Zerohedge

What History Teaches Us About Why So Many Eventually Flee Socialism Authored by Armstrong Williams via The Epoch Times, History is filled with political movements born from noble promises. Few have been more appealing in theory than socialism. At its heart, socialism promises greater equality, economic fairness, and protection for those who struggle in a competitive marketplace. It speaks to the desire for justice and the belief that no person should be left behind. Yet history also teaches a sobering lesson: While millions have voted for socialism, millions more have ultimately fled from it. Why? The answer is not found in campaign slogans or academic theories. It is found in the lived experiences of ordinary people across generations and continents. Throughout the 20th century, socialist governments emerged across Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Many came to power promising to eliminate poverty, reduce inequality, and place the needs of the people above the interests of the wealthy. In the beginning, those promises often generated enormous enthusiasm. Citizens were told that government planning would be more efficient than free markets, that collective ownership would create fairness, and that centralized control would produce prosperity for all. The results, however, frequently fell short of the promises. One recurring problem was the concentration of power. When governments assume responsibility for directing large portions of the economy, political leaders inevitably gain greater control over employment, investment, production, and distribution. Over time, this concentration of authority often extends beyond economics into other aspects of society. History shows that when governments acquire greater power, citizens frequently lose a measure of independence. Economic freedom and political freedom are often more closely connected than many realize. When a person’s livelihood depends heavily upon the state, dissent becomes more difficult and individual choice becomes more limited. Another lesson history teaches is that incentives matter. Human beings respond to rewards, risks, and opportunities. Free-market systems are far from perfect, but they have consistently demonstrated a remarkable ability to encourage innovation, entrepreneurship, and productivity. When individuals are allowed to benefit from their hard work, creativity, and investment, economies tend to grow. By contrast, heavily centralized systems often struggle to generate the same level of innovation and efficiency. Bureaucracies can become slow, inflexible, and disconnected from local realities. Over time, shortages, inefficiencies, and declining productivity have plagued many state-controlled economies. This does not mean capitalism is without flaws. It clearly is not. Free markets can produce inequality, abuse, and economic dislocation. They require regulation, accountability, and moral responsibility. But history suggests that replacing markets with extensive government control often creates a different set of problems—problems that can be even more difficult to solve. Perhaps the most powerful evidence comes from migration patterns. Throughout modern history, people have overwhelmingly moved toward societies that offered greater economic freedom rather than away from them. From East Germans risking their lives to cross the Berlin Wall to Cubans crossing dangerous waters to Venezuelans fleeing economic collapse, countless individuals have voted with their feet. This reality deserves careful consideration. People rarely abandon their homes, families, language, and culture without compelling reasons. When citizens repeatedly leave countries governed by socialist systems in search of opportunity elsewhere, it raises important questions about the long-term sustainability of those systems. The lesson is not that every policy associated with socialism is inherently wrong. Many democratic societies incorporate social safety nets, public health care programs, retirement systems, and other forms of government support while maintaining market economies and strong democratic institutions. The real lesson is about balance. Successful societies tend to recognize both the strengths and limitations of government. They understand that government has an important role in protecting the vulnerable, enforcing the rule of law, and providing essential public services. At the same time, they recognize that prosperity is often driven by individual initiative, private enterprise, innovation, and economic freedom. As younger generations debate the merits of socialism, they should do so with an appreciation for history rather than romanticized visions of what might be. Good intentions alone do not guarantee good outcomes. Policies must ultimately be judged not by their promises but by their results. History’s verdict is neither simple nor ideological. It is practical. Again and again, people have demonstrated through their actions that they value freedom, opportunity, and the ability to shape their own destinies. When those things become scarce, many eventually seek them elsewhere. That is perhaps the most enduring lesson history offers: People may be attracted by promises of equality, but they are often willing to travel great distances—and endure great hardship—in pursuit of liberty. Today, these lessons are becoming part of the American political conversation. With socialist candidates gaining influence in major cities—two examples being the rise of Councilwoman Janeese Lewis George in Washington, D.C., and the growing prominence of Mayor Zohran Mamdani in New York City—voters are once again debating the proper balance between government intervention and individual enterprise. Supporters see these movements as a response to rising costs, housing shortages, and economic inequality. Critics see warning signs that history has presented before. Whatever one’s political perspective, the debate should not be driven by slogans or emotion alone. It should be informed by the experiences of nations that have already traveled this road. The harsh lessons of history are not that compassion is dangerous or that government has no role to play. Rather, they remind us that concentrated power, diminished economic freedom, and excessive dependence on the state often carry consequences that emerge only over time. America’s future will not be determined by labels such as “capitalist” or “socialist.” It will be determined by whether we preserve the freedom, opportunity, innovation, and personal responsibility that have long defined the nation’s success while ensuring that those who struggle are not left behind. History remains our greatest teacher. The question is whether we are willing to learn from it. Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge. Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 17:30

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer Expected To Resign On Monday: Report Keir Starmer's premiership appears to have entered its final act. Just over a week after Andy Burnham stormed back into Parliament with a crushing by-election win, the Prime Minister is - according to senior Labour figures cited by The Observer - preparing to set out a timetable for his own departure, with a "clear statement" possible as early as Monday. Peter Macdiarmid/Pool via REUTERS It would be a remarkable collapse. Starmer led Labour to a landslide less than two years ago. He now looks unable to command the confidence of his own benches for much longer, with cabinet ministers, union leaders and donors reportedly among those who have been involved in the conversations about his future. Burnham, the outgoing Greater Manchester mayor, did not just win Makerfield - he buried it. Official figures show him taking 24,927 votes, 54.8% of the total, beating Reform UK's Rob Kenyon by a 9,231-vote margin in a seat where Nigel Farage's party had been threatening to turn Labour's crisis into a rout. The result gives Burnham the Commons seat he needs, clears his path to a leadership challenge, and leaves Starmer's position looking terminal. Also, Starmer's former Chief of Staff - Morgan McSweeney - was the sacrificial lamb in the Mandelson scandal (recall that Starmer appointed Jeffery Epstein pal