systems crossing the strait form a complex network connecting the Persian Gulf countries to the global network spanning Europe, India, and East Asia.
These systems carry not only public internet traffic but also the most sensitive and valuable data streams in the global economy.
Global content providers known as hyperscalers, companies including Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta, use these fibre-optic cables to connect their local nodes to the core of their global networks.
The traffic these companies carry consists primarily of cloud data centre synchronization, including real-time copies of distributed databases, virtual machine migrations, internal application programming interface traffic, and user-generated content.
In cloud computing architecture, maintaining stability and reliability at the level of 99.999 percent uptime, known as the “five nines” standard, is a mandatory requirement in service level agreements.
Rather than purchasing small amounts of bandwidth, these companies lease long-term dark capacity or purchase irrevocable rights to use submarine cables for periods of 15 to 25 years, keeping network latency in the millisecond range.
Level 1 and Level 2 telecommunications operators, including Etisalat of the UAE, Ooredoo of Qatar and Oman, the Telecommunications Infrastructure Company of Iran, and STC of Saudi Arabia, are responsible for transporting international internet traffic.
This traffic includes Border Gateway Protocol routing information, enterprise virtual private networks, international mobile roaming traffic, and network-based voice packets.
These operators are the gateway to the internet for the countries of the region, receiving terabits per second of capacity from the submarine cables in the Strait of Hormuz and then distributing it to smaller operators and end users.
These cables form the backbone of the digital economy of the Persian Gulf countries, creating a near-total dependence on connectivity to the global network.
Most critically, global financial institutions and content distribution networks, including Akamai, Cloudflare, and the SWIFT financial messaging network, depend on these cables.
Bank settlement messages and high-frequency transactions require dedicated, encrypted, low-latency paths with minimal signal variability.
In global stock market trading, a delay of even one millisecond can result in millions of dollars in losses. Submarine cables are the safest, fastest, and most reliable physical medium for transporting these sensitive intercontinental financial transactions.
According to analytical reports from British think tanks and transaction data from international payment networks, including SWIFT and the Central Interbank Dollar Payments System CHIPS, submarine cables carry more than 10 trillion US dollars in financial transactions every single day.
This colossal figure represents bank settlements, stock market transactions, foreign exchange operations, and all financial activities that form the lifeblood of the global economy.
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development confirms in its annual Digital Economy Reports that more than 99 percent of all international data traffic is transmitted through this cable network.
At the regional level, the West Asia international broadband market, for which the Strait of Hormuz serves as the main thoroughfare, is worth several billion dollars annually.
This value derives from the bulk sale of capacity by cable owners such as FALCON, GBI, and TGN-Gulf to national telecommunications operators.
The damage caused by a disruption or complete outage at this strategic bottleneck, however, is far larger than the direct revenues of this market.
Modelling based on studies of transatlantic cable outages estimates that a five-day disruption of cables through the Strait of Hormuz could inflict tens to hundreds of millions of dollars in damage daily to the combined economies of the Persian Gulf countries.
Map of the Persian Gulf and nearby seas with submarine cables
Failure of alternatives
In response to Iran’s assertion of its sovereign rights, some Western analysts have suggested that alternative routes or technologies could bypass the Strait of Hormuz.
The technical reality, however, offers no fast and reliable alternative.
Next-generation low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations such as Starlink offer lower latency than fibre-optic cables for very long distances, because lasers in space travel at actual light speed while light in glass fibres travels at roughly two-thirds of that speed.
However, while a single submarine cable can carry terabits of data per second, an entire satellite constellation offers bandwidth measured in gigabits.
Satellites cannot yet handle the massive bandwidth demands of artificial intelligence training, high-definition streaming for millions of users, or cloud backups. They are, in the assessment of industry experts, a boutique solution not scalable to millions of users.
Terrestrial overland corridors represent the most practical alternative, with massive land cables running through Iraq to Turkey or through Syria to the Mediterranean.
Ambitious projects such as Saudi Arabia’s SilkLink and Qatar’s FiG are underway. However, these routes must cross war-torn regions, including Syria and Iraq, where West-backed wars have previously destroyed similar infrastructure and where local militias and unstable governments remain capable of seizure, taxation, or sabotage.
These are not peaceful alternatives; they merely exchange one set of vulnerabilities for another. Free-space optical systems using lasers transmitted through air or vacuum are not a solution for the Strait of Hormuz at all.
Such systems are extremely susceptible to weather interference, including the fog and sandstorms common to the Persian Gulf, and have a limited range of less than 50 kilometres.
