The Most Revolutionary Act

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

The Most Revolutionary Act

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

By Anthony Scott

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

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

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

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

Per The Hill:

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

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

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

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

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

[…]

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

Israeli Company with Intelligence Ties at Center of Rogue AI Incidents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Irregular-Israeli Connection

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[…]

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

Tennessee death row inmate survives double lethal injection

Tennessee death row inmate survives double lethal injection

RT

1 Oct, 2026 13:04  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

by Alliance for Natural Health

Excerpts:

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

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

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

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

These priorities are backwards.

A Narrow Definition, Wide Exclusions

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

There are a host of exclusions:

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

Nearly A Quarter of Your Chips

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

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

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

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

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

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

Essentially it is the food company that makes the decision…

Read the full article at Alliance for Natural Health.

Brian Shilhavy’s Comments:

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

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

[…]

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

 

 

American CEOs kowtow before the Chinese emperor

President Donald Trump hosts White House dinner for US tech leaders

Dmitry Orlov

1 October, 2026

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[…]

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

Synthetic ‘Vitamin’ Soon to be Added to UK Flour (& Already in NZ’s) is Known to Cause Miscarriage

bread - pixabay

October 1, 2026
Pam Vernon

“Only Moldova and Kosovo mandate it… No Western European country currently does… stent and dialysis warnings removed … No prescription. No informed consent. No individualized dose. No Commons vote. No comprehensive ethics review. No full medical risk-benefit assessment. The mandate begins December 13.“ slaynews.com

The UK Government will begin adding a drug to the nation’s flour that is known to trigger miscarriages in pregnant women, arguing that it’s necessary for the “greater good,” exposing tens of millions of people to the substance through everyday foods, regardless of whether they want it.

The move will mandate the mass-medicating of the population by forcing commercial flour producers to add synthetic folic acid to the nation’s food supply.

Beginning December 13, 2026, virtually all non-wholemeal wheat flour produced by major British mills must contain synthetic folic acid under government regulations approved without a vote on the floor of the House of Commons.

The mandate will expose tens of millions of people to the substance through bread and countless other everyday foods whether they need it or not.

There will be no prescription.

There will be no individualized dosage.

There will be no medical screening.

And there will be no meaningful way for most consumers to avoid it.

The government argues that forcing folic acid into staple foods serves the “greater good” by reducing neural tube defects during pregnancy.

But evidence underpinning the policy includes a major randomized trial in which significantly more pregnancy losses occurred among women receiving folic acid-containing supplements.

The same substance also carries warnings from the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) for people with certain medical conditions.

Nevertheless, Britain is about to put it into the food supply for everyone.

Government Will Force Synthetic Folic Acid Into Flour

Folic acid is routinely marketed as “vitamin B9.”

It is not the naturally occurring form of vitamin B9.

Natural vitamin B9 is folate, a reduced molecule required by cells throughout the body.

Folic acid is a synthetic oxidized compound that must be converted by the body before it can be used.

When sold separately, folic acid is regulated as a licensed medicine and supplied with a patient information leaflet detailing contraindications, drug interactions, and circumstances in which medical advice should be sought.

The NHS specifically warns some patients not to take folic acid without consulting a doctor.

But from December, that same substance will be routinely added to one of Britain’s most widely consumed food ingredients.

A government minister was asked in Parliament what people who have already been advised to avoid folic acid are supposed to do when it is added to flour.

The government’s answer was that patients should read the leaflet supplied with their medicine and consult their doctor.

There is one obvious problem.

A loaf of bread does not come with a drug information leaflet.

Mandate Takes Effect December 13

The Bread and Flour (Amendment) Regulations 2024 require commercial mills producing more than 500 metric tons of flour annually to add 250 micrograms of folic acid to every 100 grams of non-wholemeal wheat flour.

The regulations were introduced through a statutory instrument.

There was no vote on the floor of the House of Commons.

The rules transformed folic-acid fortification from something previously prohibited into something the government will now force major producers to do.

Wholemeal and gluten-free flour are exempt.

For most consumers, however, avoiding fortified flour will be extremely difficult.

The milling industry’s own trade body says flour is present in roughly 30% of products on supermarket shelves.

Approximately 99.8% of British households buy bread.

Folic acid is already appearing voluntarily in foods ranging from sausages and meat substitutes to soup, gravy products, and flavored milk drinks.

Once mandatory fortification begins, repeated exposure throughout the day will become routine.

The actual amount consumed will depend on what each person eats.

That means children, adults, pregnant women, cancer patients, elderly people, and everyone else will receive different uncontrolled doses through their diet.

Pregnancy Trial Recorded Significantly More Fetal Deaths

The most alarming questions surround the very evidence used to justify the policy.

One major randomized trial examined folic-acid supplementation among women without an elevated risk of neural tube defects.

The Hungarian study, led by Andrew Czeizel and reported fully in 1994, recorded six neural tube defects in the control group and none among women receiving a multivitamin containing folic acid.

That result became foundational to global folic-acid policy.

But the same study recorded something else.

