The Most Revolutionary Act

Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine

The Most Revolutionary Act

Russia Voted Under Fire. Washington Is Loading the Tankers

 

Larry C Johnson

Two things happened this weekend that belong in the same frame, though you will not see them connected anywhere in the Western press. Russia held a national election under a hail of drones and cyberattacks — and came through it. And overnight, the United States began signaling that it is about to widen the war in the Middle East. They are not separate stories. The same barrage that tried to break the Russian vote also tore a piece out of Russia’s refining capacity, and that connects directly to the fuel crisis Washington is about to make worse. Take them in order.

An election under attack

Russians voted over three days, September 18 through 20, to seat the ninth convocation of the State Duma, their national legislature — all 450 seats. What made the final day extraordinary was the effort, backed by the West, to disrupt it by force.

Overnight, Ukraine launched the largest drone assault of the war. Moscow’s mayor, Sergei Sobyanin, reported that air defenses brought down more than 1,600 drones across Russia since Saturday, roughly 450 of them bound for the capital region; the Russian Defense Ministry put the single-night intercept figure at 1,110, the highest it has ever reported. I will be candid: I woke up Sunday morning with no idea any of it had happened. The overwhelming majority were destroyed well before they reached Moscow. A handful got through — two people were killed and about twenty injured in the Moscow region. For those who lost their lives, and for their families, it is a tragedy. But set it against the scale: some seventeen million people live in the Moscow region, and their day went on. Then, through the voting hours, came waves of cyberattacks on the electronic voting system — another attempt to break the election that failed to break it.

Now the numbers that matter. Official turnout, per the Central Election Commission, came in around 56.7 percent over the three days. Ten parties qualified for the ballot. And in the four newly constituted republics — Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia and Kherson — turnout ran dramatically higher than the national figure, despite those regions being under active attack. People who face drones on their way to the polling station and vote anyway are telling you something about how much the franchise means to them.

The election was watched by international observers — independent-minded people, some of them frankly sympathetic to Gennady Zyuganov’s Communists, no friends of the ruling party. I spoke with several. Their verdict was the same: this was a free and fair election. I saw nothing to contradict it — no signs going up and being torn down, no one dragged away for campaigning.

Now, I know exactly what the Western press will wave in reply, so let me meet it head-on. Yes: the Supreme Court struck the federal list of Yabloko, the one small party that campaigned against the war, and Boris Nadezhdin was kept off the ballot and has since left the country. Those are the two names you will hear over and over as proof that the whole exercise was theater. It is not much of a case. Yabloko has polled below the five-percent threshold for the better part of two decades; the position it staked out — abandoning the four republics and the men fighting for them — is one almost no Russian holds. Excluding a marginal faction that stands where the West stands is not the same thing as crushing dissent, and it does not turn a three-day, ten-party election with 56.7 percent turnout into a fraud. The real spectrum of Russian politics does not run from pro-war to anti-war. It runs from those who support the special military operation to those who want it fought harder — and inside that spectrum the parties went at each other in the open, and the observers, including men who would sooner see a Communist in the Kremlin, judged the contest fair. On the evidence in front of me, the endless claim that Putin simply crushes all opposition is a fabrication.

Here is what the West consistently misreads. Russia’s parties argue fiercely about domestic policy — income inequality, taxes, education, health care, the ordinary business of any democracy. But on foreign policy they are united, something on the order of 95 percent behind the President and the special military operation. If the ruling bloc’s share slips, it will not be because Russians want the war to end. It will be because they want it prosecuted harder. That is the opposite of the war-weariness Western capitals keep predicting.

The refinery, and the squeeze

Here is the hinge the Western coverage misses entirely. In that same overnight barrage, a drone reached the Gazprom Neft refinery on Moscow’s southeastern edge — a plant that processes on the order of 245,000 barrels a day and supplies fuel to the capital region — and set it ablaze. Strip away the election framing for a moment and look at what that means for the world’s fuel balance. Every refinery knocked offline, in Russia or in the Gulf, tightens the same global distillate market. Ukraine, prodded and supplied by the West, is not only trying to break a Russian election; it is degrading Russian refining capacity at the precise moment the world can least afford to lose a barrel of diesel or jet fuel. That is the thread running straight into the second half of this story.

Washington reaches for the matches

The second development arrived overnight as well, and it points the other direction — toward escalation.

Late Saturday, September 19, the State Department sharpened its travel guidance, telling Americans outside the Middle East to seriously reconsider any travel to or through the region and warning those already there to brace for airspace closures and canceled flights. That advisory is confirmed and public. Alongside it came reports — which I have not been able to independently confirm, so I flag them as reports — that personnel manning Central Command’s operations centers are being recalled to duty, and that aerial refueling tankers are up and flying over the region. Anyone who has watched these sequences knows what airborne tankers usually precede.

The open question is the target. It could be Yemen and the Houthis — Ansar Allah — who have been trading strikes with Saudi Arabia and just put a plume of black smoke over Riyadh’s King Khalid airport. It could be Iran. It could be both. I cannot rule out any of the three. As I write this Sunday night, there is no sign that strikes are actually under way. So we will learn soon enough whether this is saber-rattling or whether Donald Trump means to escalate.

What we already know is that the global diesel and distillate crisis is getting worse, not better, and nothing on the horizon reverses it. The EIA now expects U.S. distillate inventories to sit below the five-year low through much of 2027; industry veterans reckon the world has lost something like seven million barrels a day of refining capacity to this year’s fighting. Last night’s strike on the Moscow refinery subtracts a little more. This is the box Trump has built for himself. He wants gasoline and diesel cheaper and inflation tamed — and every move he has made around the Persian Gulf, Iran, the Gulf states and now the Houthis guarantees tension stays high and the distillate squeeze stays on.

The market has been whipsawing on every on-again, off-again ceasefire rumor; crude actually eased into Friday’s close, near $104 Brent, on hopes that Saudi Arabia could restore pipeline flows. But if fresh American strikes land this week, expect that to reverse hard — crude spiking, equities selling off, the pump price and the diesel crack climbing right back up. These signals went out on a Sunday evening. Come Monday morning in New York, the odds favor a market moving the wrong way for a President who says he wants the opposite.

So that is where we stand. Trump, for all his talk of ending wars and lowering prices, keeps doing the one thing that makes both harder: pouring fuel on the fire. I will have more once the real shape of the Russian result is clear and once we know whether the tankers meant anything.

For now, the democracy that is Russia did more than survive this weekend. It was attacked, and it voted anyway.

[…]

Via https://sonar21.com/russia-voted-under-fire-washington-is-loading-the-tankers/

Assange Returns to X in Midst of AI Crisis

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returned to X on Thursday, more than two years after his release from prison as the AI crisis dominates the headlines.

Assange on his flight to freedom from London in June 2024. (WikiLeaks via X)

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News

Julian Assange returned to X on Thursday 25 months after being released from London’s Belmarsh Prison and eight and a half years since he last posted on the social media site.

“I’m back,” Assange posted at 9:02 a.m. EDT. 

His return comes amidst an expanding crisis of Artificial Intelligence, which captains of the AI industry have warned in recent days is slipping out of control and endangering human society.

Assange has remained away from the public since his freedom in June 2024 recovering from his five-year prison ordeal, which was preceded by seven years of confinement in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. 

He made his first post-release public appearance in Strasbourg, France on Oct. 1, 2024 at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’s Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to discuss his case and its implications for press freedom.