The verdict is clear: there exists no single alternative that is simultaneously fast, high-capacity, and secure. The Strait of Hormuz remains an irreplaceable chokepoint for global digital communications.
Repairing submarine communication cables
Repair regime and Iran’s essential role
The maintenance and repair of submarine cables in the Strait of Hormuz present another dimension of Iran’s sovereign authority.
According to International Cable Protection Committee technical documents and performance reports, the repair process for a complete cable cut follows a well-established sequence: fault location using optical time-domain reflectometer tools, application for navigation permits under international law, and dispatch of a cable repair ship.
The process of dispatching a ship, retrieving the two ends of the cable from the seabed, performing the reconnection, and returning the cable to the seabed typically requires between 7 and 30 days, depending on weather conditions and the availability of repair vessels.
In the Strait of Hormuz specifically, the exceptionally high volume of maritime traffic requires intensive traffic coordination during cable laying and repair operations.
Under normal conditions with full cooperation from the countries exercising sovereignty over the strait, the repair process would be expected to take up to 45 days.
During the recent joint US-Israeli aggression, however, major cable installation contractors, including Alcatel Submarine Networks, declared force majeure on Persian Gulf operations, halting both new installations and maintenance of existing systems.
Billions of dollars’ worth of cable projects were suspended or abandoned, with some reportedly 90 percent complete before work stopped.
Given that the Strait of Hormuz lies entirely within Iranian territorial waters, the logical conclusion is inescapable: the user companies whose cables transit Iranian sovereign territory must conclude contracts for cable repair and maintenance exclusively with Iranian companies, specifically companies owned more than 50 percent by Iranian entities and operating entirely under the laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
This is not a matter of political choice but of legal necessity arising from the undisputed fact that foreign vessels, including cable repair ships, cannot operate in Iranian territorial waters without Iranian permission.
Sketch of a submarine communication cable
Global recognition of the new reality
The world media has taken notice of Iran’s digital sovereignty initiative. Indian media outlets, including ABP Live and the Economic Times, have warned that a significant portion of India’s internet passes through the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, and that any disruption to these routes could disrupt online services, digital banking, and communications, pressuring the digital economy of countries, including India.
Russian media outlet AIA Daily reported that Iran has effectively conveyed the message that it possesses physical access to vital routes of the global internet, emphasizing that at least seven major internet cables pass through the Strait of Hormuz and serve as the backbone of e-commerce, cloud services, and international communications.
Asian media, including Korea’s Asia Business Daily and the English-language Asia Times, have described the Strait of Hormuz as one of the world’s most important internet bottlenecks.
Asia Times wrote that data infrastructure and fibre-optic cables have become part of the deterrence equation in the region, warning that an attack on cables could disrupt the global economy without firing a missile, and that future wars may take place on the seabed and over data cables rather than traditional battlefields.
Western media have also acknowledged the vulnerability. Reuters reported in a piece that Iran’s warning about the vulnerability of undersea cables has raised concerns, emphasizing that several important fibre-optic cables lie in the Strait of Hormuz connecting countries in Asia, the Persian Gulf, and Europe, and that any damage in this area would disrupt cloud services, online communications, and the digital economy.
The Washington Post warned that submarine cables have become one of the most vulnerable parts of the world’s digital economy, with Western governments concerned that undersea cables could be used as a tool of strategic pressure.
The French newspaper Le Monde wrote that the joint US-Israeli aggression against Iran has placed infrastructure, including submarine cables, data centres, and cloud computing networks under the simultaneous pressure of geopolitical and security crises.
Three practical steps
Based on the legal, technical, and economic factors, the Islamic Republic of Iran can implement three practical steps to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue from the Strait of Hormuz internet cables while exercising its full sovereign rights.
First, all companies wishing to use this infrastructure must obtain an initial license from Iranian authorities, and because this license must be renewed annually, these companies must pay all outstanding amounts on a recurring basis.
The fee model can draw from international precedents, including the Egyptian model based on providing exclusive services, the Singaporean model based on policy-making and administrative licensing, the Indonesian bureaucratic model based on permits and corridors, and the Russian model based on strategic control and state participation.
Egypt, for example, earns between 250 million and 400 million US dollars annually from submarine cable infrastructure alone, representing 15 to 20 percent of the Egyptian Telecommunications Company’s total operating revenues.