Peter Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the US). McSweeney also targeted Zerohedge, The Federalist and Breitbart in a clandestine campaign against alternative-media outlets. He resigned in February, two weeks before Mandelson was arrested on suspicion of passing insider info to Jeffrey Epstein in 2009, when he was serving as Business Secretary. Meanwhile - he just... tweeted it out: BREAKING: President Trump confirms Keir Starmer is resigning as Prime Minister… before Starmer has confirmed it himself. The final humiliation. pic.twitter.com/yz33xD4rPt — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 21, 2026 Markets Eye The Monday Open The political risk did not go unnoticed by bond traders. UK 10-year gilt yields climbed to 4.84% on Friday, up roughly 0.09 percentage points on the session, as markets weighed Burnham's victory, domestic political uncertainty, and the possible fiscal implications of a future leadership bid. With markets shut over the weekend, the next read comes at Monday's open, and any Starmer statement setting out an exit timetable will land straight into it. //--> //--> //--> Starmer out by June 22, 2026? Yes 63% · No 37%View full market & trade on Polymarket Burnham is due to be sworn in as an MP on Monday and to meet Starmer early in the week, with a cabinet meeting scheduled for Tuesday. Senior Labour figures expect a "deliberate slow march in good order" - most likely a September handover timed to the party conference - rather than an immediate vacuum. According to the report, Burnham's supporters claim he has secured backing from more than 201 Labour MPs if Starmer refuses to step down voluntarily. The Observer framed that as a critical number because it would represent more than half the Parliamentary Labour party and would make it increasingly difficult for Starmer to argue that he still commands the confidence of his own side. A formal challenge requires far fewer names. Under Labour's rules, any challenger needs nominations from 20% of Labour MPs - currently 81 - plus the required support from local parties and affiliates. On every count, the door is open. Starmer Digging In? For now, at least in public, Starmer is not going quietly. On Friday he congratulated Burnham on X - framing the result as a win for "Labour's campaign of hope and optimism over division and hate" - while insisting he would stand in any leadership contest and still had "more to do." Congratulations, @AndyBurnhamGM, Labour's new MP for Makerfield. Voters chose Labour's campaign of hope and optimism over division and hate. — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 19, 2026 By Saturday the mood music had shifted. The Observer reports that Starmer was spending the weekend at Chequers with his wife, Victoria, weighing his future after a round of conversations with cabinet ministers, advisers, union bosses and donors. One Labour peer close to the Prime Minister told the paper that Starmer would not "walk away" from No. 10 creating a vacuum, but would instead "arrange a deliberate slow march in good order, as a matter of duty and dignity." Another Labour grandee said the Prime Minister now appeared "resigned" to stepping down after coming "hard against the reality that the support isn't there." The establishment knives are out. Lord Falconer - Starmer's own former shadow attorney general - told the BBC that the Prime Minister had "absolutely no authority left because everybody assumes Andy Burnham is about to challenge for the leadership and everybody assumes he's going to win." Former Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who remains the obvious alternative pole of opposition inside the party, publicly hailed Burnham's result even as allies insisted he still intends to stand in any contest. Huge congratulations to @AndyBurnhamGM on an astonishing victory in Makerfield, where Labour lost badly only weeks ago. It gives us all hope that Labour can still win, but Andy's campaign is proof that to do so we need to change. Enormous thanks to everyone involved. — Wes Streeting (@wesstreeting) June 19, 2026 Even the money is moving. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said "obviously Starmer needs to go," calling for an orderly transition on a clear timetable and a conversation about Labour's policy priorities. Streeting's allies, meanwhile, are still talking as though the fight is alive. The Observer reported he has taken out a contract on an office for 40 members of staff as campaign headquarters and has received two £50,000 donations from Fran Perrin, one of Labour's most generous supporters. But some senior Labour figures now believe Streeting may ultimately do a deal with Burnham rather than stand in the way of the momentum. "A Final Chance To Change" Burnham's victory speech left no doubt about the scale of his ambition, even if he stopped short of formally launching the challenge. "Tonight could - just could - be the turning point," he told supporters, warning Labour it had a "final chance to change" with "no second chance." There was also some weirdness: animal-rights campaigner Robert Pownall, who ran as an independent, and Count Binface, the bin-headed "intergalactic space warrior," who took 95 votes. "I swear I'll move to Makerfield if I win." Count Binface talks to Sky's @joncraig at the vote count at the Makerfield by-election. https://t.co/cjPB04D pic.twitter.com/skyclip — Sky News (@SkyNews) June 19, 2026 Mandlelson & Epstein Burnham's win was the trigger, but the charge had been laid months earlier. The slow detonation of Starmer's authority traces back to his decision, in December 2024, to hand the plum Washington ambassadorship to Peter Mandelson despite Mandelson's long-public friendship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Mandelson was sacked as ambassador in September 2025 after released material appeared to show a closer relationship with Epstein than had been acknowledged at the time of appointment. He was later arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office over allegations that sensitive government information had been passed to Epstein during the 2008-2010 financial crisis. Mandelson has denied wrongdoing, has not been charged, and the police investigation is ongoing. 'Where does this leave the tattered reputation of our Prime Minister?'@MartinDaubney discusses the first tranche of the Mandelson files revealing that Sir Keir Starmer was warned that the former ambassador, Lord Mandelson, brought a 'reputational risk'. pic.twitter.com/84vWC3jmhe — GB News (@GBNEWS) March 11, 2026 Starmer claimed Mandelson had lied throughout the appointment process - however it later emerged that he knew full well of the friendship. 🚨 Wow. The Mandelson files are up. They prove Starmer WAS advised and warned about Mandelson's appalling friendship with Epstein. Starmer appointed him anyway. Starmer lied. Starmer must resign. pic.twitter.com/1yjYioVJhK — Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) March 11, 2026 By then the damage was structural: his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney had resigned over the affair, a top Foreign Office mandarin was on the way out, and the government had spent months bleeding credibility through document dumps, a vetting row, sleaze-inquiry pressure and a steady drip of resignations. No. 10 is still batting the resignation talk away as "speculation," and Starmer's team insists he will fight any challenge. On Friday, the Prime Minister told staff the party had to "pull together" and "take the fight" to Reform. But the shape of the problem is brutal: Burnham has the seat, his allies claim the numbers, cabinet ministers are turning, the unions are turning, and Reform UK remains the threat Labour MPs increasingly believe only Burnham can blunt. If Starmer steps to a podium on Monday and sets out an exit timetable, it will cap an extraordinary fall - from landslide to forced retreat in under two years - and crack open the door for the man they call the "King of the North" to walk through it. Maybe if Starmer had addressed unchecked migration, England's woke police, or the rape gangs his CoS tried to get us demonetized for reporting on...  💥NEW: How PM Keir Starmer's Machine Quietly Moved to Cripple Breitbart, The Federalist, ZeroHedge, and Left Independent Outlets On Breaking Points, Ryan introduces Drop Site's latest investigation, adapted from Paul Holden's book, exposing how Keir Starmer and his chief of… pic.twitter.com/NVPDm7aWmw — Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) December 4, 2025   Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 16:35