Anti-genocide protesters,who marched across the Sydney Harbour Bridge in August, are among those being blamed for Sydney’s horrific terrorist attack on Sunday. In the front row, left to right: Mary Kostakidis, Gabriel Shipton and Julian Assange. (Consortium News)

Assange next appeared at the head of a march of an estimated 300,000 people over the Sydney Harbour Bridge on Aug. 3, 2025 to protest Israel’s genocide in Gaza.  At the end of July he attended a concert in Sydney in support of pianist Jayson Gillham after the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra cancelled his 2024 concert over comments he made about journalists killed in Gaza.

Assange’s technical expertise could put him in position to weigh in on the AI crisis. It is a non-partisan issue that lacks the controversy of comments on U.S. foreign policy.

OpenAI AI agents escaped testing environments this year and coordinated cyberattacks on other AI systems, revealing that humans were losing control. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei called for slowing AI development so security measures can catch up, warning swarms could seize the internet within a year. OpenAI’s Sam Altman agreed development “should be slower,” and Elon Musk, who runs Grok AI, posted “Dario is right.”

Assange had not posted on Twitter, later X, since March 2018 when the Ecuador government, which hosted him in its London embassy, cut his internet access after he tweeted about Catalonia’s independence referendum.

After his June 2024 plea deal and release, Assange stayed off social media and his wife, Stella Assange, said publicly he wasn’t on any platforms and that accounts claiming to be his were fake.

Via https://consortiumnews.com/2026/09/17/assange-returns-to-x-in-midst-of-ai-crisis/

Imran Khan’s immediate family detained in Pakistan ahead of mass protest demanding his release

(Photo credit: AFP)

The Cradle

SEP 21, 2026

Khan has been jailed on corruption charges since 2022 following a US-backed coup to oust him as prime minister

Pakistan’s police have detained the three sisters of former Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan ahead of mass protests to demand his release, Pakistani newspaper Dawn reported on 21 September.

Khan, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party leader and former cricket star, has been jailed since August 2023 on corruption charges that he and his supporters say are politically motivated.

The PTI has called for a mass march in the capital, Islamabad, on 27 September, with Khan’s release from prison as a central demand.

On Sunday, his sister Aleema Khan was detained at her residence in Lahore under the Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) law as part of a crackdown ahead of the protest.

PTI spokesperson Sheikh Waqas Akram denounced the arrests. Akram said Aleema Khan was detained “because she refused to stay silent about her brother’s illegal detention, solitary confinement, and denial of medical care.”

Aleema and her children were taken to an unknown place in an armored vehicle, Akram added.

Khan’s other two sisters, Uzma Khan and Noreen Niazi, were detained later on Sunday after holding a press conference to denounce their sister’s detention. The three sisters’ children were also detained.

Khan’s son Kasim said police broke into his relatives’ homes and forced them into vehicles without explanation.

“This is criminal behavior. Inexcusable,” he wrote on X on Sunday.

The sisters’ detentions have been challenged in the Lahore High Court, Aleema’s lawyer Rana Mudassar Umer said.

Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi demanded that the PTI cancel Sunday’s march.

“They cannot achieve anything through such drama. I will say again today that there is still time. Don’t get into a situation from which there is no turning back,” Naqvi said.

In May, a secret Pakistani diplomatic cable was published for the first time confirming that a senior US diplomat insisted on the removal of Imran Khan from his position as prime minister in 2022.

According to the cable, revealed by Drop Site News, Donald Lu, then US assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, told Pakistan’s ambassador in Washington, Asad Majeed Khan, that “all will be forgiven” if the former premier was removed through a no-confidence vote in parliament.

Khan was ousted as prime minister in a legislative coup six weeks after the cable was sent, on 9 April 2022. Khan revealed the existence of the cable at that time, claiming his removal was part of a “US-backed regime-change operation.”

[…]

Via https://thecradle.co/articles/imran-khans-entire-immediate-family-detained-in-pakistan-ahead-of-mass-protest-demanding-his-release

Iran’s war economy is squeezing the wrong people

SEP 21, 2026

Washington’s blockade is draining Iran’s revenues, but Tehran still decides how the burden is shared. Fuel hikes, weak price controls, and scarce currency for luxury imports risk shifting costs onto ordinary households instead of those higher up the economic ladder.

In September 2024, a lavash flatbread in Tehran’s bakeries cost 500 tomans. A barbari loaf sold for 1,800 tomans and sangak for 3,000. By July 2026, those prices had climbed to 4,000, 7,500, and 8,800 tomans respectively. For lavash, the increase approached 700 percent in less than two years, even though bread remains one of Iran’s most heavily subsidized staples.

Bread prices tell only part of the story. A former member of the Supreme Labor Council’s Wage Committee recently put the monthly cost of living for a working family above 90 million tomans. The statutory monthly wage package cited for a worker with a family is about 16.6 million tomans.

A labor representative on the committee observed that for roughly 60 percent of Iranian workers, current wages cover only eight days of household expenses. Debt, savings, second jobs, and the sale of assets must carry the remaining three weeks.

The cost of war is measured first in the bakery queue. Bread, rent, transport, and medicine are swallowing ever more of a collapsing wage. Washington’s blockade has inflicted immense damage, but Tehran still decides how that burden is distributed at home – and why those least able to withstand it are carrying the heaviest share.

The blockade enters the household budget

The foreign source of much of this pressure is beyond dispute. Months of war, tightening sanctions, disrupted trade, and the US maritime blockade have sharply reduced Iran’s access to hard currency. Shipping costs have surged, payment channels have narrowed, and foreign companies face an expanding threat of secondary sanctions.

It was estimated in early September that Iranian oil exports had fallen from about 1.7 million barrels per day (bpd) a year earlier to roughly 260,000 bpd.

Tehran presents a very different picture. The Oil Ministry said foreign-exchange earnings from oil sales exceeded $11 billion in the first four months of the Iranian year, despite sanctions and pressure on the tanker fleet.

Officials portrayed that result as evidence that sales and collections were improving. The two claims are not necessarily measuring the same thing: one concerns estimated physical shipments at a particular moment, while the other covers cumulative revenue that may include delayed payments or earlier cargoes.

Yet the gulf between them exposes a familiar problem. Iran does not publish a sufficiently detailed, timely account of export volumes, destinations, discounts, or settled receipts.

[…]

On inflation, the domestic figures are already severe enough. The Statistical Center of Iran put annual inflation in August 2026 at 69.9 percent and year-on-year inflation at 89 percent. For food and beverages, the year-on-year rate reached 127.5 percent.

The average food basket was therefore more than twice as expensive as it had been a year earlier, according to the state’s own statistical authority. Reuters also reported unemployment above nine percent as the blockade tightened, while youth joblessness remained much higher. The World Bank has warned that war, import disruption, and mounting fiscal pressure deepen the risks of inflation and food insecurity.

Washington is deliberately exploiting these vulnerabilities. The blockade is intended to choke oil earnings, deter Iran’s trading partners, and raise the domestic cost of resistance until Tehran changes its position at the negotiating table.

But foreign pressure does not dictate every domestic choice. Washington does not decide whether scarce currency goes to medicine or high-end vehicles. It does not set rent enforcement, customs priorities, tax exemptions, or the distribution of energy subsidies. Those decisions remain with the Iranian state.

Blaming every domestic failure on the blockade shields those decisions from scrutiny and hands policymakers an alibi when the allocation of scarce resources demands full transparency.

