CMR is the leading provider
of funding and management
support for small to
medium-sized businesses and
entrepreneurs
Established 1984 C MR
is the leading venture
capital, management
support and business
services provider for
small to medium-sized
businesses - linking
excellent management
skills with the
substantial financial
resources of a global bank
of private investors.
CMR has over 450 senior
executives, operating
in the UK, USA, Europe, Asia,
Australasia and
globally,
providing both funding and
specialist help for
entrepreneurial
businesses .
For Businesses
CMR provides excellent
resources:
CMR FundEX Business Exchange - gives all companies & entrepreneurs direct access to CMR's global investor base.
CMR Catalyst Group
Programme -
transform
profitability through
merging.
CMR Company Sales Division helps owners to exit
at the best price.
CMR Corporate Recovery
Division -
experts in rescue and
turnaround.
CMR Technology Licensing
Division -
commercialising
innovation.
CMR Executive
Professionals - management support
and consultancy.
CMR Executives-on-Demandâ„¢ Fully experienced
senior executives
available quickly and
cost effectively.
We always welcome
contact with new
business clients- please get in touch
- we will do our
best to match
your needs and exceed
your expectations.
For Investors
Preferential access to new opportunities for investment and/or acquisition
P re-vets
propositions and
provides a
personalised service
to our investors
Syndication service
enabling investors to
link together as desired
Executive and
management support for
investments as needed
CMR's services to
our investors are not
only fast & efficient
but also free
W e
always appreciate new
members- you are welcome
to join as an investor
or as a CMR Executive.
When you
join us as a Senior
Executive:
CMR's strength is in the
skills and experience of
our executive members -
all senior, director level
people with years of
successfully running and
managing companies.
Because the demand for
CMR's support and services
is ever-increasing,
especially as we enter
recessionary times, we
have a growing need for
more high calibre
executives to join us from
every industry and
discipline.
You will be using your
considerable experience to
help smaller businesses
and entrepreneurs to grow
profitably.
We offer full training
and mentoring support to
help maximise potential.
We are
always keen to find more
high calibre senior
executives in all areas-
skills and location.
Make contact with us today
and maximise your
opportunities.
HEAD
OFFICE
124 City Road
London EC1 2NX
Tel: +44 (0)207-636-1744
Fax:+44 (0)207-636-5639
Email: cmr@cmruk.com
Registered Office:
124 City Road ,
London EC1 2NX
Also Glasgow,
Dublin, Switzerland, Europe, USA/Canada
Privacy Statement: CMR only
retains personal details
supplied directly by executives
joining CMR themselves either as
Full Executive Members or
Interim Management Members or
Investors. Those details are
only used within CMR and not
disclosed to any third parties
without that person’s
agreement. We will keep that
data until requested by the
person to be removed – at that
point it will be deleted.
Personal data is never sold or
used for purposes outside of
CMR’s normal operations. Any
correspondence should be
directed to the Managing
Director, CMR,
Kemp House,
152-160 City Road, London EC1V
2N
Senior Executives
CMR is a worldwide network of senior executives. Join us to expand your career and business horizons.
Business Entrepreneurs
CMR has a complete range of resources & services provided by experts to help all businesses to grow and prosper.
Investors & Venturers
CMR has a continuous stream of business and funding propositions, which are matched to investor preferences. Join us - it's FREE!
FundEX
FundEX is CMR's worldwide stock market for small to medium sized companies and entrepreneurs to raise new capital.
Interim & Permanent Management
Many of CMR's executives can be recruited on an interim, permanent or NED basis.
Login
Main CMR Intranet members only
Regional Intranets
Sun, 17 May 2026 13:20:00 +0000 Market Leadership Is Narrow, Increasing Summer Risk
Market Leadership Is Narrow, Increasing Summer Risk
Market Leadership Is Narrow, Increasing Summer Risk
Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,
??Technical Backdrop – Friday Selloff Tests The Tape
The S&P 500 closed Friday at 7,408.50 , surrendering Thursday’s historic first close above 7,500 with a 1.24% decline. The semiconductor names that powered the rally became the source of Friday’s selling. Intel fell 5%, Micron 4%, AMD 3%, and Nvidia 4.4%. From a purely technical standpoint, Friday’s reversal was the first real distribution day in three weeks and the mean-reversion signal we have been flagging.
The deviation numbers are the story. At 7.0% above the 50-DMA (6,921) and 9.3% above the 200-DMA (6,780) , the index is stretched to a degree that has preceded every meaningful pullback over the past two years. The RSI, however, tells a more nuanced story: at 67.15, it has already pulled back below the 70 overbought threshold. Friday’s selloff did real work in resetting the oscillator. The MACD, while still positive at +1.54, has narrowed significantly from the 40+ readings earlier in the week, with the signal line (148.10) now nearly converging with the MACD line. A bearish crossover is likely on Monday, even if the market stabilizes.
The erratic style rotation we discussed in this week’s Daily Market Commentary , value leading Monday, growth getting slapped Tuesday, then flipping again on Wednesday, intensified into Friday’s close. Single-stock implied volatility is running 2.5x the index VIX, meaning the calm headline masks violent sector-level moves. The gamma feedback loop driving the semiconductor surge works in reverse on the way down: when call flow dries up, market makers sell the underlying to flatten their books. Friday’s action in MU, AMD, INTC, and NVDA is the process beginning.
The bull case : the primary trend is up, the RSI has already pulled back below 70 without breaking any support, and the 20-DMA at 7,260 should attract dip buyers on an initial pullback.
The bear case : the 7% and 9.3% deviations above the 50- and 200-DMAs are extreme, the MACD is on the verge of a bearish crossover, and the gamma unwind in semiconductors has only just begun.
The base case is a pullback toward the 20-DMA (7,260), not a breakdown. A deeper correction to the 50/100-DMA cluster near 6,913–6,921 would represent a 6.6% decline from Friday’s close, painful but technically healthy. Use the 20-DMA as the near-term line: a close below opens 6,921 quickly. Trail stops, take profits in extended names, and use any test of the moving average cluster as an opportunity to add.
?? Market Leadership Is Narrow
Tech is carrying the tape. Most other sectors aren’t. Here’s what history says about that setup, and how we’re positioning around it.