Every category of pregnancy loss, including miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, stillbirth, and other fetal deaths, was higher in the group receiving the folic-acid-containing supplement.

Combined, there were approximately 70 additional pregnancy losses in that group.

The difference was statistically significant.

The neural tube defect result became the headline used to drive folic-acid policy around the world.

The pregnancy-loss result did not.

After adjusting for the higher conception rate in the treatment group, critics calculate that the trial recorded approximately nine additional fetal deaths for every neural tube defect prevented.

Researchers Raised ‘Terathanasia’ Possibility

The finding troubled Czeizel himself.

In 1997, Czeizel and epidemiologist Ernest Hook published a paper in The Lancet examining whether folic acid could be preventing recorded neural tube defects by causing pregnancies involving seriously damaged fetuses to terminate earlier.

They called the proposed mechanism “terathanasia.”

In other words, the apparent reduction in babies born with neural tube defects could potentially have reflected the selective loss of affected pregnancies rather than prevention of the defect itself.

Clinical geneticist Judith Hall responded that pathological examination of the lost pregnancies would be highly desirable.

Yet the central question was never definitively resolved.

Nearly three decades later, the British government is preparing to expose almost the entire population to folic acid through staple food.

Government’s ‘200 Babies Saved’ Claim Falls Apart Under Scrutiny

Officials repeatedly promote mandatory fortification using the claim that approximately 200 pregnancies affected by neural tube defects could be prevented each year.

But the government’s own more recent assessment produces a dramatically different picture.

Its model estimates just 31 fewer affected live births annually in England.

Around 28 involve children who would otherwise be born with disabilities.

Approximately three involve fatal cases of anencephaly, in which major portions of the brain and skull fail to develop.

Much of the remainder of the celebrated “200” figure comes from projected reductions in abortions performed after prenatal scans identify neural tube defects.

Yet the public-facing message has repeatedly been framed around saving hundreds of babies.

The government’s own numbers show something very different.

Millions Exposed for Benefit Affecting Tiny Fraction of Population

Britain has a population approaching 70 million.

Almost all of those people can receive no pregnancy-related benefit whatsoever from mandatory folic-acid fortification in any given year.

Men cannot benefit from the stated purpose.

Children cannot benefit.

Post-menopausal women cannot benefit.

Millions of other women will not be pregnant.

Nevertheless, all will be exposed.

The government has therefore chosen to medicate an entire food supply to target a comparatively tiny section of the population.

The policy becomes even more bizarre because chapati flour is exempt despite Bangladeshi mothers having a disproportionately high risk of neural tube defects.

NHS Warns Cancer and B12 Patients

The government’s own health service already acknowledges that folic acid is not appropriate for everyone without medical consideration.

The NHS advises people with certain conditions, including vitamin B12 deficiency and some cancers, to seek medical advice before taking it.

Britain has approximately 3.5 million people living with cancer, with more than 400,000 new diagnoses each year.

Vitamin B12 deficiency is also common, particularly among older adults.

Folic acid can mask the blood abnormalities caused by B12 deficiency while neurological damage continues.

That damage can become permanent.

Yet those patients will soon encounter synthetic folic acid simply by eating ordinary foods made with mandated flour.

NHS Quietly Removed Warnings as Mandate Approached

As implementation of the policy approached, warnings relating to dialysis and coronary stent patients disappeared from the NHS folic-acid guidance.

Internal records obtained through freedom-of-information requests showed that the dialysis warning was removed because staff described the evidence as “confusing.”

There was no recorded justification for removing the stent warning.

When challenged in Parliament, the responsible minister said the NHS page had simply been made shorter and easier to understand.

No new clinical trial demonstrating safety was cited.

The stent warning was subsequently restored after a member of the public challenged the change.

The dialysis warning remains absent.

No Safe Upper Level Established for Children

There is another major problem.

British experts were unable to establish a conventional safe upper intake level for folic acid.

Instead, authorities adopted a guidance level because the evidence surrounding adverse effects was inadequate.

For children, no safe upper level was established because there was insufficient evidence.

Yet children will consume fortified flour every day.

The amount will depend on how much bread, cereal, pastries, pizza, processed food, and other flour-containing products they eat.

The government will mandate the dose in the flour.

Nobody will control the total dose entering each child’s body.

Cancer Signal Raises More Questions

A pooled analysis of randomized trials has also raised concerns over cancer incidence at folic-acid doses relevant to fortification.

Using individual-level trial records, cancer incidence was 23% higher in lower-dose folic-acid groups.

Using published trial summaries, the increase was 18%.

The same signal did not appear at doses above one milligram.

When all dosage levels were combined, the difference disappeared.

The lower-dose findings are particularly relevant because mandatory food fortification operates within that lower exposure range.

Nevertheless, Britain is pressing forward with population-wide exposure.

No Ethics Assessment, No Full Risk-Benefit Analysis

The government did not publish a dedicated ethical assessment examining whether it is acceptable to medicate an entire population without individual consent.