Feminists Are Increasingly Joining "Witchcraft Communes" To Fill The Spiritual Void In the past 70 years, the subject of the Salem Witch Trials has been hijacked by the political left as a historic example of the authoritarian nature of the "patriarchy".  Arthur Miller used the trials as an allegory for "anti-communist hysteria" in his famous 1953 play, The Crucible.  As we now know, however, Joseph McCarthy was mostly right when he warned about an insidious and organized Marxist takeover of America's social and educational institutions.  A more nuanced historic analysis shows that witchcraft was indeed a problem in the colonies just as it was a problem in Europe.  Not so much because of "black magic" or dark curses, but because "witches" were often early representations of social malcontents causing problems in Christian communities just as they cause problems in the western world today. There were false accusations, there's no doubt.  But the narrative that most or all witch burnings were unjustified is simply false. The reason women (and some men) were accused of being witches and burned at the stake was because they willfully engaged in highly destructive anti-social behaviors.  The local witch was often the village abortionist, a seller of poisons, and the town prostitute or harlot plying her "trade" at a time when there was zero tolerance for this kind of behavior. It should be noted that the practice of casting out or executing sociopaths, psychopaths and other people with destructive social tendencies (considered black magic) is common among religious groups around the world, not just in Puritan towns and Christian society.  This includes Native American tribes that feminists tend to idolize.   When human beings lived in small villages, broken and dangerous people were much easier to identify and remove before they did significant damage.  In the new era of metropolitan isolation within mass population centers, they easily blend into the crowd.  Sometimes they are even celebrated as "visionaries" by Hollywood and the media.        Modern feminists proudly draw connections to the subversive world of witches because they tend toward delusional fantasies of dominance.  Women, by their biological nature, lack any real ability to project power, so they fabricate notions of magical influence in their minds.  Some of the most popular women's trends today revolve around concepts of New Age "manifestation", which is just a modern way of believing in magic. It's not surprising that feminists in the US in 2026 are flocking to "witchcraft communes", an idea recently applauded in a expose by The Guardian.  The outlet notes: "Witchcraft retreats...have proliferated across the US and Europe over the last decade. The practice they’re built around resists easy definition. Equal parts ancient folk magic, herbal remedies and self-soothing rituals, it encompasses everything from the spellcasting done by self-directed pagans to solitary practitioners who scatter protective salts around their homes. If you buy a crystal, that’s witchcraft. If you practice manifestation, that’s witchcraft..." "The retreat boom was foreshadowed by an interest in witchcraft that has grown since the counterculture movement in the 1960s, says Helen Berger, a Harvard Divinity School-based sociologist of religion and one of the leading scholars of contemporary paganism. While it’s hard to really identify a single catalyst driving women to witchcraft, Berger sees a pattern: spikes in alternative spirituality tend to coincide with spikes in anti-authoritarianism. In 1968, for example, several feminist groups co-opted occult imagery, adopted the acronym Witch..." The reason witchcraft appeals so much to women on the political left is because leftist movements operate on the same value system - Meaning, they have no values.  The problem is, Atheism leaves an emotional and spiritual void, leaving people desperate for answers to questions that scientific explanation does not satisfy.  The occult promises people answers, but without all those nasty rules and responsibilities commonly attached to Christianity.      In other words, witchcraft is a religion for people who think they are above moral obligation.  People who think they can revolt against the natural order.  In this way, witchcraft and feminism are fundamentally the same thing.  The Guardian continues: "Clauré hosts at least two witchcraft retreats a year, in Savannah, Georgia and Salem, Massachusetts; prices run anywhere from $2,700 to $5,200 to attend. She says women are searching for something beyond the slumber party Ouija board rituals that loosely inspired her retreats in the first place.  “The patriarchy is not good for anybody, men or women,” Clauré says. “Women have been inherently drawn to [witchcraft spaces] after being demonized or called hysterical or stigmatized. We’re so fucking sick of it that we’re gonna do things our way, whether you call it crazy or not.”..."   "“If you look at the larger social gestalt right now, in which power is being systematically taken away from women and queer people, the traditional witch is the opposite of ‘right’ society,” says Sabina Magliocco, a professor of anthropology and religion at the University of British Columbia and a former Guggenheim fellow. “But if ‘right’ society is depriving women of rights, is excluding women, is saying that it is perfectly fine to sexually abuse women, that there aren’t going to be any consequences, then maybe being the opposite of right society is aligning with the forces of justice.”" It's impossible to distinguish between the political rhetoric of modern witchcraft and feminists; they are symbiotic.  Fantasies of victimhood usually coincide with societal expectations.  Liberal women see basic laws, social norms and meritocracy as "oppressive".  But really, they are narcissists who refuse to accept that the entire world does not revolve around them and their wishes.  This is who witchcraft appeals to.  The wider implications are serious, and not because these women have any real magical powers.  Rather, feminism and similar movements are a psychological plague that spreads, rotting nations from within.  If they face backlash it's not because they are female or queer, it's because they deliberately engineer disruption and encourage degeneracy that breaks society down.  They revel in chaos.  The witches of old were burned at the stake for such behavior; behaviors which the "Patriarchy" kept in check before they infested the greater community.  Feminists are lucky that they're only mocked or shunned in modern times.          Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 15:45

Financial Times Hypes SpaceX's Dismal ESG Rating By MSCI, But Really Nobody Cares The Financial Times appears eager to frame MSCI's decision to assign SpaceX the "lowest possible ESG rating" as a major reputational blow. However, the real story is that the entire ESG movement on Wall Street has imploded, and anyone grounded in reality and common sense has increasingly viewed the whole woke era as counterproductive. "The triple C assessment means SpaceX has the same score as that awarded to the Russian state on MSCI's ESG government rating scale in the wake of its 2022 invasion of Ukraine," FT journalist Ramsay Hodgson wrote.  This same ESG ratings regime gives triple-A ratings to oil majors and major defense companies, while giving one of America's most important rocket and space companies a bottom-tier grade. That only suggests there are major flaws in the ESG scoring model. Here are the publicly visible MSCI ESG ratings:  Oil/Gas Defense "Exxon is rated top ten best in world for environment, social & governance (ESG) by S&P 500, while Tesla didn't make the list!" Musk wrote on X several years ago.  Musk is right...  Companies With Good ESG Scores Pollute Just As Much As Those With Low Ones, New Analysis Finds Here's what X users are saying: Just checked. MSCI has handed Lockheed Martin the exemplary AA rating. They want you to believe the arms manufacturer has a more ethical and sustainable business model than a space exploration venture. Twisted. — Ejder Memis (@_sHx_) June 21, 2026 None gives a flying fuck about ESG except people who want the west to fail. — Packet (@PacketGroove) June 21, 2026 Elon Musk will never again be in the cool kids club and this is just another example of that. ESG is just another clique with its set of rules designed to welcome those firms that shackle themselves with silly rules. It is great that Musk and Luckey as well, refuse to bend… — Ken Hannig (@FlushingKenny) June 21, 2026 Its Time to permanently excise the term ESG from polite conversation, and ridicule those who use it. — JayBlake (@punishedMTL) June 21, 2026 Right back at you MSCI pic.twitter.com/8tDnWjcmXt — boog (@steevwithv) June 21, 2026 Proves to me that ESG is a f-ing joke. — Matt (@grghost) June 21, 2026 Musk added, "ESG is a scam. It has been weaponized by phone social justice warriors." Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 14:35

