Whirlpool Crashes After Iran Shock Sparks "Recession-Level" Appliance Slump

Whirlpool shares crashed as much as 20% in premarket trading after the appliance maker slashed its full-year outlook and posted weaker-than-expected first-quarter results. Management directly blamed the three-month war in the Middle East for triggering a collapse in U.S. appliance demand.

Whirlpool began the earnings release with this statement: "War in Iran resulted in a recession-level industry decline in the U.S. as consumer confidence collapsed in late February and March."

For the first quarter, the maker of refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers, ovens, ranges, cooktops, microwaves, and range hoods missed Bloomberg Consensus estimates across key metrics, underscoring a sharp deterioration in demand and profitability.

Net sales in the quarter came in at $3.27 billion, below the $3.42 billion estimate. North America sales were soft at $2.24 billion, missing expectations of $2.4 billion, while Latin America sales were weak at $774 million, missing estimates of $785.5 million.

The company posted an ongoing loss of 56 cents per share, compared with earnings per share of $1.70 a year earlier. This result was far below analyst expectations of a loss of 36 cents per share.

EBIT, or earnings before interest and taxes, plunged 79% year over year to $44 million, missing the $110.8 million consensus estimate.

Snapshot of 1Q Earnings (courtsey of BBG):

Net sales $3.27 billion, estimate $3.42 billion

• MDA North Amer. Net Sales $2.24 billion, estimate $2.4 billion
• MDA Latin America Net Sales $774.0 million, estimate $785.5 million

Ongoing loss/share 56c vs. EPS $1.70 y/y, estimate EPS 36c

Ongoing EBIT $44 million, -79% y/y, estimate $110.8 million

Snapshot of 2026 forecast (courtsey of BBG):

Sees revenue $15.0 billion, saw $15.3 billion to $15.6 billion, estimate $15.21 billion (Bloomberg Consensus)

Sees ongoing EPS $3.00 to $3.50, saw about $7, estimate $4.84

Sees cash from operating activities about $700 million, saw about $850 million, estimate $763.9 million

Still sees adjusted tax rate about 25%

Shares crashed as much as 20% in premarket trading after first-quarter sales showed weaker demand, mounting margin pressure, and a decline in North American appliance demand. If these losses persist through the cash session, it would be the steepest intraday decline since the October 19, 1987, crash of 21%.

Year to date, shares are already down 24% as of Wednesday's close. The stock is now trading at 2011 levels.

Is management conveniently blaming the U.S.-Iran war? The largest trend impacting home appliance sales has been a frozen housing market over the past several years.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 07:45

Will Today's British 'Midterms' Spark 'Starmageddon' For The Labour Party?

All eyes on UK local elections (Britain's 'Midterms') today.

As JPMorgan's Market Intel desk noted this morning, while the seats up do not influence national policy, Brits have historically used local and regional elections to punish the party in power in Westminster.

Reform UK is expected to come out as the main beneficiary of the elections, with Labour the biggest loser.

The key risk is that Labour’s poor performance causes MPs to push Starmer out in an attempt to improve the party’s standing ahead of 2029 elections.

This could come in the form of a formal leadership challenge or a ministerial resignation that triggers others to follow suit (for the former, Rayner seen as the most likely candidate for now, while Andy Burnham could make another attempt to enter parliament in the summer).

Gilts are especially sensitive to political developments (muscle memory from LDI crisis and the 2024 Autumn Budget) and renewed fiscal concerns could drive further underperformance – risk premia has been building as 30Y yields surged to their highest level since 1998 on Tues, underperforming EA rates by ~35bps since the war.

While risks are skewed bearish for GBP and rates, our economist emphasizes changes to fiscal strategy are not a foregone conclusion.

With the market impact out of the way, LibertyNation.com's Mark Angelides explains below, such small-scale ballots were traditionally focused on garbage collections and potholes, but with the growing disaffection in politics – aimed squarely at the ruling Labour Party and the Conservative Party – politicos and pundits are treating them as a midterm equivalent. And with potentially the biggest defeat for any establishment party ever as the most likely outcome, UK politics may never be the same again.

End of the Line?

Before getting to the almost certain defeat of Sir Keir Starmer’s ruling Labour Party, it’s worth sparing a thought for His Majesty’s loyal opposition, the Conservative Party.

The party of Margaret Thatcher and Winston Churchill, rightly regarded as the most successful political outfit of all time, is on the cusp of no longer being a national party. But how could such a reversal of fortunes happen in a contest that is not even a general election?

As well as in local council elections in large parts of England today, voters are also casting ballots in the devolved parliaments of Scotland and Wales: Holyrood, the Scottish body, and the Welsh Senedd elections. The Labour Party is in the unenviable position of having to defend the lion’s share while contending with historic deficits in overall approval. But the rise of the Reform Party and the reinvigorated Green Party is at the root of the anticipated toppling of the UK’s two great parties.

Reform UK – An Unstoppable Force?

Labour won the general election in a landslide back in 2024, and it has all been downhill since then. Nibbling away at the edges of its supposed “red wall” support in the north of the country is the Reform Party, whose leader, Nigel Farage, made his own parliamentary breakthrough in ’24. Notably, in every single poll for the last 12 months, Reform has placed first – not bad for a new party. And while it was initially thought it was only the Conservatives who were bleeding members, support, and treasure to Reform, the surveys show a clear decline for Labour, too.

Indeed, if a general election were held today, a polling aggregate suggests Reform would be the largest party in Parliament with around 250 seats (out of 650). Second place would go to Conservatives with just 128, and Labour a distant third on only 78 (a loss of 334 seats). This is the backdrop as the two parties that have exchanged power for the last 100 years head into today’s elections – a midterm referendum by another name would smell as sour. But that is the big picture; the local contests are set to be even more damning.

The projections are enough to create panic across Westminster.

Local Elections Matter

Of the almost 5,000 local seats up for grabs, Labour is defending 2,557; polling suggests it will lose between 50% and 75% today.

The Conservatives are defending more than 1,300 and will be lucky to save even a third of that number.

Different parts of the country hold local elections in different years, so Reform currently has zero seats to defend. However, if last year’s elections are any indication, it is likely to score big – with an estimated 1,300 pick-ups. This will mean that not only does it win more seats than any other party, but also more votes.

[ZH: DailySceptic's Mark Littlewood notes that the scale of the apocalypse facing Labour is almost unimaginable. Last year the party lost two thirds of the seats it was defending and it may fare even worse this time. In absolute rather than relative terms, the position is bleaker still. In 2025, it had fewer than 300 councillors up for re-election as the areas voting were largely the Tory shires. This time, over 2,000 seats start in the Labour column and it could be reduced to 600 or even fewer. Swathes of the party’s campaigning infrastructure will be overwhelmed as a turquoise tsunami engulfs the Red Wall. Outside London it may struggle to maintain majority control in any area at all with ‘all out’ elections – although it has sufficiently impregnable majorities to remain in power in a good number of places which elect in ‘thirds’.]

But that’s not the end of the bad news for the big two.

The Green Party has been on the eco-fringes of UK politics for several decades. With a core message on tree-hugging and environmental issues, it failed to make a significant breakthrough. Until now. Headed by new leader Zack Polanski, the party has shifted its focus from the environment to Gaza and has been courting the “independent Palestine” vote among the Muslim voting blocs.

One might assume this was a recipe for electoral disaster, and yet, with sizable, concentrated Muslim enclaves across the country, it is a formula for a certain amount of success.

The Muslim vote has been reliably Labour since it became a bloc. So, while Reform has been taking Labour votes in the traditional working-class heartlands from the right, the Greens are now encroaching on its territory from the left. The Greens are projected to win almost 700 seats in today’s contests.

What does this mean for Starmer?

Parliament on Maneuvers

Sir Keir is arguably the least popular prime minister since records began. His downfall from winning a huge majority in 2024 to being on the outs in 2026 is nothing short of a lesson in failure.

And his own party would have already moved to oust and replace him if it were not for today’s elections.

Unlike Americans, who vote for a president, Brits don't vote for a prime minister but for a party – meaning that the current leading party can have an internal election to jettison an unpopular leader while still remaining the party of government.

So why haven’t they?

The simple answer is that no one wants to be the leader of a party that oversees a crushing local election result. In normal times, that leader must resign, step aside, or be removed by a party vote. Starmer is holding on only because they want him to shoulder the blame for the anticipated losses. And when the dust settles, the smart money says he will be shuffled off to “gardening duty,” while the Labour hopefuls pitch their dreams and schemes.

[ZH: Goldman Sachs base case is that a poor Labour result will not lead to an immediate leadership challenge for a two main reasons:

1) The three most likely leadership contenders (Burnham, Rayner, Streeting) all have recent / current issues limiting their prospects, and

2) A Labour leadership challenge requires at least 20% of the party (81 MPs) to publicly support a new leader – creating a much higher bar relative to the recent Conservative challenges we have seen (requiring just 50 anonymous MPs).

That said, this view is low conviction, acknowledging the massive uncertainty both of the result as well as implications, and therefore they can easily see a scenario where in aftermath the situation snowballs towards a leadership challenge.

We also acknowledge that were Andy Burham a current sitting MP, the situation would likely be much more perilous for Starmer.]