Look under the hood of this year’s rally and the tape isn’t nearly as healthy as the headline number suggests. The S&P 500 sits up roughly 8.4% year-to-date through Friday’s close, but the strength is being carried by a small group of sectors doing all the heavy lifting. Technology is up north of 23%. Healthcare is down almost 8%. Financials have given back more than 6%. Equal-weight, which gives every name an identical vote, has only managed about 6.5%. That gap is the story of 2026 so far, and the story has a name. Narrow market leadership. We’ve seen this movie before, and the ending is rarely as clean as the bulls would like to believe.
Chart of Equal Vs Market Cap Weight
The clearest sign of narrowing market leadership is the spread between the cap-weighted S&P 500 and the equal-weight version. The cap-weighted index, where Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, and a small group of mega caps carry outsized weight, has outpaced equal-weight by roughly 200 basis points in just over four months. That sounds modest until you remember both indices hold the same 500 companies. The entire performance gap is a weight effect. A handful of names are doing the work for the whole index.
Drill into the table, and the picture sharpens. Technology and Energy are doing the bulk of the index’s heavy lifting, but the way they’re doing it matters. Energy carries just over 4% of the S&P 500 by weight. That’s one of the smallest slots in the index. The sector is the year’s best performer at nearly 28%, but at a 4% weight, even a stellar return only adds about a percentage point to the index. Technology is the opposite story. Tech accounts for roughly a third of the index by weight, and at +23.5% YTD, it alone accounts for the better part of three-quarters of the year’s gain. Strip Tech out, and what’s left of 2026 looks closer to a market in retreat than a market grinding toward new highs.
The bigger problem lies with the heavyweights who aren’t pulling. Financials, the second-largest sector at almost 13% of the index, are down 6.5% year to date. Healthcare, the fifth-largest at 9.5%, has dropped almost 8%. Communication Services at roughly 10% is slightly negative. Consumer Discretionary at nearly 10% is flat. Those four sectors together represent more than 40% of the S&P 500 by weight, and, as a group, they’re a drag rather than a contributor. The bull market isn’t getting help from the heavyweights that should normally be participating, and the dispersion chart above is the visible result.
Here’s why that matters. Sustainable bull markets pass the baton. When Tech gets tired, Financials or Industrials step up. When growth stumbles, value takes over. Right now, the second, third, fourth, and fifth largest sectors of the index aren’t passing the baton. They’re sitting it out. Without those sectors starting to lead, or at minimum starting to participate, this bull market becomes much harder to sustain. The index can ride one sector for a stretch. It can’t ride one sector forever, and that’s exactly what narrow market leadership looks like before it cracks. This isn’t a broad bull market. It’s a Tech-led tape with a thinning bench underneath.
Historical Precedents For Narrow Market Leadership
History gives us several clean playbooks for what happens when market leadership concentrates this aggressively into one or two sectors. The first is the Nifty Fifty of the early 1970s. Roughly fifty large-cap growth names carried the index higher into 1972 while the average stock had already started rolling over. When the bear market hit in 1973-74, the Nifty Fifty names lost 45% or more, and the broader index drew down nearly half its value, as participation had been weakening for months beforehand.
The second is the late-1990s dot-com era. By 1999, technology was running away from every other sector. Breadth deteriorated sharply through the back half of that year. The advance-decline line peaked well before the S&P did. When the unwind came in 2000, the Nasdaq lost 78% of its value over the following two and a half years. Importantly, defensive sectors actually outperformed through the worst of it. The third, and the one most relevant for current conditions, is 2021. Mega-cap technology drove the indices to fresh highs while small caps and cyclicals quietly topped out months earlier. The Russell 2000 peaked in November 2021. The S&P 500 didn’t peak until January 2022. The market then spent most of 2022 catching down to what breadth had already been telling investors.
In every one of those cases, narrow market leadership wasn’t the cause of the downturn. However, it was a reliable warning that the underlying participation was thinning out before price followed.
“Investors who own the cap-weighted index right now think they’re diversified across 500 names. In practice, they own a concentrated bet on roughly ten companies with 500 tickers attached.”
What Narrow Market Leadership Tells Us About Risk
Make no mistake, narrow market leadership isn’t an automatic sell signal. Markets can run further than seems reasonable when momentum and passive flows pile into the same names. The 2024-2025 mega-cap run is a recent reminder. But narrow market leadership changes the index’s risk profile in a way most investors don’t appreciate.
Here’s the problem. The same passive flows that drive mega caps higher on the way up reverse on the way down. When the largest weights sell off, they drag the index down, and the already-thin breadth gets even thinner. Drawdowns under narrow market leadership tend to be deeper and faster than drawdowns from broad-based rallies, because there’s no rotation to absorb the selling. Volatility behaves differently, too. When leadership is wide, sector rotation cushions the index. When it isn’t, the index moves with whatever the top five names are doing. Risk goes up. Most investors don’t see it.
The fingerprints of that risk are clear when you look at how far the leading themes have moved from their long-term means. Reversion is mathematical, not optional. Eventually, prices come back to their averages, and when the deviation gets this stretched, the round trip is rarely small. The table below lists the most extended subsectors of the current market leadership rally, the 200-week moving average for each, and the percentage decline required to reset to that average.
Read the right-hand column. These aren’t 10% pullback numbers. Semiconductors and Quantum themes would need declines in the 50% to 60% range just to touch their 4-year means. The broad Technology sector, the heaviest weighting in the S&P 500, would have to give back roughly 40% to do the same. The Momentum factor itself sits 57% above its long-term mean, indicating the entire momentum trade is concentrated in the same overextended names. Energy, despite leading the year, looks comparatively reasonable at 29% above the mean. Mean reversion isn’t a forecast. It’s an arithmetic statement about how much price has been pulled forward into the current market leadership names. The deeper the deviation, the bigger the eventual round trip.
How To Position Around Narrow Market Leadership
What does this mean for portfolios? Pull the threads together. Tech alone accounts for roughly three-quarters of the index’s gain this year. The four heavyweight sectors below, which together account for more than 40% of the S&P 500, aren’t participating. The historical record for narrow market leadership runs to drawdowns of 35% to 78% in the leading sector. And the most extended themes inside this rally sit 50% to 145% above their long-term means. That’s the setup. The setup dictates the response.