Nor did it conduct a full medical risk-benefit assessment balancing the predicted reduction in neural tube defects against potential adverse effects across tens of millions of people.

Instead, the government conducted a financial assessment.

That document acknowledged potential harms involving cancer patients and people with undiagnosed B12 deficiency.

Those harms were classified as “non-monetised effects.”

Their assigned financial value was effectively zero.

The government’s economic defense is that adding folic acid costs almost nothing.

The estimated cost is roughly 0.008 pence per loaf.

But the price of the chemical was never the central issue.

The issue is whether a government should be able to put a licensed synthetic medicine into staple food and expose nearly 70 million people without their consent.

WHO Ties Fortification to 2030 Agenda

The World Health Organization promotes folic-acid fortification as part of efforts linked to the United Nations’ 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.

Yet WHO itself has rated the certainty of evidence behind parts of its recommendation as low or very low.

Mandatory fortification is also far from universal across Europe.

Only Moldova and Kosovo mandate it.

No Western European country currently does.

Britain’s own Food Standards Agency rejected mandatory fortification in 2002 because of concerns surrounding vitamin B12 deficiency and consumer choice.

Those concerns have now been swept aside.

Britain Crosses an Extraordinary Line

This policy goes far beyond telling pregnant women to take a vitamin.

The government is altering the nation’s staple food supply.

It is forcing commercial producers to add a synthetic medicine consumed by almost everyone.

People who have been told to seek medical advice before taking folic acid will consume it.

Children will consume it despite authorities having no established safe upper intake level for them.

Millions of people who can receive absolutely no benefit from preventing pregnancy-related neural tube defects will consume it.

And they will consume different amounts depending entirely on their diets.

No prescription.

No informed consent.

No individualized dose.

No Commons vote.

No comprehensive ethics review.

No full medical risk-benefit assessment.

The mandate begins December 13.

By then, the British government will have crossed a profound boundary: from advising citizens what medicine they should take to putting that medicine directly into their food.

A petition is now seeking to force Parliament to finally debate what is about to be done to the entire country.

Via https://envirowatchnz.com/2026/10/01/the-synthetic-vitamin-soon-to-be-added-to-uk-flour-already-in-nzs-is-known-to-cause-miscarriage/

The fallacy of US delusions about Iran’s economic collapse

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s prediction that Iran’s economy would soon collapse underscores the depth of delusion within the current American leadership.

Press TV

“Iran is absolutely not sanctionable,” Deputy Economy Minister Mortaza Zamanian said this week as Tehran worked to keep trade flowing despite Washington’s latest sanctions campaign.

Zamanian cited Iran’s extensive borders, established commercial routes and longstanding trading relationships, saying that they make it impossible for external pressure simply to switch off the country’s economy.

His remarks came as Washington intensified its economic terrorism against Iranian oil, shipping, aviation, finance, technology and foreign companies supporting those sectors.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that Iran would probably make its final oil deliveries to China within two weeks, after which, he asserted, “they will have nothing.”

That prediction deserves comparison with history, because American administrations have imposed increasingly severe sanctions since 1979 while repeatedly expecting economic pressure eventually to produce decisive Iranian economic collapse.

The economy did not disappear under those campaigns; instead, Iran developed domestic industries, expanded regional commerce, strengthened Asian trade and accumulated extensive experience operating outside Western financial systems.

The proposition that an economy which has absorbed American sanctions for almost half a century will suddenly become economically empty within two weeks therefore indicates the depth of delusion among the current US leadership.

Iran enters the current confrontation with a large domestic market, substantial productive capacity, enormous energy resources and deeply established commercial relationships extending across neighboring countries and wider Eurasian markets.

The World Bank describes Iran as relatively diversified for an oil-exporting economy, with substantial manufacturing, agricultural and service activity supported by a large population and significant domestic consumption.

That domestic market sustains production across food, pharmaceuticals, construction materials, steel, petrochemicals, machinery and consumer goods, meaning Iranian production does not depend entirely upon continuous access to Western consumers.

Iran has also developed major industrial capabilities suited to its own resources and infrastructure, including steel, refining, petrochemicals, cement, power generation, construction, food processing and pharmaceutical manufacturing.

These capabilities have continued developing despite restrictions on Western investment and technology, demonstrating that Iranian industrial activity does not depend upon permanent participation by Western companies.

Iran’s prolonged exposure to sanctions has produced accumulated technical and commercial knowledge, giving Iranian companies decades of experience managing restricted supply chains and unreliable access to foreign suppliers.

When foreign manufacturers withdraw, Iranian companies have learned to redesign equipment, substitute components, develop domestic suppliers and cooperate with businesses from countries willing to maintain commercial relationships.

Academic research has documented this process, showing that sanctions can simultaneously restrict foreign technology while encouraging domestic technological development and adaptation within affected Iranian industrial sectors.

The resulting knowledge extends beyond individual companies, because engineers, technicians, procurement specialists and managers have accumulated practical experience managing shortages, substitution and alternative sourcing.

Iranian manufacturers therefore do not design procurement systems around the assumption that every international supplier will remain available indefinitely, making adaptation part of ordinary commercial planning.