By this time tomorrow, when the ballots are counted, the results declared, and the crying jags finished, the prime minister will effectively be a dead man walking, and the Conservative Party will be a shadow of its former self in constituencies across the country, and maybe even nonexistent in certain parts of the UK.

Who said the pothole and garbage collection elections weren’t worth watching?

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 07:20

Gundlach Warns "Bagholders" Will "Lose Money" In Private Credit As BDCs Slash Asset Values, JPM Faces $500MM Loss In Biggest "Hung" Deal This Year

Add another vocal warning to the chorus singing about the dangers of private credit. 

DoubleLine CEO Jeffrey Gundlach, who has been especially critical of private credit for the past year warning last November that the space “has the same trappings as subprime mortgage repackaging had back in 2006,” raised fresh concerns about financial advisers and other principals who ushered retail investors into private credit and other so-called semi-liquid funds, suggesting they’ve been motivated by high fees as much as by their clients’ interests.

“It’s clear that prospectuses talked about the gating mechanism, but I have a feeling that the financial intermediaries, not all of them of course, but enough of them, didn’t explain,” he said Wednesday on a panel at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills.

The products have been “kept opaque and not granularly described,” he said according to Bloomberg. “That’s why everybody wants their money back: They’re starting to realize they might be the bag-holder.”

Gundlach took issue with private credit firms calling their funds “semi-liquid” in nature. “Semi-liquid is kind of a diabolical name,” Gundlach said. “Half the time it’s liquid. It’s liquid when you don’t want your money, and it’s illiquid when you do want your money.” A little bit like "half cash, half stock", in the parlance of our times.

As documented extensively, private credit firms have been slammed with a wave of redemption requests, a jolt to an industry that had viewed retail investors as a new source of capital to complement institutions; instead it is scrambling to gate them as they seek their money back as cracks have emerged in the private credit architecture. At Milken and elsewhere, asset managers are now questioning the wisdom - or at least, the marketing message - of selling illiquid investments to the masses.

Gundlach also compared today’s private credit market to the boom-and-bust cycles in the dot-com era and in mortgage-backed securities and other derivatives. Risky credit might be able to hide in the private market, he said, noting that the quality in the high-yield public market is much better than it was before the global financial crisis.

“This is gonna be an interesting period because the data points aren’t as frequent as they were with the dot-coms and the mortgage market,” Gundlach said. “I don’t know what systemic means, but people are going to lose money here.”

They certainly are, and today the firm at the epicenter of the private credit crisis, Blue Owl, reminded us of that when two of its private credit funds bought back $85 million of shares as volatility in technology markets and a selloff in publicly traded loans brought down their value. 

The firm cut the value of its $14.1 billion technology-focused business development fund by about 5% to $16.49 a share in the three months ended March 31, according to a filing Wednesday. The value of its $15.3 billion Blue Owl Capital Corporation, fell almost 3% to $14.41 a share.

Ever a cheerful cheerleader for his struggling product, Blue Owl co-president Craig Packer said underlying credit trends remained sound for both funds. “We continue to see solid credit performance across our portfolio of durable, mission-critical businesses with many already taking steps to adapt to the evolving AI environment,” Packer said in a statement, referring to Blue Owl Technology Finance Corp.

Blue Owl noted that share buybacks had helped boost the net asset value of the funds in the quarter.  At the same time, the firm which has been facing a liquidity crunch, cut the dividend at the bigger fund to 31 cents a share from 37 cents, citing an “extended period” of declining rates and lower risk premiums. The total dividend for the technology fund was flat at 40 cents.

Blue Owl, which earlier this year precipitated the crisis in the $1.8 trillion private credit market and gated redemptions at two other private credit funds when faced with an unprecedented $5.6 billion in withdrawal requests sending shares to a record low last month, on Wednesday said it had reduced the leverage at its biggest publicly traded fund, giving it flexibility to act fast when buying opportunities come up in an improving market for lenders.

Blue Owl wasn't the only one to suffer from mismarked loans. A private credit fund overseen by Apollo Global reported a quarterly loss, citing declining valuations amid market volatility and weakness in some specific deals. 

MidCap Financial Investment Corp., a business development company focused on direct lending, reported a net loss per share of 30 cents, compared to a 32 cent gain for the same period a year ago, it said in a statement. Net asset value per share fell to $13.82 compared to $14.18 at the end of December, missing analyst expectations.

BDC earnings are drawing sharper scrutiny as managers grapple with exposure to software companies confronting the disruptive potential of AI. Oaktree Capital Management said this week that it cut the value of one of its private credit funds by almost 4% as the firm marked down its software assets, while Sixth Street Specialty Lending reduced its dividend and reported a decline in net asset value per share.

“Our net loss for the quarter was driven by a combination of unrealized valuation adjustments reflecting broader credit spread widening, as well as credit weakness in certain positions,” MFIC Chief Executive Officer Tanner Powell said in a statement.

Loans marked as non-accrual - typically meaning the borrower missed debt payments - climbed to about $167 million on an amortized cost basis, from $48.5 million in the same period a year ago, according to a presentation. The firm said that its software portfolio had a fair value of $327 million, accounting for about 11% of its total holdings. MidCap is “highly selective” on those investments, avoiding categories where workflows are easily automated, it said. 

Meanwhile, in a sign even more pain is yet to come for the sector, Bloomberg reported that a group of banks led by JPMorgan is expected to shoulder paper losses of more than $500 million on a debt deal for software firm Qualtrics Internationa. The banks are preparing to use their own balance sheets to fund $5.3 billion of debt for Qualtrics’ acquisition of Press Ganey Forsta. That would make it the biggest “hung” deal in the leveraged finance market this year.

According to Bloomberg, the lenders decided not to launch a formal offering after pausing early discussions on the deal in March, when investors in the leveraged loan and junk-bond markets balked because of Qualtrics’ exposure to the software rout. Back then, the roughly $1.5 billion Qualtrics loan due in 2030 had fallen to about 86 cents on the dollar, down from near par levels just one month earlier. At those levels, investors would find it more attractive to buy existing debt rather than participate in a new issuance, which would also sharply push up borrowing costs for the company.

The financing effort, led by JPMorgan, was tied to Qualtrics' $6.75 billion acquisition of Press Ganey Forsta, with the package expected to include a $3.3 billion leveraged loan and another $2 billion across junk bonds or private credit.

Qualtrics, which makes online survey tools, has emerged as one of the highest-profile examples of the pain plaguing software firms at the heart of the private credit crisis, as investors reassess business models across the industry given the rapid advances in artificial intelligence.

The reason why JPMorgan capitulated on laucnhing a formal offering is because the existing term loan is currently trading at about 84 cents on the dollar, creating a hurdle too big to overcome when pricing any new deal.

Banks typically provide bridge financing commitments to support acquisitions with the intention to sell the debt on to institutional investors as part of a syndication process, and earn a fee for doing so. They try to offload the borrowings quickly - before the transaction closes - because getting stuck with the debt on their balance sheets means they can’t commit that capacity to new deals.

In the case of Qualtrics, the company imploded much faster than anyone had expected, stiffing the bank syndicate with massive paper losses.

Qualtrics’ acquisition of Press Ganey, an online survey and data analytics business, is expected to close as soon as this month. Banks are discussing a number of potential structural changes with PE sponsor Silver Lake to make the deal more palatable to investors, and plan to bring the debt offering to the market at a later date, arguably in hopes that the current market euphoria lasts long enough to find a new, naive batch of buyers who would be willing to take on the banks' balance sheet risk. Should that happen, it’s possible that some of the paper losses banks will have to book when funding the Qualtrics deal will be reversed once they bring the transaction back to market.

Qualtrics is the biggest deal to have run into trouble this year. In February, a Deutsche Bank-led group was unable to sell about $1.2 billion of loans supporting an acquisition by Thoma Bravo-backed Conga Corp., another software business. More recently, banks led by UBS financed the tie-up of two logistics firms after pausing early talks to offload a $765 million loan to investors.

And as more and more firms reveal just how badly they mismarked their books over the years in hopes of attracting retail investors with mark-to-model gains which have in retrospect turned out to be fictitious, some are taking proactive steps to restore confidence in the space. Apollo is one of them: the alternative asset manager plans to offer investors daily valuations for its private-credit funds by the end of September, a move that could help ease worries about the health of an opaque world of lending.

The private-market giant disclosed its plans Wednesday during a call with analysts after reporting its first-quarter results.

“This is the beginning of standardization across this marketplace,” Chief Executive Marc Rowan said on the call reported by the WSJ.

Since most private investment funds provide valuations of their assets to investors on a quarterly basis, the investing public has to wait at least three months to get an updated sense of how the portfolio is performing. The marks (or valuations) are used to calculate fees and give investors a sense of their unrealized returns. Unlike with stocks or public debt, investors don’t have real-time updates on how their investments are faring.