This isn’t about predicting the top. It’s about making sure portfolios reflect what’s already been pulled forward. The actions below are what we’re doing in client books right now.
None of this requires calling the top. We aren’t bearish on the bull market. We are bearish on the assumption that this market leadership will remain durable for another 12 to 18 months without a meaningful reset. The arithmetic of mean reversion and the historical record of narrow tapes both point to the same conclusion.
Position accordingly.
?? Key Catalysts Next Week
This is the most important week of Q2 and possibly the year. Nvidia reports Wednesday after the close; the FOMC Minutes land Wednesday afternoon; Walmart opens Thursday morning; and Jerome Powell’s fourteen-year tenure at the Federal Reserve ends Saturday. Each of these events alone would dominate a normal week. Together, they arrive at a moment when the 10-year Treasury yield has surged to 4.55%, the highest in a year, and rate hike probabilities have climbed from 1% a month ago to 45% today. The regime is shifting in real time.
However, Wednesday is a collision day that will define the markets next week. The FOMC Minutes from the April 28–29 meeting drop at 2:00 PM, and they arrive carrying a question the market has never had to ask in this cycle: did anyone on the committee discuss raising rates? With core CPI reaccelerating, oil elevated by the Iran conflict, and the 10-year yield climbing, the minutes will reveal whether the internal conversation has shifted from “when do we cut” to “do we need to hike.” Any hawkish surprise, even a single paragraph acknowledging that hikes were discussed, would detonate the rate-sensitive trade.
Three hours later, Nvidia reports Q1 FY2027. Consensus expects $78.8 billion in revenue, 78% year-over-year growth, and $1.77 in EPS, both above the company’s own $78 billion guidance. But the Q1 number is almost beside the point. The real trade is the Q2 guide versus the $86 billion consensus, Blackwell ramp and GB300 Ultra timing, and any commentary on China H200 reopening after the export restrictions effectively zeroed out Chinese data center revenue. The stock has fallen on four of its last five earnings beats, and options are pricing a 5–10% move, in either direction.
Thursday is the consumer verdict. Walmart before the open is the definitive Main Street read. Estimated revenue is $172 billion, grocery share gains, e-commerce penetration, and critically, how much tariff and inflation costs are being passed through at the shelf level versus absorbed in margin will be key. This is where we learn whether the consumer held up through $100 oil and 4.55% Treasury yields or started to crack. Walmart’s full-year guidance will set the consumer narrative for Q2.
Bottom line: Nvidia tells us whether the AI capex cycle is still accelerating. The FOMC Minutes tell us whether the Fed is considering tightening. Walmart tells us whether consumers are surviving. And Saturday, a new Fed Chair takes over with a fundamentally different worldview. This is the week the narrative for the rest of 2026 gets written. Hedge your book before Wednesday at 2:00 PM.
Trade accordingly.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 09:20 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 12:59:00 +0000 Attack Drone Hits Near UAE Nuclear Power Plant
Attack Drone Hits Near UAE Nuclear Power Plant
Abu Dhabi authorities report that a kamikaze drone struck an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in Al Dhafra. Officials said there were
Read more.....
Attack Drone Hits Near UAE Nuclear Power Plant
Abu Dhabi authorities report that a kamikaze drone struck an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in Al Dhafra. Officials said there were no injuries, no impact on radiological safety levels, and no disruption to plant operations.
Dubai-based newspaper Gulf News cited the Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation, which said the one-way drone attack on the Arab world's first commercial nuclear facility did not affect the safety of the nuclear power plant or the readiness of its essential systems. FANR added that all systems were operating normally as of late Sunday.
Barakah operates four APR-1400 reactors with a combined capacity of 5.6 gigawatts, generating about 40 terawatt-hours annually, or about 25% of the UAE's electricity. Any successful attack on Barakah would cripple the UAE's power grid.
The incident comes as the broader U.S.-Iran truce remains fragile, with President Trump recently describing the ceasefire as being on "life support ."
Trump told reporters on Friday that Iran's latest proposal was "unacceptable " and blamed the Iranians for backtracking on the nuclear issue.
In response to Iranian demands, the Trump administration has set five conditions of its own for Tehran, according to Iran's Fars News Agency.
Those conditions include:
No U.S. compensation for damages
Transfer of 400 kg of uranium from Iran to the United States
Limiting Iran's nuclear activities to only one operating facility
No release of even 25% of frozen Iranian assets
Linking any ceasefire across all fronts to the continuation of negotiations
Here are the latest headlines from the Gulf region (courtesy of Bloomberg):
Peace Talks
The US has set five main conditions for a prospective peace agreement with Iran, including no compensation payments, removal of 400 kilograms of uranium, limiting nuclear infrastructure to a single facility, releasing less than 25% of frozen assets, and suspension of certain activities. [BFW]
Iran's foreign minister said a lack of trust is the biggest obstacle in negotiations to end the war with the US, citing contradictory messages that have made Tehran reluctant about American intentions. [APW]
Iran would be open to diplomatic help, particularly from China, to help ease tensions. [APW]
Hormuz Chokepoint
Iran said transit through the Strait of Hormuz will flow once the conflict with the US and Israel is over, but the sides are no closer to resolving their differences. [BN]
Commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains largely frozen, with only limited vessel movements observed and most tied to Iranian-linked shipping. [BN]
A Vietnam-bound supertanker carrying 2 million barrels of Iraqi crude, which was halted by US forces after crossing the Strait of Hormuz, has resumed its journey after getting clearance. [BN]
Gulf Attacks
A drone strike caused a fire at an electrical generator outside Abu Dhabi's Barakah nuclear power plant on Sunday, with no injuries reported and no impact on radiological safety. [BFW] [APW]
The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia carried out multiple strikes against Iran after their countries were attacked by the regime in the early days of the war. [WSJ]
Iran seized a support vessel owned by a Chinese security firm near the Strait of Hormuz, appearing to signal it is unwilling to permit armed protection even for ships sailing on behalf of its strongest global backer. [WSJ]
Economic Impact
Iraq is currently pumping just 1.4 million barrels a day due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the knock-on impact on production facilities.
Israel's economy contracted 3.3% in the first quarter in annualized terms, deeper than the expected 2% drop, due to security-related shutdowns from the war with Iran.