First Round Of Iran Talks Concludes In Switzerland With Fireworks, Threats Of Renewed War: 'Be Careful' Summary Round 1 ends: Vance cites "great progress" and says talks will continue. Iran defiant, sees itself in strong position: Ghalibaf rejects US threats and links talks to a Lebanon ceasefire. Trump raises stakes via some typical Truth Social lashing out: Warns on Hormuz, Lebanon, and keeps military options on the table. Nuclear progress?: Some reports say not addressed, others suggest framework already being worked on. //--> //--> //--> Israel withdraws from Lebanon by July 31, 2026? Yes 12% · No 88%View full market & trade on Polymarket *  *  * First Round Switzerland Talks Concluded, But with Some Ending Fireworks Al Jazeera is reporting that talks have 'concluded' - but is this in actuality a premature conclusion given all the tension and heated issues of disagreement which came to the forefront? GHALIBAF: THEY'D BE BETTER OFF BEING CAREFUL W/ THEIR REMARKS IRAN'S GHALIBAF: WE DON'T ATTACH ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO US THREATS IRAN PARLIAMENT SPEAKER GHALIBAF COMMENTS ON X IRAN WILL END TALKS W/ US IF ISRAEL WON'T LEAVE LEBANON: TASNIM IRAN SAYS TRUMP'S THREAT IS A 'BLATANT VIOLATION' OF MOU Below is a machine translation of what Iran's lead negotiator just issued on X as the day in Switzerland came to an end (also, another translation)... "Do they not realize that if their threats actually worked, they wouldn't find themselves in today's position of desperation? We don't take American threats seriously. They should be careful about what they say. Our armed forces stand ready to answer them in other ways. They can keep talking—it's we who take action." This is immediately on the heels of Trump playing 'bad cop' to Vance's good cop, who has expressed some cautious optimism on Sunday from Switzerland. Bloomberg is reporting that the nuclear file was not dealt with in today's engagement. The fact that the Swiss event happened at all can be called advancement on some level at least... This is historic! Not because US and Iranian diplomats haven't met face to face before. Or that they haven't been on camera before (they were regularly during the JCPOA talks) But never at the Vice President level! You can see both Aragchi and JD Vance in this clip. pic.twitter.com/jeNBPeQmgr — Trita Parsi (@tparsi) June 21, 2026 Rumors of Iranians already calling it quits are false, reports Axios: A diplomat attending the talks in Switzerland claims the Iranian delegation hasn't left and talks between the U.S. and Iran are still ongoing https://t.co/oQ1UkXwqYv — Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) June 21, 2026   Trump Reminds Iran Of 'Harder' Military Options On Table With Vance and Witkoff in Switzerland, President Trump is still issuing some US redlines via Truth Social, and via apparent 'official leaks' - and quite quickly - through the press. Trump is warning the Iranians on the sticking points of Hormuz closure and the Lebanon crisis. He has newly threatened on Sunday to hit Iran again if it can't constrain its proxies, namely Hezbollah, in Lebanon. In parallel, Tehran is demanding that Washington reign in Israel. A fresh Sunday Truth Social... brief but firm: And more on some fresh reported warnings and pressure coming from Trump: "You close it and you won't have a country." President Trump said he told Iranian officials about the Strait of Hormuz. "You won't even make it back to your fu*king country." "We may take over the Strait, if we have to," Trump said. "If they don't make a deal, we'll collect… pic.twitter.com/cErvdjCJmK — Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) June 21, 2026 As the American delegation continues the high-stakes negotiations in Switzerland aimed at de-escalating, the White House is projecting cautious optimism while simultaneously reminding Tehran that military options remain firmly on the table. Speaking as talks entered a critical phase, Vice President JD Vance said Sunday from Switzerland Washington has "made great progress over the last few hours" and expects "additional progress in the coming hours," describing the negotiations as an opportunity to "turn over a new leaf" in US-Iran relations. Vance emphasized that the administration's preference is not to return to the cycle of confrontation, adding that the US is willing to fundamentally transform ties with Iran if Tehran permanently abandons its nuclear ambitions. "The question is how much more we can achieve in the Middle East," Vance said, while expressing confidence regarding the Lebanon front and signaling satisfaction with ongoing efforts to contain broader regional escalation. "Better Watch His Mouth": Trump to Iran President via Media Yet Trump has just delivered a stark reminder of the consequences should negotiations fail. According to Fox News, Trump warned Iranian officials that closing the Strait of Hormuz would be an existential mistake, reportedly telling Tehran that it "won't have a country" if it attempts to choke off global energy flows, in the segment above. Trump also issued a personal warning to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, saying he "better watch his mouth," while reports indicated the president used unusually blunt language during discussions with Iranian intermediaries over the strategic waterway. President Trump spoke with the Iranians overnight warning them not to close the Strait. "You close it and you won't have a country," Trump said he told Iranian officials. "You won't even make it back to your fu*king country." — Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) June 21, 2026 Perhaps most notably, Trump reiterated that he retains a "60-day option" and can "do whatever" he deems necessary after that period expires, a statement widely interpreted as preserving the possibility of renewed military action. The president also reportedly threatened additional strikes against Iran should Tehran's regional proxies in Lebanon resume attacks or undermine the emerging diplomatic framework. The result is a familiar carrot-and-stick approach as talks are unfolding under the shadow of explicit US military threats and a rapidly approaching deadline that could determine whether the region moves toward détente or another round of escalation. But Iran has also made known that it is ready of a long war, but will Trump be willing to risk enduring the political and economic fallout? Qatari, Pakistani Top Leaders Present, Optimistic Initial Statements Qatar's Foreign Ministry has formally confirmed the launch of the talks between the United States and Iran with the mediation of Qatar and Pakistan in Switzerland, with the Iranian delegation headed by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. US Vice President JD Vance is leading the American side along with envoy Steve Witkoff. Also gathered at the Buergenstock Resort Lake Lucerne, near Stansstad, are Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. Qatar has expressed "its aspiration that these meetings will lead to the conclusion of a comprehensive and permanent agreement addressing all aspects covered in the Memorandum of Understanding." Iran has reiterated it wants a comprehensive settlement and final end to the war. But it also demands a final Lebanon-Israel peace settlement be linked in. Already there could be an inkling of progress on the nuclear front: PAKISTAN:US, IRAN AGREED ON REDUCTION OF ENRICHED URANIUM LEVEL PAKISTAN:IRAN'S ENRICHED URANIUM TO BE REDUCED FROM 60% TO 0.7% IRAN PRESIDENT SAYS QATAR TO RELEASE $6B AS TALKS START: IRNA Screengrab via Government of Pakistan footage The last time Vance sat physically across from Iran's lead negotiator Ghalibaf was a full ten weeks ago, in mid-April. Interactions appear to initially be only through intermediaries, which will build up to face-to-face meetings, as happened in prior failed rounds.  