Rowan said the firm would observe other trades, comparable assets and market trends to produce a price for assets. Then again, if all Apollo does is merely spew out what some excel model thinks the loan book is worth daily instead of every three months, nothing at all will change unless the actual marking process is also fixed.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 06:55

My morning train WFH reads:

• I Asked ChatGPT to Manage a Stock Portfolio. Here’s How It Did. What followed was a monthslong back-and-forth on everything from tariffs to leveraged funds . Spoiler: it picked momentum and got beaten by a bad market. Useful as a reality check on the AI-as-PM pitch deck. I planned to test it for a few weeks. (Wall Street Journal)

• Storied Toolmaker Closes Its Last Hometown Plant—and Blames Its Tape Measures: WHat a bullshit excuse — Stanley Black & Decker says fewer buyers want the Connecticut plant’s single-sided tape measures, preferring double-sided ones made abroad. (Wall Street Journal) but see what really happened Your Power Tools Got Worse on Purpose: The 2010 merger of Stanley Works and Black & Decker created a company that already owned DeWalt. From there they went on an acquisition spree that should have built an empire. Instead it built a bloated holding company drowning in debt and leadership turnover. (Worse on Purpose)

• The Fastest V-Shaped Recovery Ever: First semis, then software; Peak Social Media; Your SaaSflation Is My Opportunity. (It’s time to build.)

• Demand destruction vs fuel-superseding infrastructure: In starting this stupid, unforgivable war, Trump has vastly accelerated the process of demand destruction. Rather than buying American oil, the whole world has undertaken a simultaneous, rapid, irreversible shift to electrical substitutes for fossil fuel applications, from induction tops to balcony solar to ebikes and EVs: Doctorow on why building the alternative is more durable than punishing the incumbent. Energy-transition strategy as policy aikido. (Pluralistic)

• Scientists Are Starting to Unlock the Nanoscale Secrets of the Immune System: Immunologist Daniel Davis detailed the ways in which new technologies are enabling a better understanding of the human immune system. On the molecular-scale reckoning happening in immunology and the therapeutic implications are years out, but the science is now. (Wired)

• ‘The Most Bipartisan Issue Since Beer’: Opposition to Data Centers: Liberals and conservatives, finally united — by NIMBYism over the AI build-out. The grid math, water draw, and tax breaks are uniting people who never agree. (New York Times)

• The unflattering secrets revealed so far in Elon Musk’s latest legal feud: Shira Ovide digs through the court filings in Musk vs. Altman / OpenAI for what’s already embarrassing for Musk. Hundreds of court filings have revealed cringey texts, emails or private diary entries of Musk, Sam Altman, other OpenAI founders and other public figures. (Washington Post)

• A Stanford Experiment to Pair 5,000 Singles Has Taken Over Campus: A student built a matchmaking algorithm that has consumed the school—and highlighted the challenges of finding love for high achievers. (Wall Street Journal)

• F.D.A. Blocked Publication of Research Finding Covid and Shingles Vaccines Were Safe: The agency’s scientists and data contractors reviewed millions of patient records for studies that were pulled back before release. Suppressing favorable safety data because it conflicts with political messaging is its own kind of malpractice. The institutional rot continues to surface. The agency’s scientists and data contractors reviewed millions of patient records for studies that were pulled back before release. (New York Times)

• Work Won’t Love You Back: Greta Rainbow on ‘The Devil Wears Prada 2’ For those who’ve seen every Met Gala fit yet crave another fashion fix, the writer reports from Times Square on the sequel’s view of labor, love, and, of course, looks. The smarter take on the sequel — what it accidentally says about the labor economics of the prestige magazine world. (Filmmaker) see also That’s All: A Guide to Every Easter Egg in The Devil Wears Prada 2: For those keeping score on the sequel. Pure entertainment, but a useful index of where pop-culture nostalgia currently sits. From celebrity cameos to that emotional ending, a spoiler-filled rundown of references to the original film and special guests joining the sequel. (Vanity Fair)

Be sure to check out our Master’s in Business interview this weekend with Howard Lindzon, known as “The Larry David of Finance.” He is General Partner at the seed fund, Social Leverage, he was one of the first seed investors in Robinhood, which IPOd at $30B in 2021, eToro, Manscaped, and Beehiiv. Previously, he founded Wallstrip, a daily online video show acquired by CBS (2007). He also co-founded Stocktwits, which pioneered the “cashtag.” Recognized by Institutional Investor as a “Super Angel;” his podcast is Panic with Friends.

 

The Iran war is accelerating the shift away from fossil fuels

Source: Paul Krugman

 

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Half Of Vienna Secondary School Students Are Now Muslim As Cultural Tensions Grow In Classrooms

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix news,

Almost half of students in Vienna’s public middle schools are now Muslim, according to new figures from the Vienna Education Directorate, marking the latest sign of a rapid demographic and cultural shift inside the Austrian capital’s classrooms.

The data, cited by Heute, shows that Muslim students account for 49.4 percent of children in Vienna’s public middle schools — just short of an absolute majority. Across the city’s public compulsory schools more broadly, including elementary, middle, special needs, and polytechnic schools, Muslim students now make up 42 percent, up from 41.2 percent in the previous school year.

Catholic students, once the dominant group in the city, now account for just 16.7 percent of children in the public schools included in the figures. Orthodox students make up 14.2 percent, while children with no religious affiliation account for 23.2 percent.

The figures also reveal a stark divide between Vienna’s public and private schools.

In private schools, Catholics remain the largest group at 45.39 percent, followed by students with no religious affiliation at 25.1 percent and Orthodox students at 10.6 percent. Muslim children account for just 7.6 percent of students in Vienna’s private schools.

Taken together, across both public and private schools, Muslim students now form the largest single group at 38.3 percent. Even when Catholic and Orthodox children are combined, they reach only around 33.6 percent.

The numbers reveal how the city’s public schools are becoming the front line of a much broader cultural transformation. Earlier this year, Remix News reported that more than half of first-grade students in Vienna were listed as Muslim for the first time, while separate reporting from Profil described one secondary school where a Christian boy was allegedly the only Christian in his first-grade class.

At that school, 230 of the 390 students were Muslim, while 99 percent of the students had an immigration background. Only five children in the entire school were reported to have no migrant background. The Christian boy was reportedly mocked by classmates and called a “pig,” while teachers described classrooms marked by language barriers, social problems, and growing religious pressure.

The school was said to include students speaking 32 different languages, with Turkish, Arabic, and Chechen among the most common home languages. One teacher said that the problems were so extensive that every class could use its own social worker.

Concerns over integration have also spilled into the school canteen. In October 2025, the Austrian Farmers’ Association warned that pork dishes such as schnitzel, ham noodles, and roast pork had become rare or had disappeared entirely from some Viennese school menus. The association said some schools now offered only vegetarian meals or meat dishes without pork, citing a mother who said her daughter could choose only between vegetarian food and “pork-free” food.

“No one has to eat pork, but it must be offered. Pork is part of our culinary culture,” said Corinna Weisl, director of the Farmers’ Association.

The group’s president, Georg Strasser, said preserving choice was the key issue, arguing that “diversity on the plate means freedom of choice for everyone.”

For some parents, however, the question is whether public schools can still deliver basic education. In February, Remix News reported the case of a Vienna mother who withdrew her daughter from a public primary school in Rudolfsheim-Fünfhaus after two years, saying only four children in the class spoke German fluently.

The mother, identified as Sabine G., said teachers spent much of the day translating instructions and managing basic communication rather than teaching. By the end of the first school year, she said her daughter still could not recite the alphabet, while several classmates had to repeat the grade.

She also said her daughter had begun refusing pork after being told it was “unclean” and had started rejecting certain summer clothing.

“I felt my child was being strongly influenced,” she said.

Teachers’ representatives have voiced similar concerns. In November last year, Thomas Krebs of the Christian Trade Unionists Group warned that some students and parents were increasingly unwilling to learn German or accept local values. He said female teachers had faced disrespect, insults, and even physical assaults from male students and parents, and claimed that religious rules were often being placed above Austria’s national curriculum.

“Our educational principles are often rejected. For example, religious content is prioritized over the content of the curriculum prescribed by Austrian law,” Krebs said. He called for mandatory German-language instruction and compulsory integration programs outside school.

The cultural tensions have also reached school leadership. In December, Christian Klar, headmaster of the Franz Jonas European School in Vienna-Floridsdorf, used his book “How Do We Save Our Children’s Future?” to warn of what he called a growing “clash of cultures and religions” in the classroom.

Klar cited the case of a gay teacher at a public elementary school whose sexuality prompted a Muslim father to demand his removal. The school refused to dismiss or transfer the teacher, but allowed the father’s son to change classes. Klar called the decision “de-escalating” but questioned what precedent it set.

“When is it time to say ‘Stop!’? I think we should have done that a long time ago!” he said.

The school figures reflect wider demographic changes across Vienna. In January, Statistics Austria data showed that 40.5 percent of babies born in the capital did not have Austrian citizenship, double the share recorded two decades earlier. In districts such as Favoriten, Ottakring, and Rudolfsheim-Fünfhaus, the figure has passed 50 percent.

At the same time, more than 44 percent of Vienna’s roughly 16,700 first-graders reportedly lacked sufficient German to follow lessons. In the 2018/2019 school year, the share was 30 percent. Officials have noted that around 60 percent of those children were born in Austria, intensifying concerns that poor German language skills are being passed on inside migrant communities rather than solved by birth and schooling in the country.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 06:30

UK Jet Fuel Rationing Risks Emerge As Goldman Warns Of "Extreme Physical Tightness"

Brent crude futures briefly tumbled below $100 a barrel on Wednesday morning after an Axios report indicated the Trump administration and Tehran were working toward a one-page memorandum of understanding to end the war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Still, any near-term peace deal would not immediately normalize the badly fractured global energy supply chains. Crude products markets remain physically tight, and the damage from months of disrupted tanker flows will take time to unwind. Some countries may already be entering a critical point, with jet fuel and diesel inventories at risk of being drawn down to dangerously low levels in the months ahead.