The Philippines' gross gaming revenue fell 16% in the first quarter due to economic headwinds from the Iran war impact. [BFW]
Diplomatic Signals
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has been named Iran's special envoy for China affairs. [BFW]
President Trump returned from a two-day summit with China's Xi Jinping, where both agreed the strait should be open but made no apparent progress toward that goal. [BN]
Energy Market
Brent Crude
Professional subscribers can read the latest Hormuz reports from Wall Street at our new Marketdesk.ai portal.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 08:59 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 12:45:00 +0000 Most Americans Can't Afford New Homes
Most Americans Can't Afford New Homes
Most Americans can’t afford a new home.
A new analysis from the National Association of Home Builders ( Read more.....
Most Americans Can't Afford New Homes
Most Americans can’t afford a new home.
A new analysis from the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB ) shows that 65% of U.S. households are priced out of newly built homes, based on current prices and mortgage rates.
In some parts of the country, the situation is even more extreme. More than 80% of households can’t afford a new home, highlighting how widespread the affordability gap has become.
This map, via Visual Capitalist's Dorosthy Neufeld, shows where Americans are being priced out and where barriers to homeownership are highest.
Ranked: Where Americans Are Most Priced Out of New Homes
At the extreme end, buying a new home is nearly out of reach. In New Hampshire, 83.4% of households are priced out of a new median-priced home.
In total, 11 states have at least 80% of households locked out.
This table shows the share of households priced out of new homes by state in 2026. A household is considered “priced out” if total housing costs—principal, interest, taxes, and insurance—exceed 28% of income, based on median new home prices and a 6% mortgage rate.
State
% of Households
Priced Out of New Homes
Median New Home Price
Income Needed to Qualify
New Hampshire
83.4%
$677,982
$211,080
Hawaii
83.0%
$884,781
$234,818
Maine
82.7%
$548,493
$160,714
Alaska
82.2%
$627,077
$188,313
Connecticut
81.8%
$696,752
$224,811
Wyoming
81.8%
$580,627
$164,982
Montana
81.5%
$495,610
$141,997
Oregon
81.0%
$608,135
$173,717
New York
80.5%
$656,108
$204,163
Vermont
80.1%
$580,627
$181,064
Pennsylvania
80.0%
$528,370
$160,900
Massachusetts
79.8%
$836,236
$246,370
Wisconsin
77.3%
$485,449
$149,085
Ohio
76.5%
$443,646
$137,310
Washington
76.1%
$649,812
$185,213
Colorado
75.1%
$644,149
$179,928
Kansas
73.4%
$401,237
$128,372
Rhode Island
72.9%
$578,724
$174,451
South Carolina
72.5%
$421,098
$118,180
New Mexico
71.7%
$362,847
$104,055
Illinois
71.3%
$428,712
$143,374
Michigan
71.3%
$371,503
$122,158
Kentucky
71.3%
$398,741
$109,299
Florida
71.1%
$429,644
$127,139
Indiana
70.7%
$418,993
$123,219
District of Columbia
70.1%
$836,441
$232,260
Iowa
70.0%
$348,337
$120,598
Arkansas
70.0%
$381,881
$100,780
Alabama
69.2%
$375,944
$106,586
New Jersey
69.1%
$527,069
$172,356
Utah
68.2%
$531,151
$145,638
Tennessee
67.7%
$399,580
$111,631
Oklahoma
67.6%
$351,771
$107,846
Arizona
66.6%
$446,796
$122,364
Missouri
66.6%
$371,515
$111,332
Idaho
66.4%
$430,280
$117,615
North Carolina
66.4%
$394,058
$112,263
Louisiana
66.2%
$318,728
$95,895
California
65.6%
$545,892
$153,471
Nevada
65.5%
$420,782
$115,555
West Virginia
64.8%
$308,607
$88,071
Texas
64.5%
$369,798
$117,131
Georgia
62.5%
$374,579
$109,329
Minnesota
62.1%
$402,209
$122,025
Nebraska
62.0%
$328,603
$107,185
South Dakota
62.0%
$346,894
$106,233
North Dakota
61.4%
$382,451
$116,480
Mississippi
61.1%
$266,837
$80,174
Virginia
58.9%
$429,184
$122,542
Maryland
58.5%
$432,949
$127,559
Delaware
56.0%
$376,478
$104,282
While high-cost states like Hawaii and Massachusetts rank among the least affordable, others such as Maine and Wyoming show that affordability pressures are no longer limited to major metro areas.
Affordability Isn’t Just a Coastal Problem
The most striking takeaway is how universal the problem has become.
Even in lower-cost states like Mississippi ($267K) and West Virginia ($309K), a majority of households are still priced out new homes. While buyers need under $90,000 in income—compared to over $200,000 in the least affordable markets—that threshold remains out of reach for many.
In other words, moving to a cheaper state is no longer a reliable solution. Instead, the data points to a deeper issue, which is that incomes have not kept pace with rising housing costs across the country.
While existing homes can be more affordable than new construction, this data highlights a key constraint: much of the new housing supply entering the market is already out of reach for most households.
The Bigger Picture
As new home prices continue to outpace income growth, the gap between who can and can’t afford newly built homes is widening. That shift is reshaping where Americans live , how they build wealth, and whether homeownership is attainable at all.
If even the most affordable states are out of reach for most households looking at new homes, the question becomes harder to ignore: where can buyers realistically go next?
Learn More on the Voronoi App
To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on where wealth is moving in America.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 08:45 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 12:10:00 +0000 Mayor Sadiq Khan Claims London Devolving Into A Sh*thole Is Just AI-Driven Rage-Bait
Mayor Sadiq Khan Claims London Devolving Into A Sh*thole Is Just AI-Driven Rage-Bait
Mayor Sadiq Khan Claims London Devolving Into A Sh*thole Is Just AI-Driven Rage-Bait
Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,
London Mayor Sadiq Khan has claimed that the decline of the city is a myth and that it’s all just lies being spread by MAGA supporters, Russia, and China through AI-generated content.
In a fresh escalation of his war on inconvenient truths, Khan pointed to a surge in online posts highlighting anti-immigration realities, claiming foreign actors and Trump backers are behind it. He insists the dystopian image of lawless streets and cultural erosion is purely fabricated.