What to Expect in 1st Round Format Qatar's foreign ministry has previewed the following planned format to the opening of the talks as follows: The ministry statement says “specialized technical and expert groups have been formed to negotiate the terms of the final agreement, which will cover all aspects of the Memorandum of Understanding” between the US and Iran. “Additionally, follow-up groups have been established to oversee the implementation of the Memorandum, monitor progress achieved, and work toward the conclusion of the final agreement,” it added. “This reflects the commitment of all parties to moving forward in the negotiation process in good faith, with the aim of reaching a comprehensive and sustainable agreement.” Of course, in terms of "implementation" of just the MoU itself, things are not quite there yet, as sporadic fighting and Israeli aerial attacks continue in Lebanon, which could serve to derail the Switzerland process at any moment. After roughly 45 min, the bilateral meeting between FM @araghchi and his Swiss counterpart @ignaziocassis came to a close at Bürgenstock Hotel. Quadrilateral talks between Iran, the US, Pakistan, and Qatar are expected to commence shortly at another venue on the same premises. pic.twitter.com/hOmovguWFs — IRNA News Agency ☫ (@IrnaEnglish) June 21, 2026 Additionally, Iran has declared it has 'closed' the Strait of Hormuz just this weekend, but which the US military has been denying is a reality. VP Vance in media appearances has also been downplaying it. The Lebanon situation seems the bigger, more pressing threat to the peace process - at least from Tehran's point of view. Dozens of people in Lebanon have been killed while at least six Israeli soldiers have been slain, with 20 wounded over past days of Hezbollah rocket and drone attacks. Trump Between a Rock & A Hard Place Where Escalation is Concerned As a reminder, President Trump doesn't want to oversee an economic catastrophe driven by a worldwide energy crisis. It seems he's ready to anything to not let it happen under his watch: President Donald Trump said Wednesday that he was motivated to finalize the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran to prevent “economic catastrophe” if the war was not resolved soon. “So rather than possibly going into a depression, rather than having your favorite president be Herbert Hoover, he was always the one I didn’t want to be,” Trump said of the 31st president whose policies are often blamed for starting the Great Depression. “I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe. If you kept this going, that could have happened. But all I know is, every time we talked about the possibility of peace, the stock market shot up like a rocket ship,” Trump said during a press conference Wednesday on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in Évian, France. And so judging by this and other of recent Trump admissions, Iran clearly enters Switzerland in very strong negotiation position. Its current rhetoric regarding the Strait of Hormuz also reveals this. JD Vance met with Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Army Chief Asim Munir in Switzerland.pic.twitter.com/5bteI1Vtyu — Clash Report (@clashreport) June 21, 2026 Tehran has accused the US of a "clear breach of its commitments" and announced Saturday that "the Strait of Hormuz will be closed to the passage of vessels," according to state broadcaster IRIB. More Details on Format For more on the details of the format, CNN has reported some further information in the following: When and where do the talks start? US and Iranian negotiators will begin their meeting at around 1 p.m local time (7 a.m. ET) at the Swiss mountain resort of Bürgenstock, an Iranian source told CNN. Who will be there? Both the United States and Iran have sent high-level officials to Switzerland. Vice President JD Vance is heading up the US side, while Iran’s lead negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, will lead Tehran’s delegation, Iranian media outlet Saberin News reported Saturday. What format will they take? Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, who is part of the Iranian team, earlier told state media “the Iran-US talks will be held in a quadrilateral format, with the presence of Pakistani and Qatari delegations.” What will be discussed? Lebanon is likely set to top the agenda after clashes between Israel and Hezbollah threatened the nascent agreement between the US and Iran. Vance says he hoped he would make advancements on negotiations surrounding the handling of Iran’s nuclear materials. Long Road Ahead To put things in perspective about the long road ahead, analyst and reporter James Bayes - who is on the ground for the talks in Switzerland, has offered the following: "This is a very different deal from the Iran nuclear deal that was done by [former US] President Barack Obama … things have changed completely. But I think it’s worth looking at that deal for one reason, which is the timeline – how long these things take." Iranian Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araghchi, center, arrives at the Buergenstock resort in Obbuergen, near Lucerne. Pool via AP "Because when they did an interim deal then, in November 2013 until the final deal in 2015, it took 597 days," the correspondent added. "So, even though the circumstances have changed – it’s a very different deal and they’ve got the knowledge of that deal as well which is helpful – it’s a lot to do in just 60 days." Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 13:00

Feeling Emboldened After Attacks On Moscow, Zelensky Threatens Belarus With Military Action Ukraine is feeling more confident of late as its long-range drones have made the Moscow area - as well as dozens of oil refineries across the country burn. Zelensky if seeking to flex yet again in recent days by issuing an ultimatum to Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, threatening that close Russian ally and 'Union State' Belarus could face attacks out of Ukraine if it fails to dismantle the air defense radar array along its southern border. The Ukrainian leader even issued a timeline and deadline, in a social media post on Friday night telling Lukashenko to "remove that equipment." Reuters/Sky News "I think a week is enough for him to do that… If he doesn’t do it, we will," Zelensky threatened. Zelensky added that "Russia will keep pushing him further into this war" - but that Lukashenko now "understands that Ukraine will respond." Belarus has been involved in Russia's 'special military operation' from the beginning, having played the role of staging area and logistical hub for the initial invasion and some subsequent attacks. Importantly it is also hosting Russian tactical nukes, which is clearly a loud warning and threat to NATO. Addressing these factors, Zelensky also alleged that the Belarusian army "adjusts fire on our people." He stressed in the statement that "today, Belarus is one of the key suppliers for the Russian army." A major incident just unfolded due to a Ukrainian drone strike on Belarusian civilians, which Lukashenko dubbed an act of terrorism: The Belarusian Foreign Ministry said Thursday that it summoned a senior Ukrainian diplomat to protest a deadly drone strike on a bus carrying a Belarusian youth soccer team. Belarusian and Russian authorities accused Ukraine’s military of targeting the vehicle as it traveled through Russia’s western border region of Bryansk on Wednesday. A woman accompanying the team was killed, and six others, including four teenagers, were wounded. Following the incident, federal investigators in Russia launched a terrorism probe. Russia’s Foreign Ministry denounced the attack as “another monstrous crime.” Ukraine, for its part, has rejected that its forces were behind the attack, dismissing the whole incident as a "provocation" and suggesting a false flag or manufactured event. Attack on Belarusian bus. MAX/Moscow Times Days ago Lukashenko demanded answers for the bus attack, accusing Ukraine of seeking to drag his nation into the conflict and that it "will have to pay dearly for that." Throughout the war there's actually been surprisingly little in the way of direct Ukraine-Belarus fighting and confrontation, but this could change. Officials fear this would catapult the over four-year long conflict into a bigger regional war. Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 12:15