Goldman analysts, led by Michele Della Vigna, warned about diesel and jet fuel availability in Europe ahead of the summer months, noting that "extreme physical tightness in summer/early autumn" is a scenario they are forecasting.

"We believe jet fuel prices in Europe will need to remain elevated to redirect cargoes from other regions, covering 50% of the shortfall in disrupted volumes from the Middle East through Hormuz and from Asian exporters no longer exporting to Europe," Della Vigna told clients.

Della Vigna, the head of EMEA natural resources research at Goldman, pointed out that "some countries (the UK in particular) could end up with extremely low inventories, and it's possible that rationing measures would be put in place to slow inventory draw."

Readers have been well informed about the looming jet fuel crisis set to hit Europe this summer (read here & here & here & here), as well as JPMorgan's March take on how the energy crisis is spreading across regions (read here).

As we detailed on Tuesday, President Trump's push to reopen the Hormuz chokepoint at the start of the week likely reflects the beginning of a one-month countdown to accelerated energy chaos if the critical waterway is not reopened. The risk is no longer confined to crude markets. Prolonged disruption through Hormuz is spreading into refined-product supply chains, with Europe's jet fuel and diesel inventories facing the brunt of physical tightness heading into summer and early autumn.

Della Vigna estimated that Europe faces a gross jet fuel loss of about 500,000 barrels a day from Gulf-area exporters and Asian tankers transiting Hormuz, and assumes that half of that shortfall can be offset by redirected U.S. and West African energy flows, leaving a net loss of approximately 250,000 barrels a day. For diesel, he assumes the full 220,000 barrels-a-day loss is absorbed by European stocks.

Exhibit 3: We estimate a gross jet fuel loss of c.500 kb/d from Middle East Gulf and Asian exporters and we show the sensitivity to different % of exports subtitutions coming from other regions

He singled out the UK as having the highest-risk jet fuel market because it is Europe's largest net importer of jet fuel, at about 195,000 barrels a day, and lacks proper reserves. He warned that UK commercial stocks could fall below 10 days of cover by midsummer, raising the risk of rationing, which in turn would impact commercial flights.

Della Vigna continued:

Under our commodities teams' base case (Gulf normalization in June), we see European jet fuel inventories - on commercial stocks alone, excluding government emergency reserves - falling to the IEA's critical 23-day shortage threshold by end-May and breaching it in June, slightly more aggressive than the IEA's own assessment as we account for the disruption of Asian-origin cargoes transiting the Strait.

Under an adverse scenario (normalization delayed to July), stocks could be depleted entirely by year-end (Exhibit 1). Diesel faces a more gradual erosion given lower ME import dependence.

At the country level, the UK appears most at risk of rationing (Exhibit 4), with commercial stocks falling below 10 days of cover by mid-summer given high starting import dependence and no government reserves. Net exporters such as the Netherlands and Greece are more insulated but would still be affected through higher prices.

Exhibit 1: Jet Fuel is the tightest oil product market

Exhibit 4: For jet fuel, the UK is most at risk with low inventories and high reliance on imports

To offset losses, Europe has drawn in more jet fuel and barrels from Nigeria's Dangote refinery, but Della Vigna said prices will need to remain elevated to redirect even more tankers to the energy-stricken continent.

Bloomberg's Javier Blas notes, "US refiners are going gangbusters trying to solve the global jet-fuel shortage (and to cash in record high margins)." 

CHART OF THE DAY: US refiners are going gangbusters trying to solve the global jet-fuel shortage (and to cash in record high margins).

The chart shows seasonal jet-fuel output from 2000-to-date (2026 is top line in blue). The bottom outliers are 2020 and 2021 during Covid. pic.twitter.com/fllcX6EM5y

— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) May 6, 2026

On the topic of airlines, he said carriers on the continent have already slashed summer capacity by low single digits, while Middle East schedules have been reduced by high double digits through late June.

Exhibit 8: Low single-digit capacity cuts on EU short-haul post conflict

Exhibit 9: Similar cuts on Transatlantic capacity

It's clear Europe has a jet fuel problem. And this won't be solved by Brussels' weird obsession with 'green' energy. 

Professional subscribers can read the full "Stress testing European jet fuel and diesel availability this summer" at our Marketdesk.ai portal. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 05:45

Americans Will Foot The Bill For Germany's New Drug Price Controls

Authored by Drew Johnson via PJMedia.com,

Germany just found a new way to lower its own healthcare costs: make Americans pay more.

In late April, German policymakers proposed changes that cap spending growth, restrict care, and force drugmakers to provide steep discounts.

These changes are supposed to save Germany money. But drugmakers still need to recoup the high costs of research and development. When a country like Germany suppresses the prices it pays for innovative medicines, those costs don't disappear — they simply shift elsewhere.

And because many other wealthy countries use similar price controls, that cost burden is increasingly falling on the United States.

The global imbalance is already stark.

American patients generate roughly three-quarters of global pharmaceutical profits despite accounting for just a quarter of global GDP. In effect, the United States is underwriting much of the world's drug innovation while patients abroad pay far less for the same treatments.

President Trump has spent months trying to end this freeloading by pressing other countries to pay fair value for new treatments — and he shouldn't let Germany get away with refusing to cooperate.

Foreign mooching off American medical innovation is a real and longstanding problem. Wealthy governments around the world — and especially in Europe — set drug prices by decree, effectively refusing to pay manufacturers fair value for treatments they spend years, sometimes decades, developing.

As a result, drugmakers disproportionately rely on revenue from the United States to sustain research and development. While patients abroad often pay cut-rate prices, Americans pay far more for the same meds. That imbalance is fundamentally unfair.

Of course, America can't simply stop paying for innovation. If U.S. leaders copied other countries' price-control tactics — as Democrats have often suggested — companies would struggle to earn returns on new research, and global development of life-saving new drugs would grind to a halt.

That leaves only one viable solution: force other countries to start paying their fair share for innovation.

President Trump has made progress on this front by pressuring wealthy allies directly. In April, for instance, he convinced the United Kingdom to increase its spending on new medicines. The deal proved that a firm U.S. stance could yield meaningful results.

But Germany is now testing America's resolve. Germany already spends far less than the United States on medicines, even when factoring in its smaller population and economy. Its new plan will deepen that divide by imposing strict limits on health spending growth and taking money directly from manufacturers to fund drug coverage.

Soon, Germany will pay even less than it already does for innovative medicines. The result will be higher costs concentrated in the U.S. market — or reduced investment in new cures. Either way, American patients will bear the burden.

And if Washington fails to respond, its broader effort to end foreign free-riding will lose credibility. Other countries will assume that they can continue to free-ride without facing consequences.

The United States needs to make a stand.

Fortunately, the Trump administration has real negotiating leverage. As the recent deal with the UK shows, U.S. trade officials have plenty of tools to obtain cooperation from foreign governments. They should use these tools to ensure fair pricing, knock down barriers to market access, and make clear that continued freeloading will come with consequences. This can and should start with a Section 301 investigation of other countries' drug-pricing policies. Such a move would expose unfair practices and empower U.S. officials to impose trade penalties, forcing allies like Germany to pay fair value for innovative medicines.

Ultimately, policymakers should ensure that all of America's allies pay their fair share. President Trump ended a different form of international leeching last year when he convinced NATO members to spend a greater percentage of their GDP on defense. If U.S. negotiators can secure similar spending targets for innovative medicines, they can end free-riding for good — and allow drugmakers to lower prices at home without hurting innovation.

American patients shouldn't have to subsidize the world's medicine cabinet. The policies of countries like Germany have inflated U.S. drug costs for too long.

By standing up to Germany now, President Trump can reaffirm that the United States no longer tolerates foreign freeloading on American medicines, while helping to reduce costs for American patients and preserving the breakthroughs they depend on.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 05:00

Medvedev: Russia Must Instill 'Animal Fear' In EU Warmongers As Goodwill Measures Futile

Head of the Russian Security Council and former president, Dmitry Medvedev, has penned an article ahead of the 81st anniversary of Soviet victory over Nazi Germany, or Russia's V-Day, lambasting Europe's new path of reckless militarization. As widely featured in state media, he argued that the "animal fear" of unacceptable losses will prevent Germany and the wider "United Europe" from launching another attack against Russia.

He wrote, "It is no secret that an attempt is being made to impose on us the doctrine of ‘peace through strength’. Our response then can only be 'the security of Russia through the animal fear of Europe.'"

Anadolu Agency

He stressed that "neither persuasion, nor demonstration of good intentions, nor goodwill and unilateral confidence-building steps should be our tools to prevent a big massacre."

"Only the formation of an understanding among Germany and the United Europe supporting it of the inevitability of their receiving unacceptable damage in the event of the implementation of the Barbarossa 2.0 plan," Medvedev concluded.