“You’ve got state actors,” Khan said, pointing to supposed evidence of Russian and Chinese involvement (there is none) alongside Make America Great Again backers in the US. He warned that “decent people” might start believing these narratives of a dangerous city with no law and order.
“Secondly, we’ve seen individuals and companies trying to monetise and make profit from division,” Khan further claimed.
He appears to be referring to joke AI videos being circulated showing London strewn with rubbish and rats. Of course these videos are fake, everyone realises that. However, they’re being made as a response to the fact that London is strewn with rubbish and rats, public services are woefully underfunded, and mass migration is causing further social breakdown and an explosion in crime.
Instead of taking responsibility and attempting to fix the problems, Khan is continuing his gaslighting campaign to dismiss London’s very real problems as foreign propaganda or American disinformation.
VIDEO
In April, Khan began a push for a government-backed social media “disinformation” unit , demanding Big Tech and the state crack down on criticism of his record, claiming an “outrage economy” is eroding trust.
He told the Cambridge Disinformation Summit that platforms must do better—or regulators like Ofcom should hit them hard. Khan positioned London as the “canary in the coal mine” for global fights against online dissent.
Critics note he often disables replies on his posts, shutting down Londoners who could share firsthand experiences.
While Khan obsesses over algorithms and foreign bots, official figures from his own tenure paint a grim picture. As highlighted in our April report on his disinformation unit push, Metropolitan Police data since Khan took office in 2016 shows:
Knife crime : +27%
Robbery : +57%
Theft from the person : +37%
Shoplifting : +109%
Sexual offences : +64%
Violence against the person : Significant rises in multiple categories.
Recent reminders underscore the pattern: Every hour in London, a rape is reported. Every 34 minutes, knife crime. Every 4.5 minutes, a phone theft. Every 1.8 minutes, a theft overall.
There has been a broad collapse in everyday safety, theft epidemics and gang violence is plaguing the city.
In addition to completely ignoring reality and pretending London is a utopia, Khan is calling for more state tools to police speech, label AI content, and tweak algorithms against “poison and division.”
Civil liberties voices like Big Brother Watch have warned this risks political exploitation—labeling criticism of crime, migration, and multiculturalism as “disinformation” to protect the narrative.
Instead of addressing root causes—open borders policies flooding the city with incompatible elements, straining resources, and importing crime—Khan prefers to shoot the messenger.
The mayor’s record speaks louder than any conspiracy: a capital where shoplifting exploded over 100%, knives dominate headlines, and public trust erodes daily. Blaming MAGA, Putin, or Xi won’t fix failing multiculturalism or restore law and order.
Londoners deserve accountability, not gaslighting and speech police. Britain’s elites continue importing problems then censoring the massive backlash.
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
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 08:10 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 11:35:00 +0000 Audemars Piguet x Swatch's Affordable Watch Launch Sparks Lines Across World
Audemars Piguet x Swatch's Affordable Watch Launch Sparks Lines Across World
Luxury watchmakers Audemars Piguet and Swatch have done the unthinkable: unveiling a new, affordable collaboration aimed at younger buyers, with prices ra
Read more.....
Audemars Piguet x Swatch's Affordable Watch Launch Sparks Lines Across World
Luxury watchmakers Audemars Piguet and Swatch have done the unthinkable: unveiling a new, affordable collaboration aimed at younger buyers, with prices ranging from $400 to, of course, $420.
Called the "Royal Pop," the affordable handheld watch inspired by pop art is clearly a mass-market move aimed at stimulating the Swiss watch market after muted activity over the last few years, following the massive run-up fueled by cheap money during the pandemic.
Keep in mind that the average Audemars Piguet watch is priced at about $36,000 on the secondary market, according to WatchCharts. Its flagship Royal Oak line averages closer to $48,000 .
So why collaborate with Audemars Piguet and Swatch?
As CEO, Ilaria Resta noted, "For the joy and boldness it represents because audacity is often the starting point of innovation and new ideas. And because it invites a broader audience, including younger generations, to experience mechanical watchmaking differently."
Translation: Younger consumers, who will increasingly dominate the labor market in the years ahead, are much poorer than previous generations. If these Swiss watch giants want to stay in business into the 2030s, they must cater to younger buyers.
It appears to be working, with crowds lining up at stores across the West:
Related:
A bold bet by Swiss watchmakers that may actually pay off. Are pocket watches back?
We're old enough to remember when Apple had lines around the block for product launches - not anymore...
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 07:35 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 11:00:00 +0000 Is A Future War Between The US And Europe Unavoidable?
Is A Future War Between The US And Europe Unavoidable?
Is A Future War Between The US And Europe Unavoidable?
Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,
For those who might have been out of the loop over the past few months, there is a war going on between the US and Europe. Largely, it’s western European governments that are the problem – They started the conflict, they continue to perpetuate the conflict, and they tend to cry victim when they suffer any consequences for it.
It’s clear that the European elites have a distaste for US policy. From anti-woke reforms and immigration restrictions to geopolitical interactions, when Americans voted en masse to remove the far-left Biden regime, Europe became an overnight enemy. I think it’s important to understand that the European leadership does do NOT view the Trump Administration as their primary threat. No, they view YOU as their primary threat.
American conservatives, nationalists, patriots, truth activists, etc. are the target of an international demonization campaign. And, as long as we hold sway in American politics, they will treat the US as a potential enemy.
Since 2014, Western European progressives (globalists) have been pursuing a multicultural blitzkrieg of their own respective populations. Open borders and mass immigration from largely Islamic countries became the political standard, with many European citizens suckered or shamed into compliance using two big lies:
Lie #1: Native Europeans are responsible for offering reparations to third worlders for centuries of “colonialism” and decades of war in the Middle East.
Lie #2: Mass immigration is vital to European economies because of cascading population decline and shrinking labor force.
For a decade this has been the methodology in Europe with increasingly horrific results (including a massive spike in sexual assaults and knife crimes).
To address the first lie, the vast majority of migrants entering Europe from the third world are not traveling from war torn countries. This narrative was a fabrication by liberals in Europe in order to grease the wheels for public support of open borders. Furthermore, the argument that western nations are somehow required to compensate the rest of the world for their geopolitical success is a fallacy.