Second, all cross-border communications and information technology companies operating in the region, including US companies such as Meta, Amazon, and Microsoft that transfer Iranian user data abroad through these cables, must be subject to the laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran and supervised and regulated by the Iranian Ministry of Communications and Information Technology.
With the official activities of these companies and their cooperation with the Iranian side, there would no longer be any need for filtering or blocking of their platforms.
Third, because the Strait of Hormuz is entirely part of Iranian territory, the user companies must conclude contracts for cable repair and maintenance exclusively with an Iranian company, meaning a company owned more than 50 percent by the Iranian side and operating fully under the laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The proceeds from this entire framework will flow to the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, specifically to the Fibre-Optic Development Fund, and will be used to create and improve the country’s information technology infrastructure.
This file picture shows passenger planes parked at Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv, the Israeli-occupied territories.
Press TV
The chief of Israel’s civil aviation has warned that Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv has effectively turned into a “US military base,” disrupting civilian flights and threatening Israeli airlines.
According to the Hebrew-language Yedioth Ahronoth daily newspaper, Shmuel Zakay told Israeli Transportation Minister Miri Regev and ministry Director General Moshe Ben Zaken on Monday that military activity at Israel’s main international airport is delaying the return of foreign carriers, and increasing ticket prices ahead of the summer tourism season.
“Turning Ben Gurion International Airport into a military base harms the return of foreign airlines and threatens the financial stability of Israeli airlines,” Zakay said.
He added that Iranian retaliatory operations to the US-Israeli airstrikes against the Islamic Republic significantly affected civilian air traffic in the occupied territories, with Israeli airlines relocating many aircraft abroad, some of which have not yet returned.
Zakay said the Israeli military apparatus does not fully understand the damage caused to civilian aviation or the impact on ticket prices and the public.
“Ben Gurion Airport has become a military base with limited civilian activity,” he said.
Zakay also warned that the situation poses “a real threat” to smaller Israeli carriers, including Israir, Arkia, and Air Haifa, because of rising operating and fuel costs and growing demands for flights.
He called for moving US aircraft from Ben Gurion Airport to military bases, saying the current situation harms not only airlines but also all Israeli settlers.
The Yedioth Ahronoth also quoted Israir CEO Uri Sirkis as saying during a meeting of the Knesset Economic Affairs Committee that the airline, which usually parks 17 aircraft at Ben Gurion Airport, is now permitted to keep only four there overnight.
He said the restrictions are pushing up airfare prices and limiting the number of flights Israeli airlines can operate.
In recent weeks, Israeli media outlets published images showing dozens of US military aircraft, including refueling planes, stationed at the airport amid continued US military support for Israel.
Israel’s Channel 24 reported on Thursday that hundreds of settlers received notices of canceled hotel reservations in the southern resort city of Eilat to accommodate US troops.
The channel said hotels informed guests that reservations from this month through November, including the summer vacation season, had been canceled.
Israeli media have also reported recently that Israel raised its military alert level in preparation for a possible resumption of war with Iran in case indirect negotiations between Tehran and Washington fail.
US President Donald Trump has grown “increasingly frustrated” with Cuba and its ability to withstand months of US pressure, and is considering waging an act of aggression against the Caribbean country, according to a report.
NBC News reported on Monday that American officials have told Trump that the government of Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel “could still fall by the end of the year” without military action, but the US president is not willing to wait that long.
Trump’s impatience, the report added, has prompted the Pentagon to ramp up planning for a possible attack against the island country.
Last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the Cuban government had rejected $100 million in humanitarian aid offered by Washington.
He also called it “an unacceptable status quo” that the US has, “90 miles from our shores, a failed state that also happens to be friendly territory for some of our adversaries.”
For more than six decades, Cuba has been subject to increased inhumane US sanctions in flagrant violation of the fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.
The Trump administration has intensified the campaign of pressure against Cuba since January, when the US kidnapped Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro following an illegal military assault.
In February, the US president imposed an oil blockade on Cuba, while also repeatedly hinting at a possible “regime change” operation against the Latin American state.
Last month, the Cuban president told NBC News that he is willing to sacrifice his life for his homeland.
“If the time comes, I don’t think there would be any justification for the United States to launch a military aggression against Cuba, or for the US to undertake a surgical operation, like the kidnapping of a president,” Díaz-Canel said, referring to the abduction of Maduro.
“If that happens, there will be fighting and there will be a struggle. And we’ll defend ourselves. And if we need to die, we’ll die, because as our national anthem says, ‘Dying for the homeland is to live.’”