RT reviews and pinpoints why Medvedev is taking direct aim at Berlin in his written piece: 

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz openly vowed to turn the German military into the “strongest conventional army in Europe” in a speech just days after the world marked the 80th anniversary of the fall of the Third Reich last May.

Last month, the German Defense Ministry unveiled a plan to reach this goal and field 460,000 combat-ready personnel by 2039, the 100th anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s invasion of Poland. German and other EU officials repeatedly cited 2029 as the first stage deadline to be “war-ready” for a potential conflict with Russia.

It is true that even after 4+ years of grinding war in eastern Europe, the Western powers have yet to intervene directly by sending their own forces, and after losses on both the Ukrainian and Russian sides have probably been in the hundreds of thousands.

The conflict is largely stalemated, with Russian forces in the east having had a very slow but steady, piecemeal momentum over the past year.

However, Ukraine's drone strikes deep inside Russia have been devastating of late, inflicting serious damage on Russian oil refineries - in some cases hitting key sites multiple times, with Russia's anti-air defenses appearing powerless to stop these attack waves.

The Moscow region itself has been coming under repeat drone attack. While these operations have little or no impact on the frontline situation in the Donbass, Kiev hopes to inflict serious costs on the Russian government and population, the latter which is surely growing tired and weary of the war.

But Medvedev's point is also that if broader conflict with Europe opens one day, the European powers won't be able to find an offramp before absorbing immense losses - no matter their efforts to revamp and expand their respective defense industries.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 04:15

Age Verification PsyOp? Kids Bypass UK Government Tech With Fake Moustaches

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

The UK government’s much-hyped age verification system for social media has been reduced to a joke overnight – and the punchline is being delivered by schoolkids armed with makeup pencils and fake facial hair.

A damning new report from Internet Matters reveals that more than a third of UK children have already figured out how to dodge the latest “safeguards” imposed under the draconian Online Safety Act.

Methods include entering fake birthdays, borrowing logins, and – most hilariously – drawing on fake moustaches to fool facial age estimation tech. One parent admitted catching her son using an eyebrow pencil; the system promptly verified him.

The UK government’s age verification checks have been brought down by children wearing fake moustache’s

Brilliant pic.twitter.com/FvSAiKaZ6r

— Basil the Great (@BasilTheGreat) May 5, 2026

This comes as ministers double down on plans to restrict or outright ban social media access for under-16s. Just days ago, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson and junior minister Olivia Bailey confirmed the government will impose “some form of age or functionality restrictions” regardless of whether a full ban is enacted.

A national consultation on the policy closes later this month, with pilots already running in hundreds of homes testing bans, time limits, and digital curfews.

But the farce unfolding in real time shows exactly why these measures were always doomed to fail – or, more cynically, why they were designed to fail.

I suspect it’s fake news so they can push for ID verifications

— Fellow Noticer (@Sendem_Bach) May 5, 2026

Either the architects of this scheme are completely incompetent, or this is a deliberate ploy to make the whole thing look ridiculous.

Why? To curtail resistance and downplay the inevitable next step: mandatory digital ID.

Age verification, or more properly defined as "identity verification," was designed to fail, so that the government could push for a full blown digital ID system.

The people behind this are utterly dastardly and machiavellian in their lust for total power over their fellow Man.

— NPC Knuckles (@KnucklesNp26684) May 5, 2026

Eventually there will be no work-around for any of us unfortunately

— Gabhán (@OffgridIreland) May 5, 2026

We’ve seen this playbook before. When Apple began forcing iPhone users to prove their age with government ID or lose unrestricted internet access, we warned it was the thin end of the wedge.

The government’s digital ID scheme is already being rolled out. A “dystopian experiment in mass surveillance,” with critics warning it will make proving your identity online unavoidable for everything from banking to browsing.

And it’s not just Britain. The EU is charging ahead with its own war on online freedom, forcing age verification and going after VPNs in the name of “saving the children” while quietly building the infrastructure for continent-wide censorship and tracking.

Commission Urges Member States to Implement EU Age Verification Apphttps://t.co/F3eYpQfaoO

The EU has moved to protect children from harmful and inappropriate online content. On Wednesday, the EU Commission adopted a recommendation urging Member States to accelerate the roll...

— eurotoday (@eurotoday_org) May 5, 2026

Just coincidentally, the EU’s own age verification system was defeated in minutes after it was soft launched in April. So now, of course, there needs to be a further crackdown.

Digital ID systems always promise security and always deliver breaches. The EU's new age verification app got hacked in under two minutes. Passport photos were stored unencrypted. PIN protection was bypassed with a text editor. Von der Leyen called it "technically ready." Every…

— Reclaim The Net (@ReclaimTheNetHQ) April 19, 2026

This was never about protecting kids. They don’t care about kids. It’s about control. Every failed “safety” measure provides the perfect excuse to demand even stricter verification – biometric scans, national digital IDs, device-level monitoring.

The moustache kids aren’t the problem; they’re exposing the con.

In the US, President Trump has already drawn a line in the sand, declaring war on the Euro-style censorship machine and vowing to smash any UK-EU internet crackdown that threatens free speech.

While the UK government chases headlines with performative “child safety” gestures that collapse under the weight of a 12-year-old with a makeup pencil, the real threat isn’t social media – it’s the authoritarian apparatus being built in its name.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 03:30

Visualizing The Stunning Global Fertility Divide

A widening gap is emerging in global birth rates.

This chart, via Visual Capitalist's Niccolo Conte, shows population-weighted total fertility rates (TFR) across major world regions, based on data from the UN World Population Prospects 2024 Revision, and how they compare to the 2.1 replacement level.

While Africa remains far above this threshold, most of the world, including Asia, Europe, and the Americas, has already fallen below it.

This split highlights where future population growth is likely to be concentrated.

Africa Stands Apart

Africa’s fertility rate of 4.0 children per woman is the highest of any region. It is nearly double the global average of 2.2 and close to three times Europe’s rate of 1.4.

With a rapidly growing population base, Africa is expected to drive a significant share of global population growth in the coming decades.

Higher fertility rates are often linked to younger populations, lower urbanization, and differences in access to education and healthcare.

Below Replacement in Most Regions

Many parts of the world now have fertility rates below the replacement level of 2.1. Asia, North America, and South America each sit at 1.7, while Europe trails at 1.4.

These levels point to aging populations, slower natural population growth, and potential workforce pressures over time. In many countries, immigration and family-support policies are becoming more important parts of the demographic outlook.

Population Weight Matters

Asia accounts for 54% of the global population, meaning its relatively low fertility rate has an outsized influence on the global average.

By contrast, regions like Oceania and the Middle East have higher fertility rates but much smaller populations. This helps explain why the global average remains at 2.2 even as most major regions fall below replacement.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out When Will the Global Population Reach Its Peak? on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 02:45

Is It Time For Von Der Leyen To Go?

Via Remix News,

Amidst continued fears regarding Putin attacking beyond Ukraine and economic uncertainty caused by the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz, Brussels is reportedly beginning to grumble, i.e., look for someone to blame and remove.

Now, according to a report by Finnish public service media Yle, cited by Világgazdaság, voices are growing to remove the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen.

Several European leaders, as well as NATO officials, have long warned that Moscow may potentially attack NATO states, which is why there has been a continued push for support for Ukraine to prevail in its war with Russia.

In the event of such a scenario, where Putin looks to further his ambitions and attack inside NATO, rapid and effective cooperation between European countries will be crucial, which is why, according to this recent report, some are wondering if von der Leyen is the right person for the job.

One name that has been put forth for “European war leader” is Finnish president, Alexander Stubb, an independent known for seeking greater EU integration and a higher profile for the EU in international policymaking.

The suggestion was also reportedly confirmed by defense expert Line Rindvig, who believes that the Finnish president may be particularly suitable for such a role.

The Finnish president is even said to have served as a “quasi-European representative” on several occasions in discussions on support for Ukraine.

Rindvig has actively been assisting Finland to boost its military defense capabilities in light of lessons learned from Ukraine.

He says that the Nordic country is at the forefront of preparations in Europe, which he attributes in large part to Stubb’s diplomatic activity and international acceptance.

He is, according to the expert, a good bet for leading broader European cooperation.

Significantly, Stubb also enjoys good relations with U.S. President Donald Trump, which is key for transatlantic coordination.

Rindvig even pointed to their closeness being aided by a shared interest in golf.

As the EU seeks to navigate its role in a world dominated by major powers and their wars, the right person at the helm will be critical if it ever wants a seat at the table — to discuss Ukraine, as well as NATO, foreign policy, and other economic matters.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 02:00

Russia Calls On Foreign Embassies To Evacuate Diplomats From Ukrainian Capital

Russia is warning that the Ukrainian capital could face unprecedented aerial bombing, and is taking the somewhat unprecedented step of issuing evacuation orders for bystanders in Kiev.

Russia's Foreign Ministry said Wednesday it warned foreign diplomatic missions to evacuate staff from the Ukrainian capital ahead of a potential large-scale strike if Ukraine attempts to disrupt Russia's May 9 Victory Day commemorations.

via Associated Press

Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, speaking in a video posted on Telegram, called on diplomats to take seriously a Defense Ministry warning issued Monday about retaliation in response to any Ukrainian attack linked to the commemorations and the Red Square parade.