We don’t owe anyone anything and we’re not required to take on immigrants for any reason, ever.
The second lie is much more complicated. Europe does not need immigrants to reinforce the economy, but what if they are useful for something else? An agenda which is not yet clear?
It has long been my position that the globalists in Europe intend on integrating into a wider opposition bloc, a coalition against nationalism, free markets, meritocracy, free democracy, etc. Evidence suggests that this coalition will include elements of Asia and their eyes on resource rich regions of Africa.
Russia is a wild card.
Europe’s leaders are ravenous, they want a greater war and they see Ukraine as the best opportunity. That said, this does not mean Russia is our friend.
I believe European leaders (much like leftists in the US) want the establishment of a “new world order” in which national borders are erased and green authoritarian socialism is enforced under a globally centralized bureaucracy. There are many ways to go about achieving this agenda.
For example, the globalists have tried implementing international climate change laws and carbon controls as a means to limit industry and dominate energy resources. I would argue that this plan has failed as it becomes more and more clear to the public that global warming science is mostly propaganda. The majority of the opposition to the carbon agenda has come from the US.
They tried medical tyranny , using pandemic hysteria through perpetual lockdowns and vaccine passports. This also failed, with twenty-two red states blocking the mandates. If they couldn’t get the US to comply, then the rest of the world would see that a nation could operate perfectly fine without authoritarian micromanagement.
They also tried to lure the US into a war in Ukraine to function as a meat shield against Russia . This would trap America in a perpetual quagmire in the best case scenario, weakening the US while Europe is strengthened through years of resource infusions. This plan also seems to have failed. The American public has zero interest in entering the Ukrainian theater or going to war with Russia without a substantial reason.
A fourth tactic is mass immigration, which has been much more successful. The US was almost overrun under the Biden Administration and now we are faced with a long uphill battle to deport millions of illegals. On the upside, border crossings have dropped by 95% and he majority of the citizenry now supports deportations.
Europe has been overwhelmed by a third world incursion. Between 50 million and 60 million migrants now reside in the region, making up around 20% of Western Europe’s total population. But is this just globalist sabotage of the west? Or, does this army of migrants serve another purpose?
As an economic resource they are a net negative. If the idea is for migrants to increase the labor pool and fill traditional jobs, then there is no positive return. Germany’s unemployment rate has climbed to 6.4% and 54% of the unemployed are migrants. These people they take far more in welfare subsidies than they contribute in economic activity.
The same goes for Spain, where the unemployment rate is 10%, yet the far-left Spanish government continues to flood the country with foreigners. The UK’s unemployment rate has climbed to 5% and 22% of the unemployed are foreign nationals on the take.
The decline is present all across the EU; economic growth is stagnating. So, why would the elites view migrants as a resource rather than mere tools for deconstructing western society? I would ask: What if a broad population increase is useful for events that have not yet occurred?
What if world war is still on the table, or an economic collapse followed by globalist consolidation? What if European leaders see millions of extra bodies as a valuable resource to feed that war, or control the citizenry at home? Is mass immigration just about cultural replacement? Or, are third worlders being lured into the west with promises of easy plunder, only to be caught up as cannon fodder in a future conflict?
Have the globalists placed their bets on foreign hordes and the power of cheap labor (or cheap soldiers) as the key to victory?
This brings us to what appears to be the US strategy in preparation for the schism, and it’s not hard to see, it involves oil. The move on Iran is clearly the catalyst for a US program of energy dominance. Consider for a moment the insane geopolitical changes and energy market mutations that have happened in just the past few months.
Venezuela is now under new leadership and shipping oil to the US, while China has mostly been cut out. Trump has been engaging with Panama to dramatically reduce Chinese influence over canal operations, again, cutting the CCP out of the western hemisphere.
Trump’s visit to China this week was filled with grand gestures and diplomatic talk for the cameras, but what really happened behind closed doors? One has to expect that the CCP is very unhappy.
Canada under globalist Mark Carney refuses to negotiate a tariff deal with the US and is trying to form bilateral trade agreements with Europe and China (to Canada’s detriment). This could lead to direct hostilities between the US and Canada if Carney tries to use oil agreements as leverage against Trump, or if he tries to give China access to Canadian soil.
The war with Iran has led to the UAE leaving OPEC, which essentially signals the end of OPEC and an incoming flood of oil to global markets at lower prices once the war is over (which the US will benefit from). It’s a shock in energy markets that has not happened in decades. It also disrupts the globalist climate agenda and their bid for artificial scarcity.
Iran is where the division between the globalists in Europe and conservatives in the US becomes undeniable. Why didn’t European elites immediately jump on board with the Iran war and the effort to control the Strait of Hormuz. They supported every other war in the Middle East from 2001 onward. With Iran, they’ve tried to undermine the US every step of the way.
We know for a fact that Europe’s leadership is devoid of moral principle or conditions of conscience. Their rhetoric and behavior when it comes to Iran and the Hormuz indicates they want the US to fail, not because they disagree with the war, but because they don’t want the US to gain an edge in energy dominance.
US operations against the regimes in Venezuela and Iran are choking energy supplies to China (the most useful economic and military ally for Europe in the event of conflict with the US). This is detrimental to the Europeans IF they are preparing for deeper hostilities with the US in the future.
NATO is now likely to break apart. Trump is threatening to pull troops from Europe and may shut down military bases entirely. Tariff salvos are going to increase. European governments are cracking down on their own citizens for expressing conservative and nationalist views. The lines are forming.
I would not be surprised to see talk of kinetic conflict between America and Europe in the next few years. Unless, something spectacular happens in the near term and the citizens of Europe take their countries back (most EU countries have to wait until 2027-2029 for elections). After endless abuse by the liberal establishment, if there was a war, millions of Europeans would likely welcome the US with open arms.
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE .
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 07:00 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 09:40:00 +0000 Democrats Devastated After Supreme Court Rejects Attempt To Revive Virginia Congressional Map
Democrats Devastated After Supreme Court Rejects Attempt To Revive Virginia Congressional Map
Hammering the last nail in the coffin of what could have been a significant midterm factor, the US Supreme Court on Friday rejecte
Read more.....