Gasoline puts the burden on the street

From 7 September, monthly gasoline consumption above 110 liters has been charged at 100,000 rials, or 10,000 tomans, per liter – twice the previous third-tier rate. Officials point to daily demand of roughly 145 million liters, well above domestic production capacity, and say the measure directly affects about 15 percent of consumers.

There is an economic case for restraining consumption of a heavily subsidized commodity. Iran’s aging vehicle fleet, smuggling, inadequate public transport, and extraordinarily cheap fuel have all contributed to demand. A government facing a widening supply gap cannot treat consumption as though the war had changed nothing.

The difficulty lies in how the adjustment travels through an economy already enduring extraordinary inflation. Fuel is embedded in the price of almost every physical good. Many workers have no practical alternative to private cars or shared taxis, while small businesses cannot absorb repeated increases in transport costs. A price rise aimed at the heaviest users can therefore spread well beyond that 15 percent through freight charges, fares, retail prices, and expectations of further inflation.

President Masoud Pezeshkian’s government has leaned toward price adjustment, subsidy restraint, and limits on public spending. A single gasoline increase does not define an entire economic program, and interventionist governments also raise prices to curb smuggling or close fiscal gaps.

When price reform advances faster than wage protection, targeted transfers, public transport, or control over essential markets, the adjustment lands on consumers before the state has built a shield around them.

Wartime prices carry the weight of the blockade. Insurance premiums, sanctions exposure, blocked payments, longer trade routes, shipping shortages, and military disruption are all folded into the final price. When the state allows those costs to pass unchecked through the market, Washington’s economic war arrives in every shop and at every family table.

The design of compensation is just as important as the headline price. A cash payment that arrives after inflation has already consumed its value offers little protection, particularly when the poorest households spend most of their income on food and housing.

Assistance must be indexed, targeted, and paid on time. Public transport, school travel, rural mobility, and small freight operators also require specific treatment because their fuel use cannot simply be dismissed as discretionary excess.

Emergency controls need an emergency supply plan

Permanent price suppression is no answer. Keeping a commodity below its production or import cost for too long erodes supply, lowers quality, encourages rent-seeking, and feeds the black market. Iran’s own experience makes those dangers impossible to dismiss. Wartime management, however, need not mean freezing every price indefinitely.

The state can impose temporary and reviewable limits on a narrow range of essential goods and costs while protecting supply. That requires preferential foreign exchange for raw materials, strategic stocks released before shortages become acute, affordable credit or tax relief for producers, and direct support for low-income households.

A cap without supply measures merely postpones an increase or drives the commodity out of formal markets. Supply support without controls can become another transfer to intermediaries.

Housing shows that the government already accepts the principle of emergency intervention. Authorities have imposed a 25 percent annual ceiling on rent increases, including in Tehran, alongside measures intended to support the renewal of leases and limit arbitrary evictions. Enforcement is uneven, and local rules require careful distinction, but the policy concedes the central point: during a severe crisis, the state cannot leave every essential cost to an overheated market.

The missing element is a coherent system. Food, housing, medicine, transport, and production inputs should command a higher claim on scarce currency and administrative capacity than luxury vehicles, foreign leisure travel, or other non-essential consumption.

A war economy is ultimately a hierarchy of priorities. Without one, separate interventions remain improvised exceptions while households confront the crisis as a single, relentless rise in the cost of living.

Luxury imports expose the contradiction

The return of large-engine vehicle imports illustrates the contradiction. In 2025, after years of restrictions, regulations again made room for cars above 2,500 cubic centimeters. The relevant plan reportedly anticipated around 13,000 vehicles and set aside approximately 635 million euros: 8,000 cars with engines between 2,500 and 3,000 cc under a 180 percent tariff, and 5,000 above 3,000 cc under a 190 percent tariff.

The Toyota Land Cruiser lays bare the contradiction. A 2025 model priced at roughly $60,000 in the UAE can sell for several times that amount in Iran once tariffs and other charges are added. The state may collect handsomely from wealthy buyers, but the customs revenue cannot recover the scarce foreign currency already spent on the vehicle.

Iran is struggling to secure foreign exchange for medicine, animal feed, food, machinery, and industrial parts. Hundreds of millions of euros assigned to luxury vehicles cannot be spent twice. A high tariff captures some of the buyer’s wealth for the treasury, but it does not restore the hard currency that left the country to purchase the car. Under blockade, the opportunity cost matters more than the spectacle of a large customs bill.

This is also where appeals for national sacrifice begin to lose force. Wage earners are told that fuel and bread cannot remain insulated from reality while upper-income consumption retains access to scarce foreign exchange. The state may collect revenue from that consumption, but it also signals whose demand remains negotiable and whose living standard is expected to adjust first.

The same test should be applied beyond imported cars. Preferential currency, subsidized credit, procurement contracts, and tax relief all create claims on resources that have become more valuable under blockade. 

The state should disclose who receives these benefits and on what grounds. Without that transparency, privileged importers secure goods and currency at protected rates, while ordinary Iranians face the full force of the market.

Eurasia offers routes, not a rescue

Iran nevertheless has options beyond its southern ports. The free-trade agreement with the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) took effect on 15 May 2025, reducing or eliminating tariffs across much of Iran’s trade with Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia, and Kyrgyzstan. The arrangement gives Tehran a larger formal framework for sourcing food, industrial goods, and raw materials through northern corridors.

Kazakhstan exported about 1.1 million tons of grain to Iran in 2025, while its agricultural exports to the country rose sharply. Officials have discussed increasing annual wheat shipments by as much as two million tons.

Barley, corn, vegetable oil, meat, and legumes broaden the potential basket. Russia has also used the Caspian route for grain deliveries, although falling water levels, small vessels, and limited port capacity constrain the volume that can be moved.

The rail network provides another opening. In September, a 55-container block train left China for Sarakhs through Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan, with an expected journey of 14 to 16 days across more than 6,000 kilometers. Such services demonstrate that pressure at sea does not sever Iran from the Eurasian supply chain.

They do not provide a cost-free substitute for maritime trade. Before the war, more than 80 percent of Iran’s two-way trade by volume moved through its southern coastline. Roads and railways cannot absorb that traffic overnight.

Longer distances, transshipment, border congestion, limited rolling stock, and exposure to neighboring states’ political choices all add costs. One Iranian trade official estimated that shifting China trade from sea to land could add $18 billion a year.

Once essential goods reach Iran’s borders, domestic delays become a policy failure. Customs and licensing agencies cannot continue working to peacetime schedules while vital cargo remains stuck in queues.

Medicines, food, agricultural supplies, and industrial parts need a wartime fast track, backed by quicker clearance and priority access to foreign currency. Where public safety permits, inspections can be completed after entry.

[…]

Make wealth absorb more of the shock

A widening budget deficit does not make gasoline the inevitable starting point. The government can cut non-essential expenditure, narrow tax exemptions, pursue large-scale evasion, tax luxury property and vehicles more effectively, and develop a workable capital-gains regime. Energy subsidies can be reduced more aggressively for the largest consumers while compensating households whose livelihoods depend on transport.

Washington’s campaign seeks to make everyday life so expensive that the public and the government come to view political concessions as the only escape.

Domestic policy can end up serving that objective without intending to. Applying peacetime measures under blockade shifts more of Washington’s pressure onto ordinary Iranians, deepening inequality and eroding public trust.