Iran’s geography provides another economic advantage, because the country borders Turkey, Iraq, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan while possessing coastlines reaching the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman.

Those borders connect Iranian commerce with the Caucasus, Central Asia, South Asia, the Persian Gulf, Turkey and Iraq, while transportation corridors also connect Iran with Russia and wider Eurasian markets.

Financial sanctions can make transactions more difficult, but they cannot physically relocate Iran or eliminate its access to neighboring markets, suppliers, transportation routes and established regional trading relationships.

Iran has consequently developed commercial links involving Iraq, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Caucasus, Central Asia and China through years of sustained economic interaction.

The World Bank has documented Iran’s increasing trade orientation toward neighboring countries and China as sanctions restricted conventional international relationships, making this regional pivot an established economic feature.

China adds another dimension because it combines enormous industrial capacity with sustained demand for Iranian energy while supplying machinery, manufactured products and industrial inputs required throughout Iran’s domestic economy.

The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission identifies China as Iran’s largest trading partner and estimates that China imported approximately 1.4 million barrels of Iranian crude daily during 2025.

Chinese independent refiners have continued purchasing Iranian crude through commercial arrangements designed to reduce their exposure to American financial restrictions and sanctions enforcement.

That relationship demonstrates why Iran does not require unrestricted access to every Western market when Chinese demand and extensive regional commerce provide alternative markets for Iranian commodities.

Iran’s energy resources provide enormous economic depth, with the World Bank ranking the country second globally in proven natural-gas reserves and fourth globally in proven crude-oil reserves.

Those resources provide export potential while also supplying abundant domestic energy and petrochemical feedstocks supporting manufacturing, electricity generation, transportation and numerous energy-intensive industrial activities.

Iran has consequently developed a substantial downstream economy converting hydrocarbons into refined products, petrochemicals and industrial inputs rather than depending exclusively upon crude-oil exports.

The World Bank has noted that sanctions encouraged additional processing of hydrocarbons into petrochemicals, illustrating how restrictions contributed to changes within Iran’s export structure.

Iran has also developed financial mechanisms outside conventional Western banking, including bilateral currency arrangements, exchange houses, barter, intermediary companies and indirect settlement channels supporting international commercial activity.

The World Bank has documented growing use of bilateral currency exchange, barter and indirect payment mechanisms as Iranian trade shifted increasingly toward neighboring countries and China.

These arrangements provide alternative methods for exchanging value when conventional dollar-based transactions become unavailable or prohibitively difficult.

Their existence helps explain why Washington increasingly targets third-country banks, intermediaries and commercial facilitators, because Iranian commerce extends through extensive international networks beyond domestic financial institutions.

Against this background, Bessent’s prediction assumes that eliminating a major source of oil revenue would effectively remove the broader economic foundations supporting Iran’s productive system and commercial institutions.

Iran’s economic structure is considerably broader, because oil exports represent one component of national activity alongside manufacturing, agriculture, services, domestic consumption and regional commerce.

The World Bank estimates that Iran’s economy contracted during the Iranian year ending March 2026, while simultaneously describing adaptation through changing trade patterns and alternative payment mechanisms.

Economic contraction, however, is fundamentally different from the disappearance of productive capacity, infrastructure, commercial institutions and domestic relationships sustaining millions of Iranian consumers and businesses.

American sanctions have repeatedly targeted Iranian banking, oil exports, investment, technology, shipping and foreign companies, yet Iran has retained its industrial base and redirected substantial trade toward neighboring countries.

Washington possesses powerful financial tools, but financial restrictions cannot physically eliminate Iran’s factories, oilfields, farms, engineers, consumers, ports, borders or commercial relationships accumulated over decades.

The central question is therefore whether American pressure can erase the productive, geographical, resource and commercial foundations Iran has accumulated across nearly half a century of economic adaptation.

Nothing in Iran’s economic history demonstrates that those foundations can disappear within two weeks, particularly while the country retains domestic production, regional markets, energy resources and established commercial relationships.

Iran therefore enters the present confrontation with domestic capabilities, energy resources, industrial capacity, geographic advantages and international relationships capable of keeping its economy operating despite intensified American terrorism.

Via https://www.presstv.co.uk/Detail/2026/09/30/777309/The-fallacy-of-US-delusions-about-Iran%E2%80%99s-economic-collapse

Why Our “Populist Moment” Keeps Failing

America is in a populist moment. Or at least, that’s what we’ve been hearing for the last decade.

Ever since Donald Trump shocked the legacy press, “expert” pollsters, and the political establishment more broadly in November of 2016, we’ve seen endless attempts to explain what was, at the time, seen as a perennial sea change in American politics.

A consensus quickly emerged that pointed to a “populist surge” on the right, driven by rural white voters who were angry about the financial crisis and the political class’s failure to “stem the tide” of illegal immigration. The establishment tried to frame this all in a way that was flattering to themselves. Trump’s popularity, we were told, came from a particularly nasty group of uneducated rural whites who were enraged about having to compete with non-white people and stupid enough to fall for Trump’s lies.