Democrats Devastated After Supreme Court Rejects Attempt To Revive Virginia Congressional Map
Hammering the last nail in the coffin of what could have been a significant midterm factor, the US Supreme Court on Friday rejected Virginia Democrats' request to use a new congressional district map, which was drawn to flip four House seats into Democratic control.
As is typical in this kind of "emergency" ruling, the court provided no legal rationale or vote count -- however no dissents were noted.
The new map was expected to dramatically alter the composition of Virginia's US House delegation , boosting Democrats from their current slim 6-5 edge to 10-1 domination. For context, in 2024 presidential balloting, Virginia voters were split 52% for Democrat Kamala Harris and 46% for Donald Trump.
On May 8, the Virginia Supreme Court denied a request from Democrats and state officials to lift a lower-court order blocking certification of the April 21 redistricting referendum.
Voters approved the Democrat-accommodating map by a 52-to-48 margin , but a Virginia circuit court declared the referendum null and void, saying Democrats had run afoul of state constitutional measures that exist to fend off partisan gerrymandering.
Virginia Gov Abigail Spanberger, seen here as a US House representative on Jan 6 2021, says she now wants to focus on Democrat turnout
After that setback, Democrats sought to salvage their new map with an appeal to the US Supreme Court, which has now failed. Two days earlier, Gov Abigail Spanberger had already waved a white flag of sorts , implying that Virginia's May 12 deadline for map changes made the emergency request to the US Supreme Court something of a moot point.
“What needs to happen is we need to focus on the task at hand, which is winning races in November,” she said.
"I believe, somewhat doggedly, that we will [gain] two to four seats in the House of Representatives. … That is my goal. That is what I know is possible.”
However, after the ruling, she opportunistically lashed out at the Supreme Court:
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat, criticized the decision, which she said had the effect of nullifying “the votes of more than three million Virginians.”
“As Governor, I will make sure voters know when and how to cast their votes this year. Because our votes are how we choose the representation we deserve,” she wrote on X.
The lead respondent, Virginia state Sen. Ryan McDougle, a Republican, who is also legislative commissioner for the Virginia Redistricting Commission hailed the new ruling.
“The Supreme Court of the United States has affirmed what we always knew: you cannot violate the Constitution to change the Constitution,” the state lawmaker wrote on X.
The Virginia battle was part of a nationwide saga that started last year, when Texas Republicans redrew their congressional map to gain seats, straying from what had been a fairly (but not thoroughly) universal norm that saw states refrain from redistricting that wasn't driven by once-a-decade census results. Following the lead of California Democrats who undertook their own maneuvers to offset the Texas map, the Virginia leftists who gained full control of state government in 2025 responded with a constitutional amendment allowing the General Assembly to temporarily redraw congressional districts outside the normal 10-year cycle -- specifically to “restore fairness” if other states gerrymandered (bases on the convoluted implication that varied wrongs against the citizenry of multiple states can add up to a national right).
Despite the implosion of the Virginia Democrats' scheme, and the view that the net result of the redistricting war will flip seats to the GOP column, prediction-market participants lean heavily toward Democrats wresting control of the House from Republicans , who currently have a 217-212 edge over the Democrats. (One representative is an independent and there are five vacant seats owing to deaths and resignations.)
Via Polymarket
Chalk up the difference between the redistricting outcome and the predicted 2026 House elections to resurgent price inflation springing from the Trump-Netanyahu war on Iran, disenchantment with the broader economy, and a career-high disapproval rating for party standard-bearer Trump .
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 05:40 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 07:02:00 +0000 China Confirms Boeing Jet Deal, Agrees To Cut Select Levies & Expand Agri Trade
China Confirms Boeing Jet Deal, Agrees To Cut Select Levies & Expand Agri Trade
China Confirms Boeing Jet Deal, Agrees To Cut Select Levies & Expand Agri Trade
Summary:
China, U.S. Agree To Cut Levies On Select Products , Expand Agricultural Trade
China, U.S. Reach Boeing Jet Purchase Agreement
U.S. And China Agree To Establish Trade And Investment Boards
Trump-Xi Summit Delivers Modest Trade Wins
China Responds With Agreements To Purchase Jets, Cut Levies, Expand Trade
One day after President Trump left Beijing, following his multi-day summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, China's Commerce Ministry released new details about agreements it had reached to purchaseU.S.. planes and farm goods .
The exact wording "reach arrangements"s in the Bloomberg headline is important because it suggests a framework, a commitment, or a negotiated understanding, not necessarily a finalized purchase contract for Boeing commercial jets.
Based on earlier reports, Trump said China agreed to buy 200 Boeing planes, with the total potentially rising to 750 aircraft.
The next set of headlines shows that the Trump team and Beijing have reached a partial trade de-escalation package following the summit:
CHINA, US AGREE TO REDUCE LEVIES ON A CERTAIN RANGE OF PRODUCTS
CHINA TO EXPAND BILATERAL TRADE W/ US ON AGR AND OTHER PRODUCTS
CHINA VOWS TO EXPAND BILATERAL AGRI TRADE WITH US
The headlines point to a U.S.-China trade détente that is constructive for American industry, exporters, and U.S. farmers .
Now the larger question is what Trump and Xi agreed to behind closed doors regarding Tehran and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
U.S. and China Agree To Establish Trade And Investment Boards As Trump-Xi Summit Delivers Modest Wins
U.S. and Chinese leaders agreed to establish a new "Board of Trade" and a parallel "Board of Investment" during President DonaldTrump'ss two-day visit to Beijing - a summit that ended much as it began: with significant pageantry, warm personal rapport between the leaders, and modest, incremental progress on trade. The new boards aim to oversee bilateral purchases, manage trade differences, facilitate deals in non-sensitive sectors (with roughly $30 billion in goods identified), and provide a standing channel to prevent future escalations without constant high-level intervention.
President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing. Alex Wong/Getty Images
The boards were a pre-summit priority pushed by U.S. officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. They build on preparatory talks in South Korea that produced what both sides described as "generally balanced and positive outcomes." Chinese state media, including Xinhua, highlighted the agreements as part of efforts to expand practical cooperation and maintain stable economic ties.