The Trump administration is looking for a face-saving way to escape the Iran war quagmire it has become trapped in.
Earlier, Trump said that “we may stop by Cuba after we’re finished with this,” in reference to the illegal US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran, which began on February 28 and stopped under a Pakistan-brokered ceasefire on April 8.
n Festus, a community of around 14,000 people near St. Louis, residents have ousted four city council members who backed plans for a massive AI data center
By Sadie Whitelocks
A sleepy Midwestern town has become one of the fiercest battlegrounds in America’s growing backlash against AI data centers – and voters are making their anger clear at the ballot box.
In the town of Festus, Missouri, a community of 14,000 people near St. Louis, residents have ousted four city council members who backed plans for a massive AI data center, replacing them with candidates who openly opposed the project.
The political upheaval didn’t stop there.
At a packed City Hall meeting following the election, newly sworn-in officials were greeted with cheers – while the city’s mayor Sam Richards, who still supports the development, was met with boos and jeers from the crowd.
‘You’re next!’ one resident shouted, underscoring how heated the fight has become.
At the center of the dispute is a proposed $6 billion data center spanning roughly 360 acres, designed to support the growing demands of artificial intelligence.
Supporters say the project could transform the local economy – generating an estimated $32 million a year in tax revenue for decades, funding schools, roads, and public services.
But many locals aren’t convinced, and opponents fear the development could strain the electrical grid, push up utility bills and disrupt daily life with years of construction.
Other residents worry about environmental risks, including pollution from backup generators and wastewater systems – concerns shaped by the region’s industrial past.
In a bid to scrap the development, locals have launched a website and a Facebook group titled No Data Center in Festus, which has attracted more than 3,000 members.
The backlash quickly spilled into local politics: In the landslide election, all four incumbents who supported the data center were voted out.
‘It was an annihilation,’ said one local campaigner.
Since then, more than 4,000 residents have signed petitions seeking to recall the mayor and other officials still backing the plan.
Vice President JD Vance‘s appearance in a state critical to the 2028 Republican presidential nomination is raising eyebrows due to a lobbyist’s bid to entice attendees.
Victoria Churchill
Ahead of a rally Vance headlined in Des Moines with Iowa Congressman Zach Nunn that took place last Tuesday, a text message was sent by an Iowa ethanol lobbyist recruiting spectators to attend. The messages contained an offer of payment.
‘Gentlemen, Jake Swanson here. I wanted to invite you to join me in seeing Vice President JD Vance this afternoon in Des Moines. I do some work for an ethanol company and so if you’re able to join, I will give you $100, and for anyone that you recruit, an additional $25. No limit on referrals, so if someone recruits a group of 20 to show up, that’s $500.’
Swanson is a lobbyist and a former policy adviser to Iowa’s Republican governor, Kim Reynolds.
In a statement to Iowa Starting Line, Swanson defended the move: ‘I love ethanol and what it does for our state.
‘So I was happy to bring some Iowa State kids to the rally to celebrate all the things Trump-Vance have done for biofuels and I think there’s opportunity for so much more. This is what I like to do in my own personal spare time,’ Swanson noted.
The Daily Mail reached out for comment to the Vice President’s office, which did not respond in time for publication. There is no suggestion that Vance or his team were aware of Swanson’s actions. Swanson was also contacted for additional comment.
Artist’s illustration of a private orbital-debris cleanup spacecraft in Earth orbit.(Image credit: Portal Space Systems)
By Andrew Jones
Two private companies are partnering up to establish a repeatable debris removal service for low Earth orbit.
The U.S. firm Portal Space Systems and Australian startup Paladin Space are working together to establish the commercial Debris Removal as a Service (DRAAS) for removing multiple debris objects during a single mission.
The partnership, which Portal announced on March 19, will see a combining of respective technologies to make the service possible. The platform will be based on Portal’s maneuverable, refuelable Starburst spacecraft and will integrate Paladin’s Triton payload for imaging, classifying and capturing tumbling debris objects under 1 meter (3 feet) in size.
Space debris experts estimate there are nearly 130 million pieces of junk in orbit, ranging from fragments from explosions and satellite deployments up to huge pieces such as abandoned spacecraft and spent rocket stages. That number alarms many people in the space community and has spurred efforts to start cleaning up our orbital neighborhood.
Some companies have already made serious headway on this effort, showing that debris capture is technically feasible. But Portal and Paladin want to go a few steps further.