But anyone looking closely could see that that characterization was, at best, a gross and overly narrow simplification. While rural white populations provided a lot (not all) of the votes and fuel for the Trump movement, its ideological thought leaders were largely young men living in or around blue cities, connecting and interacting with each other online.

Also, at the same time, there was a significant populist surge on the left. This was a bipartisan, or even non-partisan, political phenomenon. Establishment Democrats have done a far better job than their Republican counterparts at keeping their populist wing in line—largely thanks to its political leader, Bernie Sanders, who was always willing to roll over and support the establishment candidate when the time came. That said, the success of several “post-woke” democratic socialists in this year’s primaries suggests that establishment Democrats are now also losing control.

So it’s not merely some handful of uneducated rural white voters. There has been a widespread sense, across the political spectrum, that America’s institutions are not merely failing, but are actively working against the interests of everyday Americans. And that is true.

The massive federal government built up in DC over the last century or so was never meant to serve the interests of the American people as a whole. It has always been a tool for enriching the political caste and their well-connected friends in the “private sector.” They’ve done that directly with tax-and-spend programs and indirectly by using rules and regulations that warp entire industries to benefit some well-connected firms already on top.

The political establishment has gone to great lengths to hide their expropriative activities behind deceptive propaganda and fake appeals to the common good. But especially after they’ve taken the opportunity to greatly ramp up their schemes in response to crises of their own making—like the 2008 financial crisis—it became a lot harder to stop people from noticing that, somehow, the elites are ripping them off.

The “populist anger” against the elites that resulted has enabled Trump’s dominance of the Republican Party and fueled an escalating civil war within the Democratic Party that appears to be nearing a similar establishment defeat. And this anger has been the defining feature of American politics for at least ten years now.

What, then, has this populist moment accomplished? What has been done to liberate the American people from our corrupt political class, or at least to meaningfully improve the safety and material well-being of everyday Americans?

The truth is, on nearly all fronts, the results have been abysmal.

Broadly, this populist wave was meant to end the “corruption” in DC—or to stop politicians and bureaucrats from using government to enrich themselves and their friends. It was meant to end the endless series of wars fought to benefit foreign groups and governments along with well-connected firms in the “defense” and energy sectors. And it was meant to reorient the American system from one that serves the interests of corporate giants and financial elites to one that serves small businesses and local communities.

On the right, populists also wanted to stop or reverse the demographic changes resulting from the post-1965 immigration system. And populists on the left wanted to reverse the rising levels of economic inequality.

Over the last decade, every single one of these problems has gotten worse. Why?

There are, of course, plenty of specific mistakes, shortcomings, or outright failures we could examine on all these fronts. But, at the end of the day, all come back to the same fundamental problem: the populist right grew bored with economics.

The truth is, the current wave of anti-establishment, anti-elite political sentiment did not really begin ten years ago with the election of Donald Trump. It began earlier, right in the wake of the financial crisis. There was, of course, the Occupy movement on the left, but that mostly boiled down to calls to send bailouts everywhere in the economy rather than just to the big banks, or even for a full-on socialist revolution. Economic literacy was never at home in that movement.

However, on the right, the post-meltdown anger was channeled in a much sounder direction. First with the early TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party protests, which at least identified the correct villain. But then especially with the presidential campaigns of Ron Paul.

What set Ron Paul’s presidential runs apart was not that he spoke about how the current system was ripping people off and needed to be radically reformed—all candidates speak like that to at least some extent. What set him apart was that he, and he alone, correctly identified the mechanism the political class uses to rip the American people off: the Federal Reserve System.

If you listened to Ron Paul argue for ending the Fed, it’s clear he didn’t view it as one policy position among many on his domestic platform, but as the single federal entity fueling every other issue—at home and abroad—that he was talking about. And he was exactly right.

The control the central bank gives the political class over the banking system, the financial sector, and the monetary system itself has allowed it to transcend previous fiscal limits and fund its various ballooning federal programs with inflation, or money printing.

In other words, all the things the populists have claimed to oppose: the ever-growing administrative state that is warping the economy—and increasingly all parts of life—to the benefit of well-connected companies and interest groups, the enormous warfare state that we’re constantly forced to pay to expand only for it to get offered up for sale to the highest bribers, and what is effectively a massive corporate welfare system for the well-off firms at the top of the financial sector; all of it is only possible at the levels we see today because of the Federal Reserve.

That is not because the shift from traditional taxing and spending to inflation eliminates the cost or makes it more affordable. It’s because printing the money hides the cost, initially, from those who pay it. The political class is able to impose heavy taxes on the population that are barely noticeable at first, only appearing later as a general and unavoidable rise in prices that is easy to blame on “greedy” grocery store owners, for example.

That unceasing rise in prices that is clearly making just about everyone worse off does generate a lot of anger. But it’s anger that has, so far, been easily directed away from the actual culprits towards politically-convenient villains for both parties.