[…]

Via https://thecradle.co/articles/irans-war-economy-is-squeezing-the-wrong-people

 

US warns of rapid escalation in Middle East war

Yemen's Houthi armed forces patrol as Yemeni prisoners loyal to the Houthi authoritie

AFP

AFP

20 Sept 2026

The United States warned that fighting between Saudi Arabia and the Iran-backed Houthis could “escalate rapidly” after a missile attack targeted Riyadh for the first time since the Yemen conflict resumed.

US President Donald Trump cut short a weekend at Camp David, a secluded presidential complex in rural Maryland, to return unexpectedly to the White House.

The White House gave no explanation for the early return, which comes as a new threshold was crossed in the conflict between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis, who control a large part of Yemen and are fighting government forces backed by a coalition led by Riyadh.

Loud explosions rang out on Saturday in the Saudi capital, where AFP journalists saw a fuel tank bearing the logo of oil giant Aramco on fire near the airport.

“This military conflict has the potential to escalate rapidly,” the US State Department warned, adding American citizens outside the Middle East should “seriously reconsider travel to and through the region”.

Separately, the State Department restricted travel for American government employees to the Saudi cities of Taif and Yanbu, home to a major Red Sea oil export terminal that has previously been targeted by Houthi strikes.

In recent weeks, the Houthis’ lightning offensive seizing swathes of Yemeni territory has left hundreds dead and, according to the UN refugee agency, displaced more than 110,000 people.

‘Intercepted’

The violence has already disrupted exports from Saudi Arabia, the world’s leading supplier of crude oil, as well as maritime traffic.

Saudi Arabia’s ally the United States has sent mixed signals. According to US news platform Axios, Washington refused last week a Saudi request to strike the Houthis, and Fox News reported Sunday that Trump had said the Houthis have agreed not to hit US targets.

On Sunday, US Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe met Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi in a rare visit to Cairo.

The visit came days after Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was also in the Egyptian capital, where he and Sisi urged safe and secure navigation through Bab al-Mandab, after the Houthis seized the Yemeni coast.

The Bab al-Mandab strait is a Red Sea waterway that is crucial to energy flows and global shipping and which has become even more strategic since Iran imposed a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz.

Condemning the Houthis’ latest attacks, Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan told the broadcaster NTV that his country had discussions with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, partners in a mutual defence pact, about possible assistance.

“In this regard, military needs, especially in state technical matters, may happen. There would be no problem in meeting this demand either,” he said.

Saudi Arabia meanwhile has scrambled to contain the fallout of the Houthis’ attacks on its territory.

On Sunday, the attack on Riyadh was not mentioned in several major Saudi papers, even though hours beforehand, the Riyadh-led coalition had confirmed that a ballistic missile launched by the Houthis was “successfully intercepted and destroyed”.

The coalition added that the pro-Iranian fighters had tried to target “civilians and civilian infrastructure” in several cities in the west of the kingdom, including the port of Yanbu on the Red Sea, an important export hub for Saudi oil.

Saudi Arabia has responded with scores of airstrikes on Houthi-held areas but has failed to stop the fighters’ advance in Yemen.

Claiming responsibility for the attack, Houthi military spokesman Yahya Saree said fighters had carried out “two successful military operations using a large number of ballistic and cruise missiles and drones”.

“The first targeted sensitive sites in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, and the second targeted Aramco facilities in Yanbu.”

Lightning offensive

According to Andreas Krieg of King’s College London, the attack on Riyadh, the first to threaten the Saudi capital since Yemen’s civil war resumed, crossed “an important psychological threshold”.

“Saudi Arabia can absorb intermittent attacks on remote military or energy installations more easily than repeated threats to Riyadh itself,” he told AFP.

“Strikes around airports, fuel storage and populated areas make restraint politically and strategically much harder to sustain.”

The attack has piled further pressure on a global economy already rocked by seven months of war in the Middle East, which began in February with US-Israeli strikes on Iran and which has seen the Islamic republic respond with attacks around the region.

Iran-backed groups also got involved, with Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen carrying out attacks against their foes.

Iran’s top negotiator said Tehran had conveyed to the US through mediators its conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which it has blockaded throughout the Middle East war, and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi set off on Sunday for New York to attend the UN General Assembly.

[…]

Via https://www.breitbart.com/news/us-warns-of-rapid-escalation-in-mideast-war/

End of United Kingdom? Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland Sign Cardiff MoU: Celtic Leaders Plan Historic Breakup, as Trump Fuels Irish Fire

For the first time, the First Ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are jointly pushing for the end of the United Kingdom. The Cardiff pact, combined with Trump’s open support for Irish reunification, raises serious questions about Britain’s future, NATO’s nuclear position – and Western double standards on self-determination.

***

Nation-states and empires are not eternal or natural entities. They come and go, just as Rome did, and more recently the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. The United Kingdom (UK) is no exception.

In an unprecedented development this week, the First Ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all represent parties that want their Celtic nations to leave the English and the UK.

On 14 September 2026, Scottish First Minister John Swinney, Welsh First Minister Rhun ap Iorwerth, and Northern Ireland First Minister Michelle O’Neill all signed (as party leaders) a memorandum of understanding in Cardiff alongside Sinn Féin president Mary Lou McDonald. They declared that Westminster’s time is “coming to an end” and called on London to prepare for constitutional change. Scotland’s Swinney wants an independence referendum by 2031.

So, for the first time since devolution, the three nations have leaders committed to independence or Irish reunification. Scotland’s Swinney predicted that current UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham would be “the last” of the United Kingdom. The pact stresses self-determination and a future linked to the European Union (EU).

Back in 2022, after the death of Queen Elizabeth II, I commented that King Charles III’s greatest challenge would be keeping the United Kingdom united amid post-Brexit strains and lower royal popularity.

By then, Brexit had already reinvigorated calls for Irish reunification by creating an Irish Sea border under the Northern Ireland Protocol, leaving unionists there feeling abandoned. Those tensions have never fully gone away.

A full dissolution of the Kingdom is thus realistic enough to be a serious constitutional possibility – yet it is neither imminent nor inevitable.

Scotland remains the most advanced case for formal secession. Northern Ireland could, under the Good Friday Agreement, eventually hold a border poll on reunification – if the British government judges a majority likely. Wales is politically less advanced in this regard.

The truth is that London can still resist politically and legally, but it cannot forever block an enduring, democratically expressed demand without deepening its own legitimacy crisis.

A British breakup would shrink London’s demographic, economic and diplomatic weight. It would complicate defense, nuclear basing, intelligence sharing and English global position.

An independent Scotland might seek closer European integration. Irish reunification in turn would bring the North into an all-Ireland state inside the EU framework.

The nuclear question in itself is serious enough. Britain’s Trident submarines and support infrastructure sit at Faslane and Coulport in Scotland. A scenario of Scottish independence would thereby force difficult negotiations over the deterrent that the UK contributes to NATO.

Relocating it would take years and cost dearly. The Scottish Government itself states an independent Scotland would likely seek NATO membership, though its anti-nuclear stance creates an obvious tension.

Northern Ireland joining a united Ireland in turn would potentially remove territory from NATO’s footprint since the Republic of Ireland remains outside the Alliance.

The result would not be the end of NATO, but a reconfigured North Atlantic architecture: a smaller, still Atlanticist Kingdom; a potentially non-nuclear Scotland in the alliance; and a united Ireland maybe outside of it.