"The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs strongly urges the authorities of your country…to treat this statement with the utmost responsibility and ensure the timely evacuation from the city of Kyiv of the personnel of diplomatic and other representations in connection with the inevitability of a retaliatory strike on Kyiv by Russia’s Armed Forces," Zakharova said.

Zakharova charged that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently made "aggressive and threatening statements" about disrupting the commemorations during Monday remarks at a European Political Community meeting in Armenia.

"Several EU countries were present," she said. "None of them reprimanded the ringleader of the Kyiv regime."

Here's what Zelensky had said:

"It will be the first time in many, many years they cannot afford military equipment and they fear drones may buzz over Red Square. This is telling."

Last year similar back-and-forth threats and rhetoric surrounded the lead-up to Russia's V-day celebrations, but little in the way of direct threats or hostile drone activity over Moscow materialized at the time.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry is urging foreign countries to ensure the evacuation of diplomats from Kyiv.

Russia will strike decision-making centers in Kyiv if Ukraine disrupts the May 9 parade. pic.twitter.com/G7YmNUm3Kf

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 6, 2026

At the moment, the warring countries have presented competing dates for ceasefire. Putin wants it to correspond with the major Russian holiday: May 8-9, while Zelensky had last week offered May 5-6, which has already come and gone.

Both sides have meanwhile continued attacking the other's vital energy sites, and in some cases this has left significant casualties and destruction.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 23:00

Denver Leaders Reject Justice Department's Demand That City Repeal 'Assault Weapons' Ban

Authored by Michael Clements via The Epoch Times,

Denver is refusing to repeal its 37-year-old ban on certain types of firearms known as “assault weapons.”

Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, sent a demand letter on April 28 to Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and City Attorney Miko Brown, requesting the city repeal the ordinance, which has been in place since 1989.

In a May 4 response letter, Brown stated that the ordinance has withstood legal challenges, kept violent crime low, and was democratically enacted.

Brown wrote that while Denver may consider various strategies to keep citizens safe, “Reversing a common-sense ban that has worked for 37 years and bringing assault weapons back into the City’s neighborhoods is not one of them.”

Johnston reiterated that sentiment in a statement released that same day.

“Denver’s law has stood for 37 years because it works, it saves lives, and it reflects the values of our community. No demand or lawsuit from Washington is going to change that,” Johnston said.

The ordinance—Denver Revised Municipal Code Section 38-121(c)—prohibits carrying, storing, keeping, manufacturing, selling, or possessing an assault weapon.

Denver Mayor Mike Johnston testifies before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on Capitol Hill on March 5, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

The ordinance defines an assault weapon as “any semiautomatic pistol or centerfire rifle, either of which have a fixed or detachable magazine with a capacity of more than fifteen (15) rounds, and any semiautomatic shotgun with a folding stock or a magazine capacity of more than six (6) rounds or both.”

The definition includes firearms that have been modified to have these features to function as an assault weapon.

Dhillon wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court held in D.C. v. Heller that the Second Amendment secures “the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms for self-defense.”

She goes on to state that arms in common use may not be categorically banned.

Dhillon stated that the definition includes AR-15-style rifles, which are owned by “literally tens of millions” of people.

“The city has banned an arm in common use for lawful purposes by law-abiding citizens. Therefore, the Ordinance violates the Second Amendment,” Dhillon’s letter states.

Dhillon set a deadline of May 5 for the city to enter negotiations to repeal the ban. To avoid a lawsuit, the city would have to cease enforcing the ordinance, acknowledge the law is unconstitutional, and enter a consent decree to prevent enforcement of the ordinance.

“This ordinance has helped keep Denver safe for decades. Repealing it would put my officers and our residents at greater risk and violate our duty to protect and serve,” Denver Police Chief Ron Thomas was quoted as saying.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 22:35

Toward Dual-Use Deterrence On The Moon

Authored by Rick Fisher via The Epoch Times,

As the United States pursues its goal of sending astronauts to the moon starting in 2028 to start building lunar bases—and China pursues its goal of sending its people to the moon by 2029 or 2030, also to start building lunar bases—it is necessary to consider a lunar political-military stability based on dual-use technologies.

Concern that China could behave aggressively on the moon is justified based on its behavior on Earth: an unwillingness to recognize the territory of neighboring states while mounting militarized aggrandizement against Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, and India.

This behavior does not bode well for China’s willingness to be transparent about its intentions on the moon, while being predisposed to defend claimed areas rather than seeking deconfliction should other countries pursue nearby lunar activities.

This becomes more of a concern for two additional reasons.

• First, both China and the United States are targeting lunar bases for the south pole of the moon due to the greater probability of finding water ice, but as National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Moon Base Program Executive Carlos Garcia-Galan noted in the agency’s March 24 “Ignition” briefing, this region is about the size of the state of Virginia.

• Second, while Virginia is not a small state, China’s early moon landing system will employ two stages: a manned or cargo stage that is decelerated near the moon by a second propulsion stage that detaches and then crashes into the lunar surface.

For China, use of the propulsion stage is needed because its initial Long March-10 lunar space launch vehicle (SLV) can only loft about 26 tons to the moon, thus requiring two Long March-10 launches to put people on the moon, and use of a propulsion stage lowers the weight of the lunar landing system.

So far, Chinese state-affiliated sources have revealed that their Lanyue manned lunar lander and a larger pressurized lunar rover will be transported to the moon using the crashing propulsion stage, but it is likely that other payloads will do so as well.

For decades, the Chinese regime has tolerated the crashing of SLV first stages into populated areas, so it is a legitimate concern that Beijing will be similarly cavalier about the potential dangers to other countries’ lunar settlements posed by crashing Chinese propulsion stages.

It is certainly preferable to deconflict lunar basing plans, something that could be done between NASA and Chinese space officials who attend the annual International Astronautical Congress, which brings together space officials and engineers.

But China’s decades-long refusal to consider transparency and controls over its nuclear weapons does not bode well for its willingness to ensure that other countries are not “bombed” by its 5- to 8-ton moon-crashing propulsion stages.

As such, it is necessary to have a backup plan that can “deter” China from aggressive behavior on the moon and to defend against potentially dangerous behaviors, such as refusing to prevent threats from its moon-based propulsion stages.

A Long March-2F carrier rocket, carrying the Shenzhou 20 spacecraft and a crew of three astronauts, lifts off from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in the Gobi Desert on April 24, 2025. Pedro Prdoa/AFP via Getty Images

By now, it’s also possible to discern that both the United States and China are preparing to deploy “dual-use” systems to the moon that could serve defensive-military objectives, offering the possibility of a system of lunar deterrence.

Lunar Satellites: Both the United States and China plan to deploy small constellations of satellites around the moon for surveillance of the lunar surface and to enable lunar navigation and intra-lunar and Earth-moon communication.

Since 2024, China has deployed its Queqiao-2 communication relay satellite to the far side of the moon, supported by two small Tiandu navigation-communication development satellites.

By 2050, China intends that Queqiao will host a large number of communication, surveillance, and navigation satellites, enabling missions to the moon, Venus, and Mars, and even further into the solar system.

NASA intends to deploy two groups of five lunar satellites in 2027 and 2028 to perform surveillance, navigation, and communication missions.

Both China and the United States could use their lunar satellite constellations to support military objectives on the moon, and both are developing “combat” satellites for low Earth orbit operations, which, if needed, could also be deployed to lunar orbits.

Moon Hoppers: For its next Change-7 unmanned moon probe mission later this year to the far side of the moon, China will test a small “moon hopper,” an unmanned vehicle able to fly or hop into a nearby moon crater to search for water ice.

On March 24, NASA revealed that it intends to deploy three groups of four hopping vehicles to the moon in 2028, 2030, and 2032—a total of 12 such vehicles.

Even early, small hopping vehicles like China’s could swap out their small science payload for a small electromagnetic pulse grenade that could disable unshielded electronics at the target moon base. The fact that both could use their hopping vehicles as Earth-bound unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) would add to deterrence.

Lunar Nuclear Power: On March 24, NASA revealed its intention to develop space nuclear-thermal power systems to propel a nuclear-thermal powered spacecraft to Mars in 2028, with that power system also serving as the basis for a lunar-based nuclear power system for U.S. bases on the moon, to compensate for the loss of solar power during the “lunar night.”

Co-developed with the U.S. Department of Energy, the plan is to deploy a 40- to 100-kilowatt fission power system to the moon by 2030 or 2031 to provide reliable power for U.S. unmanned and manned moon base systems.

Chinese literature also reveals the intention to develop space nuclear power, both to propel spacecraft into deep space and to generate electricity for Chinese lunar bases, with a prototype space reactor reported to have been completed in 2023.

As fear of retaliation is the basis for nuclear deterrence on Earth, there would be a similar fear of retaliation that would deter attacks against lunar nuclear power stations, which would threaten personnel and contaminate a lunar base, thus preventing recovery and rebuilding.

But as a lunar nuclear power station would power lunar habitats and lunar rovers, it could also power future lunar mining lasers, which may also be inherently “dual-use”—an early lunar “artillery.”

With the May 4 signature of Ireland and Malta, there are now 66 nations that have signed the 2020 Artemis Accords principles for transparent and peaceful behavior on the moon, which form the basis for future U.S. cooperation on the moon with all Artemis partners.