“This is about making debris removal operational, not experimental,” said Jeff Thornburg, CEO of Portal Space Systems, in a statement. “Satellite data underpins communications, navigation, weather forecasting, and national security. Maintaining that infrastructure requires active debris management.”
The service has already attracted interest, according to Portal, which states that Starlab Space has signed a letter of intent to integrate the service into future space station operations.
Portal aims to send Starburst-1 into orbit in late 2026 on the SpaceX Transporter-18 rideshare mission, which could pave the way for commercial launches in 2027 onwards. The company also raised $50 million in Series A funding in early April to boost development of its maneuverable spacecraft.
A picture dated September 8, 2002, shows a partial view of the Dimona nuclear power plant in the southern Negev Desert. (AFP Photo)
Press TV
In a milestone event, a group of 30 Democrats in the lower House of Congress has demanded an open acknowledgement of Israel’s nuclear arsenal in a letter to the Secretary of State.
For decades, Washington had an ironclad bipartisan conspiracy that refused to confirm the existence of Israel’s estimated 400 nuclear weapons.
It was a testament to the power of the Israeli lobby’s influence and ability to put Israel’s well-being and safety ahead of that of the United States.
And so you have this collusion to speak Israel’s language, and Israel’s language is extremely deceitful, and that deceit extends to hiding that they have nukes, denying genocide, denying human rights, insisting that they should walk to a different standard than the international community, and basically being just dismissive of international law and the laws of humanity.
Member of Public 01
The current US-Israeli war on Iran was launched over decades of not just unverified, but openly disproven claims that Iran was racing to build a nuclear bomb.
Since October 7, 2023, Israel has terrorized the region in an effort to spark a major war, which may have made some politicians see the light regarding Israel’s doomsday arsenal.
And we’re on an [sic] edge of a tectonic shift that is toward recognizing our common humanity.
There’s no security for Israelis, there’s no security for Americans, unless we are all secure and we work toward this mutually verifiable, gradual disarmament; all together on the same page.
Steven Sellers, Pro-Palestine Activist
The end of the bipartisan collusion is another stunning example of how quickly Israel has fallen from what was thought to be an unshakable position in Washington in recent years.
They are expected to fall even further from grace.
It’s being referred to as the awakening, and basically (the) American public is becoming aware.
You have … polling that went from extremely high polling that was pro Israel and really people drinking the Kool-Aid, to a situation where the Gaza genocide has really opened people’s eyes.
They were watching a genocide live-stream 24/7 and that really jolts people into reality.
Member of Public 01
One official in the administration of President Donald Trump is reported as saying that, “There is a low boil of unease about Israel’s nuclear program and what could compel them to use nuclear weapons”.
The letter from the group of Democrats demands to know what nuclear weapons and enrichment capabilities Israel has and its “threshold for use” in the context of the current conflict with Iran.
Iran’s reply to the US proposal is exclusively focused on initiatives to end the war of aggression.
Press TV
Iran has submitted its official reply to the latest US proposal for reaching a deal that allows a permanent end to the US-Israeli war of aggression against the country.
Iran’s official IRNA news agency said in a Sunday report that the country had submitted its reply to the US proposal to Pakistan, which has mediated efforts aimed at ending the war of aggression.
IRNA said the reply insists that current negotiations between Iran and the US should solely focus on efforts to end the war, and other issues, including disputes surrounding Iran’s nuclear program, should be discussed at later stages of the talks.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry announced earlier this week that the country would submit its final response to the US proposal after carrying out deliberations and thorough examinations.
The US proposal had come in response to a 14-article plan submitted by Iran to allow a complete halt to the US-Israeli war of aggression.
The latest Iranian reply is focused on efforts to end the aggression on all fronts, including Israeli attacks on Lebanon, and to guarantee the security of shipping in the Persian Gulf.
Iran and the US held an intensive day of negotiations on April 11–12 in Islamabad, four days after Pakistan mediated a ceasefire to halt the US-Israeli aggression on Iran that had started in late February.
The talks collapsed over US maximalist demands, Iranian officials said.
A key sticking point in the current negotiations between Iran and the US is the restoration of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway in the Persian Gulf, which has come under Iranian control since the early days of the aggression.
Iran has indicated it is ready to reopen the Strait if the aggression ends permanently and the US lifts its illegal sanctions and blockade on the country.
Authorities in Tehran have said that a first phase of efforts to reach a deal must concentrate on shipping and sanctions, while signaling they are ready to discuss the country’s nuclear program in later stages of the talks with the US.
The Most Revolutionary Act 