Betting Against Ourselves: The Casino-ization Of America Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance Last month I wrote about something that had been building in my mind for years: the realization that active trading was doing more harm than good in my life. I wrote about how I had finally put systems in place to turn my trading and account management over to trusted parties who are far better and more disciplined at it than I am. I had to separate the fact that I feel great about often being an accurate prognosticator on my blog about market trends, but that executing the corresponding trades was simply something I wasn’t good at. Now, thirty days since my last trade, I couldn’t be happier that I made the decision. Admittedly, it hasn’t been incredibly easy, especially because I can’t remove all of my triggers and simply ignore the news, world and current events. I’ve been chugging coffee, reading headlines and trading every morning for the last 20 years. So I don’t expect it to be an easy habit to break. But it’s getting easier, and I’m stepping away from reading every headline, every day, toward putting the phone down and living in the present moment once my work is done and my column is written each morning. And I can’t imagine a better time to undertake this exercise. “The market” was once a symbol of integrity and serious business run by old f*cks in bowties and suits, like the Duke brothers. Now it has become less a mechanism for allocating capital and more a 24-hour Las Vegas freak show carnival of increasingly exotic wagers. Our market has become the pro boxing equivalent of when Screech from Saved by the Bell fought Horshack on Celebrity Boxing. Back in year like 1980, a company had stock. Simple enough. Today you can trade options on the stock, leveraged ETFs tracking the stock, tokenized versions of the stock at 2 a.m., and prediction-market contracts on whether or not Joe Kernen is wearing a toupee when he reports on the stock. Wall Street and Las Vegas used to be different places. Those days are over. And new reporting from The Wall Street Journal confirms it. They reported this week that Charles Schwab is preparing to enter the prediction market business through a partnership with Cboe. According to the report, Schwab customers will soon be able to trade binary-style contracts tied to the performance of the S&P 500. The contracts function much like prediction market wagers: traders make a yes-or-no bet on whether an index finishes above or below a certain level and receive either a fixed payout or nothing at all. In other words, one of the largest and most respected brokerages in America is moving further down the path of turning market outcomes into wager-like products. To be clear, this is not simply a Schwab story, it is a sign of where the entire financial industry is heading. The distinction between investing and gambling is becoming harder and harder to identify. Prediction markets have exploded over the last several years. Sports betting has become ubiquitous. Options volumes continue to reach extraordinary levels. Crypto exchanges offer leverage that would have seemed insane a decade ago. Every event, every opinion, every outcome increasingly becomes something that can be traded. Sometimes it’s tough to remember there’s actual company equity at the bottom of the pile of all this speculative shit somewhere. Last month I wrote: “Every event is now a market. Every opinion is now a wager. Every moment of boredom can be monetized by putting money at risk on your phone.” If anything, I understated the trend. The financial industry sees demand and it is responding exactly the way industries always do: by supplying more product. The problem is that the costs aren’t limited to individual traders. Most discussions about gambling focus on personal responsibility, addiction, and financial hardship. Those concerns are real. We already see rising stories of people using credit cards, personal loans, margin debt, and other borrowed money to fund speculative activity. The American consumer is tapped out, as I detailed a couple weeks ago. Source: Zero Hedge We’ve seen countless examples in crypto, options, sports betting, and meme stocks where people become trapped in cycles of chasing losses and doubling down on increasingly risky positions. But the risks do not stop at the individual level. When enough leverage accumulates inside a system, personal mistakes become market problems. Speculation funded by borrowed money creates fragility. Fragility creates forced selling. Forced selling creates liquidity events. Liquidity events create contagion. The history of financial markets is filled with examples of this dynamic. And as savings dwindles, margin debt as a percentage of GDP is consistently rising. In other words, we’re taking more risk. Gambling more. Investing less. But leverage doesn’t look dangerous during a boom. It looks efficient. It looks sophisticated. It looks profitable. Then something breaks, and when everyone is crowded into the same trades using borrowed money, small problems become trapdoors. And when market dynamics create multi-trillion dolllar trapdoors that are force fed into the indices, mutual funds and the average American’s retirement fund right before this happens, that’s when questions about systemic issues arise. Crypto has already provided multiple examples of this on a relatively small scale. We have watched cascades of liquidations wipe out billions of dollars in value within hours. We have watched exchanges fail, lenders collapse, and leveraged traders evaporate seemingly overnight. This can, and will, happen in equity markets, prediction markets and option markets going forward. And the world we are heading towards is one where prediction markets, binary options, leveraged crypto products, sports betting, and traditional brokerage accounts increasingly overlap and compete for the same attention. I don’t think we fully appreciate the psychological consequences of where we are heading. Twenty-four-hour prediction markets are inherently unhealthy for many people. Human beings were not designed to live inside a perpetual casino. Anyone who has ever been to Vegas for more than 2 days understands this. You arrive healthy, in shape, sober, excited to see friends and maybe place a couple bets on the NFL game, and you leave destitute, broke, 10 pounds heavier, smelling like cigarette smoke and trying to figure out which stripper stole your credit card number (this is a purely hypothetical example, I swear). These platforms don’t just compete for your money. They compete for your attention, your focus, your relationships, your sleep, your peace of mind, and your ability to be present. They monetize uncertainty itself. They thrive off of your loneliness and boredom. The more events become tradable, the more incentive there is to constantly monitor outcomes. The result is a culture where people never disconnect. Every election becomes a market. Every earnings report becomes a wager. Every sporting event becomes an opportunity to speculate. Every idle moment becomes an invitation to check prices, odds, probabilities, and positions. The smartphone becomes both casino and brokerage account. And the “markets” are not regulated at all and are susceptible to massive corruption. You thought a questionable pass interference penalty at the of a playoff NFL game was bad? How about when Coinbase’s imbecilic CEO ended a company conference call by spouting off random words to cash bets for god-knows-who in the prediction markets? He said live on the call: “I was a little distracted because I was tracking the prediction market about what Coinbase will say on their next earnings call. I just want to add here the words Bitcoin, Ethereum, blockchain, staking, and Web3 — to make sure we get those in before the end of the call.” As I noted last month, I’ve seen people trading crypto between rounds at the gym. I’ve seen friends checking futures markets during dinner. I’ve seen twenty-somethings betting every pitch of a baseball game while sitting at a bar. And I’ve been all of those people myself. 