As the leader of the Artemis “coalition,” the United States should try to achieve lunar deconfliction with China, especially to prevent errant Chinese propulsion modules from posing a threat to Artemis coalition lunar activities.

However, inasmuch as the Chinese Communist Party may regard dominance on the moon as a necessary tool for achieving future hegemony on Earth, the United States may have to lead its Artemis partners in making sure that “dual-use” technologies are deployed in a way that creates a system of lunar deterrence.

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 Wed, 05/06/2026 - 21:45

"Existential Fight For Survival": MSFT May Nuke Green Data Center Climate Pledge

One week ago, Microsoft expected roughly $190 billion in AI data center spending for this fiscal year, highlighting the massive scale of the hyperscaler capex cycle as Big Tech races to build out compute infrastructure. Across the tech space, hyperscalers are expected to spend nearly $700 billion in capex this year alone.

The incredible amount of capex being deployed this year has forced some tech giants to slash headcount and trim operating costs to free up capital for data centers. At the same time, Microsoft may now delay or abandon its ambitious 2030 "100/100/0" clean-energy target for data centers as costs continue to mount.

Bloomberg reports MSFT is set to nuke its pre-AI-era climate commitment, which aimed to match 100% of its electricity use, 100% of the time, with "green" energy by 2030, due to the mounting costs of going green.

MSFT wanted every hour of electricity used by its offices and data centers to be matched with clean energy purchases. The reality of saving the planet in a pre-AI era has collided with costs and power constraints as renewable energy struggles to keep pace with data center buildouts.

"The costly and energy-intensive buildout of data centers is affecting views on the feasibility of climate commitments made before the AI era," according to the outlet, citing one person familiar with the matter.

MSFT is reportedly adding about 1 gigawatt of data center capacity every three months (enough to power 750k homes) and expects to spend about $190 billion on data center buildouts this year. The tech giant recently held talks with Chevron to fund a major natural gas plant in the West Texas Permian Basin.

"AI is an existential fight for survival for Big Tech, and so all and any funds at their disposal are being diverted to building as much AI as possible," Alexia Kelly of the High Tide Foundation told the outlet.

MSFT's emissions have already jumped 23% from the pre-AI chatbot era, while Meta, Google, and Amazon have seen similar spikes as well.

The possible move by MSFT to dial back its climate pledges comes as data center buildout costs mount, and the tech giant is doing everything possible to trim those costs to ensure it continues to lead the hyperscaler race. Most importantly, it wants to lead the AI race against China, where data centers are predominantly powered by coal.

The need for cheaper power costs by MSFT also comes at a very precarious time for the entire AI buildout narrative, as cracks are beginning to emerge. Read the full report here.

 

 

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 21:20

Canadian Prime Minister Is Playing A Very Dangerous Game

Authored by 'Sundance' via The Last Refuge blog,

Anyone who has ever dealt with a toxic narcissist understands the psychology behind their manipulative language, words and intents. 

What Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is doing here is very dangerous, particularly for the Canadian people.

After a year of increased provocative language intended to confront President Trump for U.S. nationalist policy changes on economics, trade and security, Prime Minister Carney travelled to Europe where he again delivered strong remarks saying that Europe is now the center of the “rules based international order,” the western government control mechanisms that have maintained economic and security relationships for the past one-hundred years.

Essentially, Carney, after saying the USA was no longer a reliable or obedient partner, emphasized the opposition to state nationalism must come from a collective decision to retain the old geopolitical structures.  President Trump must be opposed, and Europe -according to Carney- represents the assembly that will not permit state government nationalism (sovereignty) to replace their long-constructed globalist systems.

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Carney faced questions about those remarks. I don’t want to influence the audience, but with the context in mind, watch and listen closely to his response.

[NOTE: The question comes from the Toronto Star, the only ‘conservative’ media outlet permitted under the rules of the Canadian regime to ask questions.  All other outlets who might challenge the government viewpoints are strictly controlled and not permitted audience.]

Notice how Carney divides the world of opposition to President Trump, indicating the 5-Eyes nations of Canada, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand are in opposition to Trump and in alignment with the old control mechanisms. 

Adding to this grouping, Carney pulls in the entire European continent and boldly proclaims his position as lead diplomat and representative for their effort against the USA.

This is a very dangerous game that Prime Minister Carney is choosing to play here. 

This is the behavior of a person who is toxically narcissistic and prepared to claim victim status as soon as his target hits back.  Carney has carefully and purposefully deceived his domestic audience, and things are about to get very ugly.

I must say something of a personal frustration….

In the bigger picture, expanding on the ancillary aspects that pertain to the geopolitical landscape that surrounds us, Carney is able to push this line this far because we have internal friction driven by people like Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and other short-sighted “influencers, who do not recognize the scale of the moment.

President Trump is standing up to a globalist system that weakened the United States over several generations. 

The same voices who understand how toxic the United Nations, NATO, USAID and other international influences are to what remains of U.S. sovereignty, are the same voices attempting to divide Trump’s base of support while our President battles multinational influence operations; all because they have the same traits as Mark Carney underpinning their psychology.

You either affix your bayonet against these forces, or in our lifetime there will be nothing left to fight over.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 20:55

Israel Attacks Beirut For First Time In Nearly A Month: Assassination Raid

The Lebanon ceasefire seems definitively off, as the capital of Beirut has come under heavy attack on Wednesday, with Israeli officials describing the military action as a targeted assassination of a top Hezbollah commander.

"Israeli forces have targeted Beirut’s southern suburbs for the second time today, causing a loud explosion and extensive damage," Al Jazeera reports. "The Israeli army confirmed the attack and said that it was targeting a commander of Hezbollah's Radwan Force."

IAF file image

This marks the first day in nearly a month that Israeli jets have bombed Beirut, given the relative period of calm during a US-mediated ceasefire.

"The IDF has just struck in Beirut the commander of the Radwan Force in the Hezbollah terror organization to eliminate him," an Israeli statement has confirmed.

 Defense Minister Israel Katz says that Radwan Force operatives "were responsible for firing [rockets] at Israeli communities and harming IDF soldiers."

"No terrorist has immunity, Israel’s long arm will reach every enemy and murderer. We promised to bring security to the residents of the north. This is how we act, and this is how we will continue to act," the statement added.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also confirmed that he ordered the military to carry out the killing. Al Jazeera provides some further details as follows:

Israeli warplanes targeted an apartment with three missiles in the vicinity of Haret Hreik in the southern suburbs of Beirut, NNA reported.

Jets were also reportedly flying at a very low altitude over the Bekaa Valley.

This strongly suggests Lebanon is on the brink of once again entering full-fledged fighting between Israel and Hezbollah. Already a conflict has been raging in the far south, but now Israeli forces seem to be expanding to a total aerial operation once again.

The conflict goes back to the wake of Oct.7, 2023 and Gaza war. But Hezbollah's entry was also renewed following Trump's Operation Epic Fury. Hezbollah had successively joined the fight both related to the Palestinian and the Iranians.

As reports circulating that Iran and the U.S. inch closer to a possible framework to end the war, Israel hits Beirut’s southern suburb in a serious breach of the ceasefire. pic.twitter.com/lXuvPnXOtL

— Ali Hashem علي هاشم (@Alihashem) May 6, 2026

If Israel returns to unleashing a series of massive bombing waves on the capital Beirut, which many ordinary Lebanese have chaffed at - it could have serious repercussions for the ultra-fragile Iran ceasefire across the Gulf. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 20:05

The Supreme Court Needs A Clock

Authored by Frank Miele via RealClearPolitics,

The Supreme Court decides cases. But it also decides when to decide them – and that timing can be just as consequential as the ruling itself.

Now we have a real-world example.

In a closely watched decision last week, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Louisiana’s creation of a second majority-black congressional district violated the Constitution, holding that race cannot be used too heavily in drawing political maps, even to comply with the Voting Rights Act.

Reasonable people can agree with that conclusion. The Constitution promises equal protection under the law, and the idea that race should not dominate redistricting decisions is consistent with that principle. For years, the court has struggled to reconcile the Voting Rights Act with the Equal Protection Clause. This ruling moves that balance in a more colorblind direction.

But the substance of the ruling is only part of the story.

The timing matters too.

The case was argued twice – first in March 2025 and again in October – and for months it sat undecided, even as the justices’ questioning during oral arguments suggested that a conservative majority was likely to strike down race-driven congressional districts. Some observers questioned whether the delay reflected more than ordinary deliberation, given how the timing of the ruling could affect the current election cycle. But whatever the reason, states were left waiting, unsure how the law would ultimately be interpreted.

Meanwhile, political calendars did not stop. In an unusual step, both Republican- and Democrat-led legislatures have been working to redraw congressional maps mid-decade, partly in response to political pressure from President Trump. But they could not know whether the court’s interpretation of the racial component of redistricting would change – or how.

Each state was left without certainty as the midterm elections approached. Louisiana was already in the middle of absentee voting for congressional elections when the court’s ruling invalidated its district map. The governor said he had no choice but to suspend the House elections in response. Even prior to the ruling, Mississippi’s governor signed an executive order calling for a special legislative session to redraw districts 21 days after the much-anticipated decision. And in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis had already positioned lawmakers to act, placing redistricting on the agenda of a special session, ensuring the state could move quickly once the court ruled.