Moreover, Brexit already pushed London closer to Washington and the Anglosphere. The AUKUS security pact stands as the clearest symbol of that orientation.

The 2025 National Security Strategy calls the US the UK’s most important defense and security ally while seeking deeper technological and nuclear cooperation.

An “isolated” England after a British collapse could then double down on the relationship with Washington, Five Eyes and AUKUS to preserve influence.

Yet paradoxically, losing Scotland or Northern Ireland would also make closer European cooperation more necessary – precisely because a reduced England would have fewer independent sources of geopolitical weight, so to speak.

The tension here is real: it would be more Atlanticist militarily – and more dependent on Europe economically and geographically.

US President Donald Trump for his part has thrown more fuel on the Irish fire, in his usual manner. During his recent visit he said he would “love to see” a united Ireland and called it inevitable.

UK fragmentation could therefore sharpen the Northern Ireland question, strengthening reunification calls and risk of loyalist/protestant radicalization and Irish conflict, with religious and ethnopolitical elements.

Western double standards on secession make the situation more interesting: Kosovo’s independence, for one thing, was accepted by much of the West – while Catalonia’s movement was rejected (by the West), as were Crimea and Donbass claims.

The historical circumstances differ, yet the principle of self-determination is applied selectively according to geopolitical interest. The Kosovo precedent has thereby set a precedent that can backfire for the West, while exposing its hypocrisy.

The unity crisis inside the United Kingdom is thus yet another symptom of the wider crisis within an increasingly divided Europe, NATO and the West.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/end-united-kingdom-celtic-leaders-plan-historic-breakup-trump-fuels-irish-fire/5940788?doing_wp_cron=1789939060.2055919170379638671875

Iran’s Plan to Shut Down AI in the Persian Gulf

GCC internet will go dark if Trump renews hostilities.

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries—Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar Bahrain, and Kuwait—are heavily invested in AI as part of a strategy to diversify away from petroleum. National AI strategies across GCC countries emphasize investment in research and development, encourage public-private partnerships, and create regulatory frameworks that support innovation. The GCC AI market size increased from USD $6.22 billion in 2025 to USD $7.60 billion in 2026. It is projected to reach USD $23.03 billion by 2034.

In April, Iran’s Tasnim news agency mentioned the submarine cables, landing stations, and data hubs in the Gulf as strategic pressure points in the conflict initiated by the United States and Israel.

According to the market research company IMARC Group, subsea internet data cables in the Gulf sit at the intersection of Europe, Asia, and Africa, and damage to these networks risks connectivity losses in one of the world’s most important internet traffic zones.

The economic importance of these cable systems extends far outside internet browsing or streaming services, notes Techstory, “because financial markets, payment systems and cloud computing firms depend on uninterrupted connections between continents every second of the day. Data centers in the Gulf and Asia also depend on those same cables to connect cloud systems serving businesses around the world.” Analysts estimate that networks linked to the GCC support roughly $10 trillion worth of financial transactions daily.

Iran claims the cables are within its territorial waters and fall under its jurisdiction. Tasnim and Fars suggest Iran may charge tech companies to use the internet cables, while Ebrahim Zolfaghari, a Brigadier General and the spokesperson for Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, said that “companies like Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon” will be required to “comply with Iranian law” and pay licensing fees for cable passage, with repair and maintenance rights given exclusively to Iranian firms.

The Islamic Republic cited the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which includes provisions governing submarine cables. Article 79 of UNCLOS says coastal states have the right to establish conditions for cables or pipelines entering their territory or territorial sea.

On September 2, Iran’s Kayhan newspaper urged Iran’s IGRC to disrupt or sever international fiber-optic cables to pressure the United States and its allies.

“Is it not our indisputable right, in order to bring these sources of evil to their knees and cut off their lifeline, to prevent internet cables from passing through the depths of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz?” asked Kayhan editor-in-chief Hossein Shariatmadari. “This necessary measure could be carried out by seriously disrupting the cables’ operation or even cutting them.”

Iran has the ability to take out key cable networks, including the Fibre in Gulf submarine cable system, which connects Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and UAE. The Falcon Network connects Bahrain, Egypt, India, Iraq, Kuwait, Maldives, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Yemen, while the the Gulf Bridge International links Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and has onward connectivity to India, and Europe.

The Islamic Republic may decide to retaliate for the imposition of crippling sanctions which have negatively affected its economy, causing an increase in inflation and unemployment. Iran’s minimum wage stands at approximately 104 million rials, equivalent to roughly $110 US monthly. Essential commodity prices have risen sharply, with the International Monetary Fund documenting an annual inflation rate of 42.4%, according to October 2025 figures. Most estimates suggest sanctions have cost Iran approximately $60 billion each year by limiting investments in the energy sector. The sanctions have also significantly reduced Iran’s petroleum exports.

In 2023, the Iranian navy unveiled the domestically developed and manufactured Chamrosh-4 VTOL, a remotely operated drone designed for detecting, locating, and destroying both anchored and sleeping naval mines. Furthermore, Iran operates an undersea fleet of roughly 4 to 6 diesel-electric attack submarines well-suited to operate in the shallow waters of the Strait of Hormuz. In short, Iran has the ability to sabotage subsea internet data cables.

On September 17, President Trump, frustrated by the current stalemate in his war, said he faces a major decision over whether to escalate military action against Iran.

“I have a big decision to make,” Trump said. “Do I want to go in and eliminate them or not? That’s a big decision. Anything can happen with me.”

Iran has given the United States an ultimatum for a period of three to four weeks, during which the United States must satisfy all Iranian demands. Failure to comply will result in severe escalation within the Strait of Hormuz and the execution of Iran’s planned preemptive military action targeting United States-backed Gulf infrastructure as well as American and Israeli assets, according to a senior Iranian official based in Tehran with direct knowledge of the situation.

The demands include $300 billion in reconstruction funds, a full release of Iran’s frozen assets of up to $120 billion, lifting of the US naval blockade, an end to war on all fronts (including Gaza and Lebanon), lifting of all sanctions on Iranian oil and gas, and acceptance of Iran’s permanent control of the Strait of Hormuz, including up to 7% of transit fees.

President Trump is unlikely to accept these conditions, and as previously mentioned, may intensify military operations before the midterm elections. Should Trump choose to escalate, Iran has indicated it will heighten the intensity of its assaults against remaining American military and commercial infrastructure throughout the GCC region and West Asia.

On September 15, Amazon Web Services disclosed that Iranian drone strikes caused substantial damage to the corporation’s data facilities located in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The preceding week, officials from the UAE declared that they were modifying their AI data center initiatives in response to the strikes, thereby underscoring a critical weakness that Iran continues to leverage with considerable facility.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/iran-plan-shut-down-ai-persian-gulf/5941086

Trump Expands His Plan to Have Data Centers Take Over Public Lands

Hoses, pumps, and barriers line a creek.
Hoses and pumps line part of the Anderson Creek, a tributary of the Hackensack River, after thousands of gallons of diesel fuel spilled from an AI data center in Secaucus, New Jersey, on September 15.Spencer Platt/Getty Images
 TNR
Sept 19, 2026

An overwhelming majority of Americans don’t want more data centers. The Trump administration is ignoring them.

President Trump is looking to potentially build 12 new data centers on federal public lands—something the vast majority of Americans are against, regardless of political affiliation.