🔥 50% OFF FOR LIFE: Using this coupon entitles you to 50% off an annual subscription to Fringe Finance for life: Get 50% off forever When I step back and look at the bigger picture, I can’t help but wonder whether all of this is symptomatic of something much larger. A society doesn’t become stronger by turning every aspect of life into a wager. A society becomes stronger by rewarding patience, discipline, craftsmanship, productivity, delayed gratification, and long-term thinking. Those are the traits that build companies, families, institutions, communities, and civilizations. What worries me is that we’ve spent years moving in the opposite direction. We have normalized endless money printing and financial engineering instead of productive growth. We have rewarded speculation over investment. We have encouraged debt over savings. We have elevated influencers over experts, virality over wisdom, and instant gratification over patience. We’ve built social media platforms designed to monetize outrage, political systems incapable of long-term planning, and financial products that increasingly resemble casino games. And now we’re building twenty-four-hour prediction markets on top of all of it. It’s bad enough bullshit shows like Flavor of Love and The Golden Bachelor exist. It’s toxicity squared when we can bet on the outcome. At some point you have to ask whether we’re creating anything of lasting value or simply inventing new ways to distract ourselves. The frightening part is that every one of these products is marketed as empowerment, democratization and opportunity…but many of them are really just mechanisms for harvesting attention. And the commodity being extracted isn’t just money, it’s your time, focus, peace of mind and energy. To quote Morpheus from The Matrix, it is “…a computer generated dream world, built to keep us under control in order to change a human being into this.” The irony is that the technology that promised to make us smarter often seems to be making us less capable of sitting still, thinking independently, or focusing on what actually matters. That is precisely why I’m grateful for the decision I made last month to stop trading. It was about recognizing that the environment is becoming increasingly engineered to encourage constant participation. And I want no part of it. As I said then, the older I get, the less interested I become in chasing every opportunity and the more interested I become in protecting my time, my health, my relationships, and my peace of mind. The irony is that the more speculation becomes available, the more valuable restraint becomes. The easier it becomes to trade, gamble, wager, predict, hedge, leverage, and speculate on everything, the more important it becomes to simply step back. Because if the trajectory we’re on continues, speculation won’t be confined to casinos, crypto exchanges, or niche prediction market platforms. It’s going to be everywhere. And that’s exactly why I’m thankful I already started walking away. -- QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions. As of May 20, 2026 I personally no longer actively trade (read my story here). My investing/saving is done by recurring contributions mostly to sector ETFs and a few select equities, trusted third parties who oversee my accounts, and advisors. Such advisors or funds, through individual equities, options, index funds, mutual funds, ETFs, or other securities, may have positions in, exposure to, or holdings of names mentioned herein that I know nothing about. Basically, via index funds, ETFs and individual equities it is possible I could own, have exposure to, or not own anything at any point. As of the same date, May 20, 2026, in an attempt to lead a healthier lifestyle, I’ve also excluded myself from fantasy sports, sports betting, online and in-person casinos and prediction markets. And all positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier. The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.     Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 10:30

Swiss Government Discusses Revoking Protections, Benefits For Military-Aged Ukrainians During the opening years of the Russia-Ukraine war European states were quite welcoming to Ukrainian refugees and anyone fleeing the carnage and chaos, but now in the conflict's fifth year the general sentiment among EU populations and governments is changing. Switzerland, once hailed as Europe's most neutral state - and among the most 'welcoming' countries for asylum seekers - is mulling a policy change which would exclude Ukrainian men of military age from protections granted to refugees. The Swiss Federal Council announced in a statement Friday that it has begun consultations over the legal status of some 66,000 Ukrainian nationals who fled to Switzerland after the conflict erupted. Image: Keystone-SDA Welfare assistance and refugee protections are quite good in Switzerland, given individuals receive basic living items as well as government payouts, and can even freely travel in and out of the country. For now, protections are expected to extend to Ukrainians in the country, but there's new talk of revoking this status for men of military age at a moment the Ukrainian military continues to face a severe manpower shortage: The government announced on Friday that, at a national asylum conference in November 2025, the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM), the cantons, cities and municipalities had been tasked with drawing up clear regulations for the future of S protection status. The results of this deliberation are now set out in a concept paper entitled “The Future of S Status”. According to the government, it serves to prepare for three possible scenarios: the continuation of S status; its abolition in the event of a stable ceasefire; and a phasing out of S status in the event of a protracted conflict. Specifically pertaining to men of fighting age, the government is considering "a possible future restriction for Ukrainian men subject to conscription," a new statement reads. "This is because the EU is currently considering an extension of temporary protection with a possible restriction for these men," the country's Federal Council has explained. A final decision could come by the end of the summer, but political pushback is said to be growing. It should be remembered revocation of protected status is something the Zelensky government itself has long asked Western allies to do. It wants the rapid return of military-aged men, at a moment Ukrainian recruiters have resorted to harsh tactics cracking down on what are seen as draft dodgers. EU Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner has also confirmed "This is also what the Ukrainians are asking us to do" - commenting on the question of no longer extending protections to Ukrainian men in EU states. For now, no major policy shifts are expected, but as the war goes on and on, the tone of the conversation has shifted among many European officials. Washington in particular has emphasized that Ukraine's populace must stand up for itself, and has even leaned heavily on Kiev to make the mandatory conscription age younger. Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 09:45