Most other states are scrambling to determine how the court’s ruling impacts them, especially during the current election cycle. For the most part, redistricting is not instantaneous. It requires legislation, legal review, and often additional litigation. Every week that passes reduces the number of states that can realistically redraw maps before the midterms. A decision handed down earlier in the term might have produced one set of outcomes. A decision handed down now may produce another.

That is not a criticism of the ruling itself. It is a recognition that timing is not neutral.

Most Americans focus on what the court decides. Far fewer consider the significance of when those decisions are released. But in a system where legal rulings intersect with political processes, timing can shape outcomes just as surely as legal reasoning.

Whether intentional or not, the court’s discretion over timing creates an opportunity for influence that extends beyond the law. A delay – even one rooted in ordinary deliberation – can affect elections, legislative agendas and, ultimately, who holds power. But what if the delays are intentional? Might the minority justices in the Voting Rights Act decision knowingly have withheld their dissents as a tactic to postpone the ruling’s impact? We will probably never know, but even the possibility suggests the need for reform.

But how could reform occur? In most areas of our government, the people hold the key. Members of Congress must answer to voters. Presidents face elections and constant political pressure. When procedures break down or public confidence erodes, those institutions are pushed – sometimes reluctantly – to adapt.

The Supreme Court is different.

Its members serve for life. Its internal processes are self-governed. Congress can shape the court at the margins – including aspects of its jurisdiction – but it does not and realistically cannot control the internal mechanics of how and when the court issues its decisions. Nor can the president. That is a function of the separation of powers.

The result is an institution largely insulated from the kinds of external pressures that force reform elsewhere in government.

Within that insulation lies a vulnerability.

Timing, left entirely to internal discretion, can become a form of influence. A majority controls when a decision is issued. But the minority, through the drafting of concurring and dissenting opinions, can affect how long deliberations continue. A chief justice may have procedural tools that shape the pace of the court’s work, but up until now, most chief justices have given court minorities considerable discretion to determine their own timelines.

We have seen how that discretion operates under pressure. In the Dobbs case, a draft majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked weeks before the final decision was issued. During that period, the court faced intense public pressure, protests at the homes of justices, and heightened security concerns. If a majority justice had been removed from the court before the decision was finalized, through intimidation or even assassination, the result would have been a tie, effectively nullifying the ruling as a national precedent. Yet the court did not accelerate its timetable.

That is not a judgment about the justices’ motives. It is a reflection of the reality of the court’s process. A final decision does not emerge until the full cycle of majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions is complete. That means the timing of a ruling is not controlled by the majority alone. It is shaped by the pace of the court as a whole.

The power to affect that timing – even under extraordinary circumstances – rests entirely within the court itself.

That is precisely why a clock is needed. It would not assume bad faith. It would remove the opportunity for timing itself to become a form of influence.

If timing can shape outcomes, then timing should be governed.

The solution need not be complicated. Chief Justice John Roberts could adopt a formal internal rule requiring that opinions – both majority and dissenting – be finalized within a defined period. That period could be measured from oral argument or from the circulation of the majority draft. It could allow for limited extensions in extraordinary cases.

But it would establish a principle – that decisions will be issued within a reasonable and predictable timeframe.

Critics will say that such rules could rush deliberation. That concern is real. But delay has costs as well – costs that are now visible.

A court that wields immense power over the direction of the country should not also wield unlimited discretion over when that power is exercised. It’s time the Supreme Court recognized this reality – and governed itself accordingly.

Frank Miele, retired editor of the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell, Mont., is a columnist for RealClearPolitics. His book “The Media Matrix: What If Everything You Know Is Fake” is available from his Amazon author page. Visit him at HeartlandDiaryUSA.com or follow him on Facebook @HeartlandDiaryUSA and on X/Gettr @HeartlandDiary.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 19:15

Treasury Weighs Allowing Billionaires To Donate Stock To Trump Accounts

Here's something that could go incredibly well or spectacularly wrong: The Trump administration’s flagship program for American children - the so-called Trump accounts - could soon get a dramatic upgrade. White House and Treasury Department officials are in internal discussions about letting the world’s wealthiest individuals donate shares of their companies directly into the accounts, a move that would transform the program from a conservative cash-and-index-fund vehicle into a potential magnet for high-growth tech stock.

The accounts, formally known as Section 530A accounts, are scheduled to begin accepting contributions on July 4. They were created as part of last year’s major domestic policy legislation and have already attracted billions of dollars in philanthropic pledges. Until now, the rules have been strict: only cash, invested exclusively in diversified index funds. That restriction may soon change, according to the NY Times. 

Brad Gerstner, founder of Altimeter Capital and the architect behind the 530A program, has been leading the push. Gerstner, who received a public shout-out during the president’s State of the Union address in February, has been meeting with administration officials to explore the idea. The proposal would allow ultra-wealthy donors to contribute appreciated stock - for example, Elon Musk donating Tesla or SpaceX shares, or Nvidia’s Jensen Huang contributing Nvidia stock - without triggering capital-gains taxes.

Proponents see two major upsides:

• Children could gain exposure to tomorrow’s biggest winners. Instead of modest, steady returns from broad index funds, millions of young Americans might own slices of high-growth companies for decades.
• Donors could give more, and more efficiently. By donating stock at its current fair-market value, billionaires would receive a full charitable deduction while avoiding the capital-gains tax they would owe if they sold the shares first.

Interest is already surging. At this year’s Milken Institute Global Conference, multiple ultra-wealthy individuals and companies signaled they are preparing to give. The $6.25 billion pledge from Michael and Susan Dell in December is seen as a bellwether; many others are now expected to follow.

Internal Debate and Risks

Not everyone inside the Treasury Department is comfortable with the idea. The original design deliberately limited investments to diversified index funds precisely to shield children from the volatility of individual stocks. Allowing direct donations of single-company shares - especially highly valued, concentrated tech holdings - could expose millions of young account holders to wild market swings over 18-year horizons.

Critics inside the building are also raising longer-term concerns:

• Will today’s hottest stocks still be dominant decades from now?
• Could Trump accounts become a de facto “lock-up” vehicle for billions of dollars’ worth of founder shares that cannot be sold for years?

Changing the rules would almost certainly require legislation to amend the statute. Some officials are exploring whether new Treasury guidance or even an executive order could achieve a similar result, but legal experts say a statutory fix is the cleaner path.

The conversations are still at an early stage, but momentum is building quickly. With July 4 rapidly approaching and billions already pledged, the White House faces a clear choice: keep the program simple and conservative, or open it up to the full force of private-sector wealth creation - and risk.

Either way, the Trump accounts have already succeeded in one important respect: they have turned children’s long-term investing into a national conversation. The question now is whether that conversation will include the world’s most valuable stocks.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 18:50

Scientists Reveal Time Travel Could Work

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Researchers have proposed a theoretical approach that could allow messages to be sent into the past using principles from quantum mechanics. Indeed, it could be happening right now already!

The concept does not enable physical travel through time but focuses on information transfer through causal loops at the quantum scale.

The work, accepted for publication in Physical Review Letters, builds on ideas from general relativity and quantum entanglement. 

A technique inspired by the film Interstellar suggests a new way of communicating backwards in time, but it could help improve conventional communication systems as well https://t.co/FXQTvhE6uE

— New Scientist (@newscientist) May 2, 2026

It draws a parallel to the causal loop depicted in Christopher Nolan’s film Interstellar, where a message is sent to the past via a watch.

Co-author Dr Kaiyuan Ji, a researcher at Cornell University, told New Scientist: “The father remembers how the daughter decodes his future message. So he can instruct himself on what is the best way to encode the message.”

Professor Seth Lloyd of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) described an earlier related experiment from 2010: “It was the equivalent of sending a photon a few nanoseconds backwards in time, and having it try to kill its former self.”

Lloyd noted the practical challenges: “Nobody’s built an actual physical, closed time-like curve, and there are reasons to think it’s very hard to make one. But all channels are noisy.”

The paper explains how prior knowledge of how a message was decoded could improve encoding in the future: “The father, who is in the future, may retrieve his memory of past events he has witnessed, even including the daughter’s decoding of the message which he is about to send! It would thus not be surprising that he will consult his memory of the daughter’s decoding when encoding his message, so as to maximize the efficiency of the communication.”

According to the research, this approach could make backward time messages clearer than those sent forward in normal time, even over noisy channels. 

The team suggests the idea could be tested experimentally at the quantum level and may offer insights into communication through noisy systems.

The concept relies on closed time-like curves (CTCs), paths allowed by general relativity where something could theoretically return to its own past. 

On macroscopic scales, creating such curves would require immense energy, but quantum systems may permit analogous effects through entanglement.

Quantum entanglement links particles so that the state of one instantly influences the other, regardless of distance. 

The research explores whether this “spooky action at a distance,” as Einstein called it, could be interpreted as information moving backward in time.

While the proposal remains theoretical, it highlights that nothing in current physics strictly forbids certain forms of time communication at the quantum scale. 

Future experiments could help clarify how information behaves in such systems and potentially improve real-world technologies.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Wed, 05/06/2026 - 18:25