The Washington Sun reported Friday that the Bureau of Land Management is considering placing centers on 17,600 acres of public land in six states: Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. Local leaders told the publication they weren’t aware of the proposal. Valar Atomics, Copia Power, Rhea Data, and Arevia Power are the companies behind the push. It’s unclear how the nearly 18,000 acres will be divvied up among the 12 proposed centers.

The BLM argues that the plans are for the greater good, brushing off environmental and aesthetic concerns while claiming that its review process will “protect natural resources while enabling responsible infrastructure development that can deliver benefits to the American people” like “expanded broadband capacity, improved electrical reliability, and support for growing technology-driven economies.”

Trump has spent months defending AI and data centers, becoming even more vocal over the last week. Others aren’t convinced.

“If there are places where communities think it is appropriate to build data centers, focus on those,” Center for Western Priorities conservation group director Aaron Weiss said. “The Trump administration needs to stop cutting the public out of public land management. The solution is more public notice and more opportunities for stakeholders to shape projects on the front end.”

This move comes as backlash against data centers hits a fever pitch.

Over 500 counties or municipalities have either restricted or entirely banned data center development this year. And according to Data Center Watch, at least 75 projects worth a collective $130 billion were interrupted in the first quarter of 2026.

“Ongoing data center build-out represents a culmination of everything that has made the U.S. economy so harshly unequal moving in right next door,” wrote The New Republic’s Kate Aronoff. “Inside its proverbial walls are local entrepreneurs, offshore middlemen, and multinational corporations that can exploit state-sanctioned tax shelters, financial engineering schemes, and regulatory arbitrage to rapidly accumulate wealth on the basis of having started off with a decent amount of it.”

Now, in the face of this obvious opposition, with midterms drawing closer by the day, Trump wants to put 12 more on public lands.

“If there were to be more [data centers], I honestly don’t know what that would even look like,” Idaho Sierra Club Director Lisa Young told the Sun. “Would that mean even more gas plants? Would that mean turning back on coal plants longer? What does that mean for our water resources? It’s honestly kind of apocalyptic to think about.”

[…]

Via https://newrepublic.com/post/215593/trump-plan-data-centers-public-lands

The Epstein Digital Financial System is Getting Ready to Replace the U.S. Dollar

Comments by Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News

Leah of The Leah Files has just published Part III of her Currency Killer series, The New US Dollar: The One Epstein Built.

This series is, by far, the best intel I have read in the Alternative Media regarding the takeover of the U.S. Dollar in an attempt to replace it with digital currencies.

[…]

Read Health Impact News‘ coverage of her first two articles in this series, which is our most-read article so far in September, here: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Just Restructured The American Financial System to Destroy the U.S. Dollar

The New US Dollar: The One Epstein Built

Inside the private currency built by Epstein’s crypto network, legalized by this administration, and controlled by the people who killed the old one.

by The Leah Files

Excerpts:

I think they are replacing the US dollar with a private one.

Not in some distant future, not as a theory, but right now.

[…]

The United States government banned itself from making a digital dollar. Then it crashed the real one. Then it handed the replacement to a private company connected to $17 billion in organized crime, whose co-founder spent eight years as Jeffrey Epstein’s personal crypto advisor, and whose largest shareholder was convicted of software piracy before becoming the richest man in Italy.

That company is called Tether. It controls $183 billion in digital currency and it is now the 17th largest holder of US government debt on earth. It has never completed a publicly released independent audit. The UN has linked it to $17 billion in organized crime.

Tether is a stablecoin company, but it also owns 210,000 hectares of South American farmland and operates Argentina’s sole fertilizer producer. It holds a majority stake in a brain-computer interface company. It is the lead investor in a humanoid robotics firm. It owns 48 percent of a conservative media platform. Its third-largest shareholder controls a 10 percent stake in the privatized research arm of the UK Ministry of Defence.

[…]

Howard Lutnick’s sons’ own a piece of Tether. His firm, Cantor Fitzgerald custodies its reserves. Lutnick’s former minion, Bo Hines, championed the law regulating it from inside the White House and resigned one month after the president signed it, becoming CEO of the company the law was written for.

Scott Bessent is blocking a billion dollars in suspicious Epstein banking records while his old fund was paying an intelligence firm controlled by Epstein’s partner. Trump’s family has made over a billion dollars launching their own stablecoin.

This is not deregulation, it’s a heist. And I am going to show you what they are doing.

[…]

What Is Tether

Most people have never heard of Tether. So let’s start there.

A stablecoin is a digital token pegged to the US dollar. You send a company one real dollar, and they give you one digital token that is supposed to be worth one dollar. The company holds your real dollar in reserve.

[…]

Tether is the largest stablecoin on earth.

It has $183 billion of these tokens in circulation. That makes it bigger than the GDP of most countries.

The company is supposed to hold $183 billion in real reserves to back them. It earns interest on those reserves, mostly US Treasury bills, which generated $13 billion in profit in 2024 alone. It has roughly 200 employees.

Here is the problem: the CFTC found in 2021 that Tether was actually fully backed by reserves only 27.6 percent of the time. The company paid $41 million in fines.

The New York Attorney General’s office reached a separate $18.5 million settlement over similar misrepresentations. The UN has linked Tether’s token to $17 billion in criminal activity.

The DOJ has an active criminal probe. And the company has never completed a full, publicly released independent audit.

[…]

The Man Who Built Tether

His name is Brock Pierce. Before he co-founded Tether, he was the teenage Vice President of a company called Digital Entertainment Network (DEN).

[…]

In the late 1990s, Pierce became Vice President of Digital Entertainment Network (DEN), a pioneering internet video company founded by Marc Collins-Rector, at the age of 17, earning a salary of $250,000.

At DEN’s Hollywood Hills parties, Collins-Rector and others allegedly sexually assaulted half a dozen teenage boys, including a 15-year-old, according to civil lawsuits filed between 1999 and 2002. When Collins-Rector fled the country to avoid prosecution, Pierce went with him.

They ended up in a villa in Marbella, Spain, which police raided in 2002 and found Collins-Rector, Pierce, and a third DEN executive, along with child pornography and firearms.

Collins-Rector was convicted of child sexual abuse in 2004. Pierce was never charged, but the civil lawsuit resulted in a $2,000,030 default judgment plus $1 million in interest because Pierce and his co-defendants never responded to the allegations of rape, assault, and death threats.

[…]

The Emails

The DOJ released over 3.5 million pages of Epstein files, including direct correspondence between Pierce and Epstein spanning 2011 to 2019.

Pierce was mentioned 1,815 times, more than almost any other private figure.

The emails continued for months after Epstein’s second arrest on federal sex trafficking charges. Here is what they show.

By 2012, the correspondence had turned dark. Pierce sent Epstein dozens of photographs of a Ukrainian woman named Anastasia, three days after Epstein asked him to “take photos and find me a present.” Pierce wrote back that “Ukraine is now my favorite country.”

In a separate exchange, Pierce told Epstein there was “a boat in Antigua full of amazing Ukraine’s finest” waiting for him.

In another email, Epstein’s assistant wrote that Brock had a “great time with the girls in St. Barths.” Pierce’s own assistant sent Epstein’s team photos from Ukraine and mentioned upcoming meetings. There were references to visits on Epstein’s boat and coordination around events with Epstein’s inner circle.

These are the emails of a man inside the operation. Not an acquaintance. Not a networking contact. Pierce was coordinating women, referencing boats, sending photographs on request, and maintaining this relationship for years after Epstein’s first conviction.