Gabbard Drops Fauci COVID-19 Receipts On Last Day: He Funded The Research, Cooked The Cover Story, Then Lied To Congress Newly declassified documents released Thursday by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard show that a U.S. national laboratory assessed the COVID-19 lab-origin hypothesis as a serious possibility as early as May 2020, as well as evidence of U.S.-funded coronavirus research that included planning for spike-protein modifications, receptor-adaptation experiments, and testing in humanized mice in collaboration with researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The documents also prove that Anthony Fauci lied under oath.  Today, on my final day as Director of National Intelligence, I’m releasing never-before-seen communications and documents exposing how Dr. Fauci provided millions in US taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, worked with politicized elements… pic.twitter.com/ZMdliW4zyS — DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) June 19, 2026 The release, issued on Gabbard’s last day on the job, includes an eight-page May 27, 2020, assessment from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s Z Program. That assessment concluded that “all of the necessary conditions for an accidental release of a laboratory-modified coronavirus - specifically a coronavirus adapted to recognize human cell receptors - were present at the Chinese Wuhan Institute of Virology in mid-to-late 2019.” It assigned equal weight to a laboratory-modification hypothesis and a natural-origin scenario. Screenshot, ODNI release Meanwhile, Recall that while the government was locking us down, Dr. Anthony Fauci and those in his orbit were actively fabricating a 'wet market' narrative that would conceal US research as a possible origin - despite his own advisors initially insisting that COVID-19 looked manmade. In his January 2024 transcribed interview, Fauci was asked about conversations concerning the same three topics - COVID origins, WIV, and EcoHealth. When asked about the CIA, he answered yes: he said he was briefed “once or twice” in a secure NIH facility and also recalled a briefing in a White House situation room. The newly released documents then show a June 4, 2021 briefing involving CIA/WCP personnel, NSC officials, and Fauci, during which Fauci offered views on pangolin research, sick WIV researchers, single-lineage vs. multi-lineage evidence, and recommended scientists for the IC to contact. A separate CIA-context email says that same 40-minute secure video teleconfrenece involved CIA/WCPMC officials and that Fauci gave thoughts on the 4 May 2021 COVID-origin briefing and recommended U.S. scientists to consult. So, he lied.  According to a statement released with the files, "Fauci worked with politicized career leadership in the Intelligence Community (IC) to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’ lab-leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for this dangerous research that caused immeasurable harm and countless lost lives. These documents expose Fauci’s direct role in influencing and manipulating IC assessments on COVID-19, and how Fauci lied to Congress in 2024, when under oath he denied knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research." U.S.-Funded Research and Planning for Coronavirus Manipulation The files include the Year 5 progress report for EcoHealth Alliance’s NIH grant 5R01AI110964-05. Under Specific Aim 3, the project outlined plans to: Sequence spike genes from bat coronaviruses. Create mutants to assess how much further evolution would be needed for efficient use of human ACE2 or other receptors. Conduct receptor-mutant pseudovirus binding assays. Perform infection experiments in cell lines and humanized mice. This research track overlaps with work described in the 2018 DEFUSE proposal, which involved EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina, and Shi Zhengli’s team at WIV. The proposal sought to create chimeric bat coronaviruses with enhanced human infectivity, including consideration of furin cleavage site insertion to improve lung-cell entry, and to test the resulting viruses in humanized mice originally developed in Baric’s lab. A 2016 WIV paper included in the release describes a synthetic shuttle vector system for assembling large DNA fragments, with demonstrated capability up to 31 kilobases. The authors presented the method as a tool for “genome-scale DNA reconstruction,” a technique relevant to synthetic biology and virus engineering. Surveillance work under the same NIH grant reported that 9 of 1,497 rural residents in southern China (0.6%) were seropositive for bat SARS-related or HKU10 coronaviruses. And from leaked emails three years ago: Among other things, the NIH helped fund experiments at WIV that infected genetically engineered mice with “chimeric” hybrids of SARS-related bat coronaviruses in what some scientists have described as unacceptably risky research.  ... Andersen laid them out plainly in an email to Fauci that same evening. “The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (

Poland Revokes Top Award From Zelensky As Row Over Nazi Symbolism Deepens Poland and Ukraine's ties continue to fray, worsening an ongoing diplomatic crisis - despite Warsaw being an 'eastern flank' key NATO ally in the broader Western campaign against Russia.  President ​Karol Nawrocki has just announced the country's highest state honor previously awarded to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been revoked.  "In light of President Volodymyr Zelensky's consent to name one of the units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine 'Heroes of the UPA,"... I have decided to revoke the Order ⁠of ⁠the White Eagle from the President of Ukraine," Nawrocki said in a statement. According to more of the statement: Polish President Karol Nawrocki branded Ukraine's decision late last month to name the unit after the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) "outrageous", "incomprehensible" and "deeply disappointing". For Warsaw, uplifting this name is tantamount to backing a Nazi-orchestrated genocide against the Polish people: For Poland, the UPA, or the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, is responsible for a campaign of genocidal ethnic cleansing in the 1940s that resulted in the deaths of an estimated 100,000 Polish civilians in Volhynia (known as Volyn in Ukrainian and Wołyń in Polish), a historic region with deep Polish and Ukrainian roots. This violence also systematically targeted Jewish survivors who had escaped the Holocaust. Amid the diplomatic dispute sparked by the renaming, the Polish government is still promising not to let the issue steer its thinking on Ukraine's aspirations to join the European Union. It is pledging to remain objective related to examining Ukraine's status. Ironically this highly symbolic diplomatic slap in the face aimed at Kiev comes ahead of a conference on Ukraine's reconstruction in the Polish city of Gdansk. That Poland is still hosting this high-level conference suggests that Poland is not willing to cut off its overall diplomatic and military support to Ukraine amid the war with Russia - but it is perhaps an early sign that things are headed in this eventual direction.  Ukrainian Foreign ​Minister Andrii Sybiha has made his country's outrage known - though is still trying to make nice given it needs the military support - responding to the Polish presidency by saying Warsaw committed ​a "strategic error" in revoking the state award. President of the Republic of Poland Karol Nawrocki's decision regarding the stripping of the Order of the White Eagle from President Zelensky: Decyzja Prezydenta RP Karola Nawrockiego w sprawie odebrania Orderu Orła Białego Prezydentowi Ukrainy Wołodymyrowi Zełenskiemu. pic.twitter.com/8gr1iRhM3y — Kancelaria Prezydenta RP (@prezydentpl) June 19, 2026 "The decision to strip the president of Ukraine ⁠of the Order of the White ​Eagle is a ​strategic ⁠error ‌by ‌the President ⁠of Poland ‌that ​only benefits ⁠Moscow," ⁠Sybiha wrote ⁠on ​Facebook. Poland also has other pressing concerns, not the least of which is the immigration and war refugee issue. Poland has throughout over four years of the Ukraine war had to absorb hundreds of thousands of refugees and war-displaced families. A future where Ukraine could become part of the EU might prove a major drain on Poland's own struggling economy and resources. Tyler Durden Sun, 06/21/2026 - 07:35