Add to that the ways the Fed’s manipulation of interest rates traps us in our familiar cycle of artificial, unsustainable economic booms and painful recessions, and encourages people to engage in high-time-preference behavior—a major institutional driver of much of the “degeneracy” the populist right has been speaking out against. And how the “culture wars” and ethnic conflicts that inevitably result as multiple nations, peoples, or cultures are forced to live under a single state get supercharged when that state is able to transcend normal limits and grow far more powerful, and it starts to become clear why the Fed sits right under the surface of most of the seemingly unrelated political issues animating people today.

That is why Ron Paul and the anti-establishment movement he led made opposition to the central bank their top priority. But it didn’t last.

By the time Trump came in and took control of the anti-establishment, populist energy on the right, Ron Paul’s focus on the Fed had already grown old, or stale, in the minds of populist right-wingers. They had moved on.

But importantly, what had happened was not some intellectual shift from one economic vision to another. It was a shift in focus from the root of the problem to various isolated symptoms.

And that, more than anything else, is why the populist right will continue to fail.

“Populists” can talk, until the end of time, about how they want to restructure federal policy to benefit Americans rather than the big multinational corporations it’s designed to serve, rein in the warfare state and the various foreign and domestic lobbies using it for their own ends, and tackle the nation’s cultural rot and escalating degeneracy. But as long as they remain uninterested in targeting the central federal apparatus that is fueling all this behavior, they’re not really serious about stopping it.

And that clearly describes the Trump movement, as it exists today. The lack of interest in actually taking on the root of the problems he ran on and talks about has made it easy for the political establishment to co-opt Trump’s administration and direct it back towards maintaining and even expanding the federal rackets causing the populist anger.

Now, Trump’s unwillingness to fix the inflation crisis is likely to hand power to the democratic socialists on the left. Americans tend to have a default—and justified—aversion to socialism. But these are the only candidates leaning into the populist anger who remain largely unstained by having been in office in recent years as this inflation crisis goes unaddressed. But, of course, the socialists also have no interest in actually addressing it. They merely want to use it as an excuse to ram through all their dream tax-and-spend programs—all of which will only make the problem far worse.

In other words, the populist anger we’ve seen escalate for years now is unlikely to dissipate any time soon. But, as long as today’s populists refuse to confront the economic foundation of the system they claim to oppose, that anger will keep getting redirected toward fighting symptoms while the machinery producing them grows stronger.

Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, and the intellectual tradition they embodied already identified that system’s real center of gravity. We already know the answer. All that’s left to do is act on it.

Via https://mises.org/mises-wire/why-our-populist-moment-keeps-failing

Ultra-orthodox Jews condemn IDF as ‘enemy army’

Ultra-Orthodox Jews condemn IDF as ‘enemy army’ (VIDEOS)
RT
Published 30 Sep, 2026 16:27

Thousands of Haredi Jews marched through the streets of Jerusalem overnight, protesting the Israeli military conscription and honoring incarcerated draft dodgers from the ultra-Orthodox community.

The march began in Jerusalem’s Geula neighborhood, with many streets in the area cordoned off. The police, however, avoided deploying officers into the crowds in an apparent attempt to avoid provoking violence. The demonstration was organized by multiple hardline Haredi anti-draft groups, including the Jerusalem Faction and other anti-conscription activists, who expressed hope the event would be peaceful. No major incidents were reported.

Some 50 formerly jailed draft evaders reportedly showed up at the event, with the crowds celebrating them as true martyrs who had suffered for what the event organizers described as their adherence to Judaism. The ultra-Orthodox community overwhelmingly opposes compulsory military conscription into the IDF, viewing full-time Torah study as their primary duty.

Demonstrators carried assorted placards and banners during the march, including signs equating Haredi military prisoners to “hostages.” Some placards even condemned the IDF as an “enemy army” and reiterated the Haredi refusal to sacrifice their children “on the altar of Zionism,” footage from the scene shows.

Some protesters were seen riding an open-roof double-decker bus, blasting traditional songs and dancing in the streets.

The demonstration comes two days after hundreds of Haredi Jews rallied in Bnei Brak to honor 160 ultra-Orthodox draft dodgers released from a military prison. While the event was described by organizers as a homecoming party, it turned political and was used to launch the Color Black, a newly registered Haredi political party. Its program largely revolves around securing military-service exemptions for the ultra-Orthodox community.

While military service is mandatory for most Israeli citizens, both men and women, members of the Haredi community have enjoyed an exemption for decades. The arrangement ended in 2014, resulting in repeated clashes between the ultra-Orthodox Jews and the Israeli authorities.

Tensions escalated amid the Gaza war, with the Supreme Court ruling in 2024 that thousands from the community were subject to conscription. The mass draft of ultra-Orthodox, however, has been repeatedly delayed, with the authorities reportedly winding down the conscription effort recently ahead of parliamentary elections.