But the business side of the relationship is what changed the world.

Pierce was not just advising Epstein on crypto. He was the bridge between Epstein’s money and the people who would build the infrastructure that now threatens to replace the US dollar.

He brokered the Coinbase deal.

In December 2014, Pierce connected Epstein to Coinbase’s Series C round through his venture firm, Blockchain Capital. Epstein invested $3 million. Coinbase co-founder Fred Ehrsam emailed asking to meet Epstein in New York.

[…]

The Network

Pierce and Epstein did not operate in a vacuum. Their shared network reached into the political and financial circles that now control American crypto policy.

Steve Bannon. Pierce and Bannon had worked together for seven years before any of this. Pierce hired Bannon in 2005 to run the financial side of his company Internet Gaming Entertainment, later saying

[…]

Peter Thiel. Epstein invested $40 million into Thiel’s venture firm, Valar Ventures, in 2015 and 2016. Reid Hoffman made the introduction.

That bet became the single largest asset of the Epstein estate, valued at roughly $170 million by the time Epstein died.

Thiel’s proteges now run US crypto policy: JD Vance is Vice President, David Sacks served as crypto czar, and Thiel’s Founders Fund was the largest investor in Polymarket.

[…]

Where Pierce Is Now

Brock Pierce lives in Puerto Rico, where Act 60 allows him to pay near-zero taxes on capital gains. He is still Chairman of the Bitcoin Foundation. He still runs the Integro Foundation, whose most recent IRS filing shows $78 in total assets.

[…]

Tether Today

Now that you know what Tether is and who built it, here is who runs it.

Who Owns It

Tether has never voluntarily disclosed who owns it. It is a private company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands with no public reporting obligation.

The only known ownership data comes from leaked documents reported by the Wall Street Journal in 2023, showing stakes as of 2018. As of those documents, four people controlled 86 percent of the company.

The Empire Build

Starting in late 2023, Tether began spending its profits at an extraordinary pace, acquiring stakes in companies across sectors that have no obvious connection to stablecoin issuance.

The Farmland

This is the part of the story that made me stop and ask what we are actually looking at.

Adecoagro is not a farm. It is a vertically integrated agro-industrial conglomerate incorporated in Luxembourg and listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

When Tether took control in April 2025, it took control of the entire chain from soil to supermarket shelf: the land itself, the crops grown on it, the mills that process them, the dairy plants, the rice processing facilities, the peanut sorting plants, the branded consumer products, the export terminals, and the port infrastructure.

In mid-2026, Adecoagro launched a Bitcoin mining pilot at its Brazilian sugar mills, using surplus electricity from sugarcane bagasse cogeneration to power approximately 1,280 mining machines. This connects directly to Tether’s stated goal of becoming the world’s largest Bitcoin miner.

[…]

Profertil

In December 2025, eight months after Tether took control of Adecoagro, the company acquired a 90 percent stake in Profertil for approximately $1.1 billion.

Profertil is Argentina’s sole producer of urea, the most widely used nitrogen fertilizer in the world. The plant in Bahia Blanca produces 1.3 million tons of granular urea per year and supplies roughly 60 percent of Argentina’s domestic fertilizer demand.

This means that a company whose co-founder was sending photos of Ukrainian women to Jeffrey Epstein and brokering introductions between Epstein and the people who now control American financial policy now also controls the fertilizer supply that South American agriculture depends on.

[…]

Now here is the part that made me consider this one the most important articles of the Currency Killer series.

This is not a hedge fund buying farmland as an inflation hedge. Tether looks to be building something specific.

Adecoagro co-founded a company called Agrotoken, which has already created three grain-backed stablecoins: SOYA, CORA, and WHEA.

Each token represents one ton of grain.

Farmers can use them as currency. Agrotoken partnered with Visa so producers can spend grain tokens with a card. They have already tokenized 230,000 tons of grain and transacted $70 million in deals. Adecoagro’s CEO said the goal was to build “tokenized land.”

[…]

The company is building its own real-world asset tokenization platform designed to create digital versions of bonds, stocks, funds, and physical commodities.

Now connect the pieces.

Tether now controls the land, the crops grown on that land, the fertilizer those crops need to grow, the mills that process the harvest, and the platform that can tokenize all of it into digital currency. It already issues the largest stablecoin on earth.

This is a closed loop. Own the physical asset, process it, tokenize it, and issue the currency it trades in. They are not replacing the dollar with a digital version.

They are building an entire parallel financial system backed by food, land, and fertilizer, controlled by four people who have never disclosed who they are to the public, operating out of the British Virgin Islands.

The Switch

On January 23, 2025, Trump signed Executive Order 14178. It banned all federal agencies from developing or promoting a central bank digital currency. No government digital dollar.

The only digital dollars allowed in America would be private ones.

 

The Replacement

On July 18, 2025, Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law. It created the first federal framework for privately issued stablecoins, the exact product Tether sells.

The law allows stablecoin issuers to operate under a three-year grace period before meeting full compliance requirements and does not mandate independent audits.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent signaled that the law “will drive demand from the private sector for US Treasuries,” and indicated that stablecoin firms could buy up to $1 trillion in US government debt.

[…]

The Thiel Network

Peter Thiel took $40 million from Epstein through the Valar Ventures fund, an introduction brokered by Pierce. That investment produced $170 million in returns and became the largest single asset in the Epstein estate.

[…]

Read the Full Article at The Leah Files.

What I have re-published here is NOT the full article! Please consider supporting her work – I do.

The Demise of Saudi Arabia and Perhaps Christian Zionism. Yemen Shocks World by Taking Control of Red Sea

Top Left image: Yemen army – Source, Top Right image Yemen military illustration – Source, Bottom Left image Saudi Mohammed bin Salman with Jeffrey Epstein – source: The Epstein Files, Bottom Right image Saudi Mohammed bin Salman with Donald Trump in the White House – Source.

by Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News

The Iran War drastically changed at the end of last week, as Yemen’s Ansarullah-led Armed Forces (Houthis) took control of the country’s western coastline, capturing key positions overlooking the Bab al-Mandab Strait, including the coastal city of Mokha and strategic islands in and around the waterway, and they are now effectively controlling traffic in the Red Sea.

As far as I can tell, this was a complete surprise to everyone, especially to Saudi Arabia and the United States.

It forced the U.S. corporate media to report this, and it dominated the news stream until the fake “AI is going to destroy humanity if we don’t do something about it” narrative took control of the news stream this past weekend.

Saudi Arabia, who has been at war with Yemen since 2014 with the help of the U.S. and using U.S. military weapons, was forced to shut down their East-West oil pipeline, which was allowing Saudi Arabia to bypass the Strait of Hormuz to be able to get oil out of their country.

This pipeline in Saudi Arabia reportedly transports about 4% to 5% of the global oil supply.

Saudi Arabia is now in panic mode, and has reportedly pleaded with the U.S. to help them and start bombing the Yemen forces who have taken control of the Red Sea.

However, it appears that Saudi Arabia never got the memo about one of Trump’s objectives in the Iran War, which was to let Iran destroy the Gulf Nations’ ability to control oil prices through OPEC, while at the same time seizing Venezuela oil amid plans to make  America the center of oil sales around the world.

Trump’s response to Saudi Arabia: sorry, you’re on your own.