[,,,]

Via https://www.rt.com/news/646515-orthodox-jews-protest-draft/

Bessent and Lutnick Building Parallel Financial System on Stablecoins without Government Oversight While Crashing US Dollar Intentionally

 

 

Comments by Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News

Leah of the Leah Files has just published her 4th article in her “Currency Killer” series about Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s attempts to take over the U.S. financial system by crashing the U.S. dollar and replacing it with stablecoins, and specifically with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s Tether stablecoin, the largest stablecoin in the world which is now rapidly buying up U.S. Treasuries.

Here is my coverage of her first three articles in this explosive investigative series that I have yet to see anyone else cover in either the corporate or alternative media: Part 1 & 2: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent Just Restructured The American Financial System to Destroy the U.S. Dollar Part 3: The Epstein Digital Financial System is Getting Ready to Replace the U.S. Dollar

In this 4th article in the series, Leah covers the GENIUS Act, which has already been signed into law, but has a comment period before it is enacted that will close on October 19.

As Leah writes, this is not simply “corruption as usual” in Washington D.C., where conflicts of interest rule the day.

No, this is entirely different – it is the complete hijacking of the U.S. financial system and putting it into the hands of a very few powerful people, and one very powerful company: Tether.

As Leah writes:

That is not a stablecoin company. That is a parallel financial system, every function of a central bank plus every function of an intelligence service, in one private entity, owned by four men who control 86 percent of the equity, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, physically located in El Salvador, and paying zero corporate tax on $13 billion in annual revenue.

In 2024 during the Presidential campaign season in the U.S., I exposed many of the Silicon Valley billionaires who follow the teachings of Curtis Yarvin, and believe that democracy is a poor form of government, and would instead prefer a monarchy.

Peter Thiel heads this list, along with his protege and disciple, J.D. Vance, who is now the Vice President of the United States. See: Big Tech “Far-Right” Billionaires want to Eliminate Politicians and “Democracy” as They Believe They can Run the World Better by Themselves

Of course “democracy” and the illusion that people can vote politicians into office to affect change is considered a “Constitutional Right”, and this belief is drilled into every American through our educational system.

So overthrowing the government and installing a king is just not something that would go over too well in the U.S.

However, hijacking the American financial system by crashing the U.S. dollar, replacing it with stablecoins, and putting it into the hands of a few powerful people in the private sector would accomplish almost the exact same thing, and Leah exposes it all in her series and in this latest article, which is must reading for everyone.

The Currency Killer Part IV: The Machine

They built it in eighteen months and it has been turned on. We have three weeks to make a change.

by Leah
The Leah Files

Excerpts:

Scott Bessent, the man running the US Treasury stood in front of a room in Dallas on September 10 and said five words that should have ended his career: “I am the house now.”

He was not joking. He tripled the government’s bond buyback program the same week. The next day, the DOJ publicly thanked Tether for helping freeze $52 million in criminal funds. Two weeks before that, his Treasury Department deleted the only federal database tracking who owns shell companies in America, and then published the rules that will govern stablecoins forever.

All of that happened in thirty-one days.

In Part I, I showed you how Bessent spent forty years breaking currencies and then took the keys to ours. In Part II, I showed you how Lutnick’s family built the custody operation with a Tether loan. In Part III, I traced Tether to Epstein’s crypto network and documented the empire they are building with the profits.

This is Part IV. This is what it looks like when all of it runs at the same time, and there is a clock on it. The GENIUS Act comment period closes October 19. That is three weeks from now. After that, the rules governing stablecoins in America get finalized by the man who profits from their growth, and the company those rules will govern just hired the man who wrote the law to be its CEO.

“I AM THE HOUSE NOW”

On September 10, Scott Bessent stood in front of a room in Dallas and said five words that should have been on every front page in America, “I am the house now.”

He was responding to critics who called his Treasury interventions reckless, after bond traders pushed back against his buyback program and drove yields higher instead of lower. His response was not to adjust, it was to triple down.

The Treasury announced it would buy back up to $6 billion in bonds in a single week, triple the normal operation. Bessent has doubled the buyback program twice since taking office, from $2 billion per operation to $4 billion, and now effectively to $6 billion per week, an escalation that no previous Treasury Secretary has attempted because no previous Treasury Secretary was a career currency trader who spent four decades learning how to move bond markets by force.

Here is what “I am the house now” means when you translate it from hedge fund speak. It means he is not managing the bond market, he is running it, setting the prices, deciding which bonds get bought, at what maturity, and at what yield.

The people on the other side of every one of those trades are the stablecoin issuers whose reserves the GENIUS Act requires to be held in Treasury bills maturing within 93 days.

 

When George Soros said something similar before breaking the Bank of England, he was a private citizen betting against a government.

Bessent was the man next to him when he said it.

Now Bessent is the government, and the bond market he is running determines what your mortgage costs, what the dollar is worth, and how much the country pays to borrow money.

That has never happened before, and he said it out loud.

Fortune reported that bond yields are higher now than before Bessent intervened, which means the plan is not working the way a normal Treasury Secretary would want it to work. But it is working exactly the way a currency attacker would want it to work, because higher long-term yields and lower short-term yields is the exact trade that benefits stablecoin issuers who hold short-term T-bills.

Bessent knows this because he spent forty years doing this.