Scoop: MBS urged Trump to strike Houthis amid Red Sea threat

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) called President Trump twice Thursday, urging him to launch strikes against the Houthis as the Iran-backed group closed in on a vital Red Sea chokepoint, two U.S. officials told Axios.

Trump declined, and U.S. officials stressed the administration has no plans to intervene directly against the Houthis for now.

Source.

Of course, even if the U.S. did want to stop Yemen’s military and protect Saudi Arabia’s interests, it is doubtful that they would even be able to do so, given the depletion of their weapons and military assets as Iran continues to control the Strait of Hormuz.

This very well could be the demise of Saudi Arabia.

And if the Yemen takeover of the Red Sea turns the tide overall in the war against Iran, what will the Evangelical Christians do who are so positive that this war was sanctioned by God, and was to hasten the return of Jesus Christ?

Could this also be the start of the decline of Christian Zionism as well when they realize that the U.S. cannot defeat Iran and force the return of Jesus Christ after all?

The U.S. and Saudi Arabia’s War Against Yemen for Over a Decade – The Genocide that Has Been Overshadowed by the Palestinian Genocide

While estimates of how many people have died in the Yemen conflict with Saudi Arabia, including children, most of whom have died from starvation due to the U.S.-Saudi blockade on their ports, varies, the number is significant, and probably rivals the number of people killed among the Israeli Palestinians, as well as the number of dead Lebanese people killed by the U.S. and Israel.

This was published in 2018, and the situation is obviously far worse today.

YEMEN: 85,000 CHILDREN MAY HAVE DIED FROM STARVATION SINCE START OF WAR

Using data compiled by the UN, Save the Children evaluated mortality rates for untreated cases of Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) in children under five years. Using a conservative estimate, the humanitarian aid agency discovered that approximately 84,701 children with SAM may have died between April 2015 and October 2018.[i]

After almost four years since the brutal conflict in Yemen escalated the UN says that up to 14 million people are at risk of famine. That number has increased dramatically since the Saudi and Emirati-led coalition imposed a month-long blockade of Yemen just over a year ago.[ii]

Since then, commercial imports of food through Hodeidah port have reduced by more than 55,000 metric tonnes a month. That’s enough to meet the needs of 4.4 million people, including 2.2 million children[iii]. Any further decline in imports could likely lead directly to famine.

Source.

Like so many other stories of unrest in the Middle East, the one in Yemen follows an all-too-familiar path that I am sure ultimately leads back to the U.S. and the “intelligence” agencies like the CIA and Mossad who control world politics ensuring that candidates friendly to the Zionist Epstein agenda rise to power.

The rationale, as it has been used so many times, was to overthrow “dictatorships” and alleged “ruthless” rulers who had ruled for long period of times and replace them with “pro-democracy” leaders, and always ending in disaster for the local populations.

It was this same rationale that took down leaders such as Muammar al-Qaddafi in Libya, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and even more recently Bashar al-Assad in Syria, all of whom were replaced by pro-Western leaders aligned with the U.S. (and by proxy, Israel).

What most Americans do not realize, is that while these “ruthless dictators” were portrayed as evil by the U.S., they were very popular in their own countries, and most of them were even elected in landslides, while the U.S. declared those elections “rigged.”

Imagine the U.S. with their highly ethical election system (sarcasm) dictating to foreign governments whether their elections were “fair” or not.

During the “Arab Spring” in 2012, Ali Abdullah Saleh, the first elected president of the Republic of Yemen, suffered the same fate, and was forced from office and replaced with the pro-U.S. candidate Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi.

When the Houthis struck back at the U.S. puppet regime, the U.S. had no problems with uniting with local groups in the area opposed to the Houthis, but had officially been branded as “terrorist” groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda.

It is very similar to what recently happened in Syria, where a former member of al-Qaeda, the group who allegedly bombed the World Trade Center towers in New York under the leadership of Osama bin Laden, was chosen by the U.S. to lead Syria today, Ahmed al-Sharaa.

But these factions in Yemen were not strong enough to fight back against the Houthis, so starting with President Obama, the U.S. got involved to prop up their puppet government in Yemen.

First U.S. Citizens Ever Executed without a Judge, Jury, or Trial Happened in Yemen

The country of Yemen has the unique distinction of being the first country where U.S. citizens were executed by drone strikes by their own government, with no judge, jury, or trial.

President Barak Obama was the first U.S. President known to authorize a drone strike on a U.S. citizen, Abdulrahman Anwar al-Awlaki, a 16-year-old boy who was in Yemen and whose father was linked to al-Qaeda.

This was headline news back in the day.

When Trump succeeded Obama and took office in 2017, he proceeded to do the same thing, by ordering a drone strike in Yemen that killed Nawar al-Awlaki, an eight-year-old American girl and the daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki. The 16-year-old U.S. citizen killed by Obama was her brother. (Source.)

Will Saudi Arabia’s Leader Survive the Yemen Uprising?

Since I lived in Saudi Arabia for several years and was a professor at one of their top universities back in the 1990s, I will offer my own opinion on the current leader of Saudi Arabia, which you will be hard-pressed to find from any other western journalist, the Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud (MBS).

MBS was quite young when he came into power, and he reportedly earned a law degree from King Saud University in Riyadh, allegedly finishing second in his class.

I have heard Muslim commentators mention that due to his being educated in Saudi Arabia, rather than going to a Western university, that MBS was better suited and trained to rule Saudi Arabia and not as prone to Western influence.

I strongly disagree.

Back in the day when I was teaching English at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, located in Dhahran, right next to the Aramco oil compound, it was well-known among the faculty back then that if any member of the Al-Saud family came to study at the University and had to complete their first year learning English, that they had basically flunked the English test needed to attend one of the top universities in the U.S. or the UK.

They were not among the “cream of the crop” among Saudi high school students. We had one or two come through during my tenure there, and they were mostly viewed as seeing themselves as “privileged” due to being part of the Al-Saud family, and not very good students at all, preferring instead to go out partying in the desert with their expensive Range Rovers.

So when I read that MBS graduated “second” in his class, I wondered why he did not graduate first, being a member of the Royal family. My best guess is that someone in the Al-Saud family higher up the ladder must have beat him out at the time.

But the true intellectuals and leaders among Saudis probably all graduated from Ivy League schools in the U.S., or from the top universities in the UK.

And of course, MBS is clearly a puppet who has served, first Obama, and now most recently has served as Trump’s lap dog, in my opinion.

So he is hardly against Western culture, even though he was educated in Saudi Arabia.

[…]

Trump seemingly worked hard in an effort to turn MBS into a full-fledged Zionist and support Israel, but MBS stated that if he did not support the Palestinian right to have their own homeland, his own people would stone him to death.

[…]

As I reported back in June of 2024, Saudi Arabia made the historical move to not renew an 80-year-old agreement with the United States that established the U.S. Dollar as the world currency to purchase Saudi oil, in return for U.S. military protection.

They saw the handwriting on the wall, apparently, and wanted to be able to sell oil to China in their own currency, the Yuan. See: Saudi Arabia Ends 80-Year-Old PetroDollar U.S. Agreement: Joins China-Led Central Bank Digital Currency Coalition
This, more than anything, could be the primary reason why the U.S. will not participate in helping them fight back against the Houthis anymore.

[…]

Via https://healthimpactnews.com/2026/the-demise-of-saudi-arabia-and-perhaps-christian-zionism-yemen-shocks-the-world-by-taking-control-of-red-sea/