THE NUMBERS

Here is what Bessent is actually doing with the bond market, because the numbers tell a story the headlines are not.

The GENIUS Act requires every stablecoin to be backed by Treasury bills maturing within 93 days. Not bonds, not notes. Short-term bills specifically. That means every new dollar of stablecoin growth creates a dollar of mandatory demand for one very specific type of government debt.

Now look at what Bessent did with supply.

Before he took over, the government was adding about $31.7 billion in T-bills per month. Under Bessent, the average rose to $45.7 billion. Then in June 2026, it exploded: T-bills outstanding jumped from $6.691 trillion to $7.248 trillion in two months. That is $557 billion in sixty days, 8.8 times the pre-Bessent pace. He is flooding the market with exactly the securities that stablecoin issuers are required by law to buy.

And there is only one buyer large enough to absorb that at scale. Tether held $98.5 billion in T-bills at the end of Q1 2025. By June 2026 it was $141 billion. They are already the 17th largest holder of US government debt on earth, bigger than Germany, and their CEO has said publicly they want to be top five.

Here is what that means for your wallet.

An academic study found that Tether’s buying lowers short-term yields by 24 basis points, which saves the US government roughly $15 billion a year in borrowing costs. The government is paying less on its debt because Tether is buying it. Standard Chartered projects stablecoin issuers will need $1 trillion in T-bill reserves by 2028. Bessent himself says $2 trillion.

Read that again.

The US government is becoming financially dependent on a private company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands to finance its own borrowing. And the man running the Treasury is the one making it happen.

That is the feedback loop nobody is naming.

Bessent issues the T-bills. The law requires Tether to buy them. Tether’s buying lowers yields and saves the government money. The government becomes dependent on Tether’s demand. Tether becomes too important to regulate. And Tether takes the yield from those T-bills and converts it into something else entirely.

Bessent has gutted every agency that would be watching any of this. FinCEN, the agency whose entire job is tracking dirty money, took an 11 percent staff cut with 30 more positions proposed for elimination, and the beneficial ownership database was ordered deleted.

The Public Integrity Section, the DOJ unit that prosecutes corrupt officials, went from 36 lawyers to 2 and from 190 open cases to about 20. Seventeen inspectors general were fired in a single night. The FBI’s public corruption squad was dissolved. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement was paused by executive order.

THE LOOP

Here is how it works when you put all the pieces together, six steps where each one feeds the next.

Step one: Bessent floods the market with short-term Treasury bills, tripling the buyback program to $6 billion per week and shifting debt issuance toward shorter maturities in what analysts call the “Treasury Twist.”

Step two: the GENIUS Act requires every stablecoin to be backed by reserves held in T-bills maturing within 93 days, which means every new dollar of stablecoin growth creates a dollar of mandatory demand for the exact securities Bessent is issuing.

Step three: Tether buys those T-bills, currently holding $141 billion in US Treasuries, making it the 17th largest holder of US government debt on earth and bigger than Germany, earning roughly $13 billion a year in yield.

Step four: Tether uses that yield to build the empire, deploying more than $5 billion since late 2023 into farmland, fertilizer, AI data centers, satellite companies, robotics, media platforms, gold, and bitcoin.

Step five: the empire generates revenue, with Adecoagro alone producing $467 million in annual EBITDA, the farmland growing crops, the bitcoin mines running on sugarcane electricity, the gold lending operation earning interest, and StableFund deploying private credit, with every subsidiary producing cash that flows back to Tether.

Step six: Tether issues more stablecoins, which require more T-bill reserves, which creates more demand for Bessent’s bonds, which keeps yields low, which lets the government borrow cheaply, which means Bessent can issue more T-bills.

 

That is the loop, and once it reaches scale no future president can dismantle it without crashing the bond market. At $1 trillion in stablecoins, the US government depends on Tether to finance its operations.

At $2 trillion, Bessent’s own projection for 2028, stablecoin issuers hold a quarter of all T-bills outstanding. At $4 trillion, the whole thing is permanent, because the interest rates on your mortgage, your car loan, and your credit card would all spike overnight if anyone tried to unwind it.

We are at $302 billion right now and the clock is running….

Read the Full Article at The Leah Files – this is just a portion of everything she reports on that I have republished here.

Via https://healthimpactnews.com/2026/bessent-and-lutnick-are-building-a-parallel-financial-system-on-stablecoins-without-government-oversight-while-crashing-the-u-s-dollar-intentionally/?ct=YTo1OntzOjY6InNvdXJjZSI7YToyOntpOjA7czo1OiJlbWFpbCI7aToxO2k6MjA2Mjt9czo1OiJlbWFpbCI7aToyMDYyO3M6NDoic3RhdCI7czoyMjoiNmFiZDI1OTI2Yjk4ZTg1OTU3MTM5MSI7czo0OiJsZWFkIjtzOjY6IjgwOTY5NCI7czo3OiJjaGFubmVsIjthOjE6e3M6NToiZW1haWwiO2k6MjA2Mjt9fQ%3D%3D