This development aligns with XiJinping'ss broader push to reframe the bilateral relationship as one of "constructive strategic stability" - a new guiding vision intended to provide predictability for the next three years and beyond, emphasizing cooperation as the mainstay while allowing for "moderate competition" and "manageable differences." Xi described it as a positive, sound, constant, and enduring stability that should translate into concrete actions.
Trade and Economic Deliverables
Boeing Aircraft : China committed to purchasing 200 Boeing jets , with Trump indicating the order could potentially grow to 750 based on performance. This was the most visible commercial headline, though it fell short of earlier speculation around larger volumes and drew a muted market reaction.
Agriculture and Energy : Progress on expanded U.S. farm product sales (soybeans, beef, and other goods, with reports of commitments up to $10–50 billion in some readouts) and potential energy deals. Xi told accompanying U.S. CEOs that China'ss door will only open wider" to American businesses, signaling greater market access in mutually beneficial areas.
Investment Outlook : Discussions included pathways for Chinese investment into non-sensitive U.S. sectors, with the Board of Investment intended to provide clearer guidelines and reduce uncertainty from national security reviews.
Trump touted "fantastic trade deals" upon departure, while Xi emphasized win-win outcomes and the importance of sustaining momentum in economic ties.
And hey, America apparently needs 500,000 Chinese students in the US, and China should be able to purchase US farmland so that colleges and farm prices don't collapse, or something.
Areas Without Breakthroughs
Despite the institutional progress, several high-priority issues saw limited or no resolution:
Nvidia H200 AI Chips : No major summit agreement on advanced AI chip exports. While some U.S. licensing approvals for sales to select Chinese firms occurred around the visit (with Jensen Huang joining the delegation), export controls remained a sticking point and were not centrally resolved in leader-level talks.
Rare Earths : No announced extension of the existing truce or easing of Chinese export controls, which continue to affect U.S. chipmakers and aerospace firms. This remains a lingering vulnerability from prior tariff exchanges.
Iran Conflict : Both leaders expressed a shared desire for stability and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, with Xi showing interest in greater U.S. oil purchases to reduce Middle East dependence. However, China offered no concrete commitments to leverage its influence with Tehran. Beijing’s foreign ministry reiterated support for peace efforts without pledging active intervention.
Taiwan And Competing Narratives
Competing narratives quickly emerged from the summit - highlighting the persistent gap in how Washington and Beijing frame their relationship. Chinese state media, including Xinhua, emphasized Taiwan as "the most important issue" in bilateral ties, with Xi warning Trump that mishandling it could lead to confrontation or even conflict while reiterating opposition to “Taiwan independence.” (U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, reaffirmed that American policy on Taiwan remains unchanged.) In contrast, the White House readout and Trump’s public comments focused heavily on international issues such as Iran, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, global energy security, and economic cooperation - including Xi’s reported interest in buying more U.S. oil to reduce Middle East dependence, fentanyl precursor controls, and increased agricultural purchases. Trump described the relationship as one that is “going to be better than ever before,” while Xi suggested that "cooperation benefits both, while conflict hurts both." Analysts noted that Beijing’s spotlight on Taiwan may serve to shape domestic and international perception and divert attention from other sensitive topics like trade imbalances, nuclear issues, and Iran. Meanwhile, the strong U.S. business delegation - including NVIDIA’s Jensen Huang - underscored Washington’s priority of securing concrete commercial wins . These divergent readouts reflect each side’s strategic messaging priorities: China seeking to reinforce red lines and stability on its terms, and the U.S. highlighting transactional progress and geopolitical alignment.
As Rabobank notes;
While markets kept a watchful eye on any headlines about the war in Iran, palates were left dry as only tepid announcements dripped out, such as that China “offered help ” on Iran and “pledged not to send weapons .” What they did not manage to evade was a conversation about Taiwan. During the two and a half hour conversation with Trump, Xi underscored that US intervention in Taiwan could trigger a “highly dangerous situation .” While Rubio underscored that the topic of American arms sales to Taiwan wasn’t a major focus of discussion, it likely will be when Congress’ approved USD 14bn arms sale to Taiwan lands on Trump’s desk, and again when Xi visits the White House in September.
* * *
Overall Assessment : The summit went a long way in stabilizing ties through new dialogue mechanisms and modest commercial wins rather than grand bargains. Trump returned with a few modest wins he can highlight domestically ahead of midterms - though the whole 'Chinese students and farms' might be a tough pitch to MAGA, while Xi secured a narrative of strategic predictability and time for China to address its economic challenges.
Underlying rivalries in technology, supply chains, Taiwan, and global influence persist, but the relationship now has a more structured channel for management. Future progress is likely to remain incremental and transactional, with the newly agreed boards playing a central role in testing whether this stability proves durable.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 05/17/2026 - 03:02 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 03:25:00 +0000 Washington's Joint Operation Against ISIS In Nigeria Sends A Message To The Sahelian Alliance
Washington's Joint Operation Against ISIS In Nigeria Sends A Message To The Sahelian Alliance
Washington's Joint Operation Against ISIS In Nigeria Sends A Message To The Sahelian Alliance
Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,
The scenario of a US-backed Nigerian anti-terrorist intervention in Mali is becoming increasingly likely.
Trump announced over the weekend that the US and Nigeria carried out a joint operation against ISIS’ second-highest figure, which his counterpart Bola Ahmed Tinubu disclosed took place in the northeast Lake Chad Basin where its ally Boko Haram recently killed over 20 Chadian troops . This is the US’ second military operation in Nigeria after Trump authorized bombing ISIS in Northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day, thus demonstrating the continued expansion of its anti-terrorist cooperation with this new BRICS partner .
The significance of this observation shouldn’t be downplayed since it also sends a message to the Sahelian Alliance, whose de facto Malian leader is embroiled in its own anti-terrorist struggle after radical Islamists and Tuareg separatists kicked the government out of the northeast earlier this month. Although Mali is allied with neighboring Burkina Faso and Niger, the latter of which borders Northern Nigeria where the US struck terrorists twice in less than six months, neither have come to its rescue.
That’s because they too are embroiled in their own anti-terrorist struggles against the same radical Islamists in Burkina Faso’s case, “Jamaat Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin” (JNIM), and ISIS in Niger’s. These groups importantly occupy most of their border with Mali as well, thus impeding joint military operations even if they were greenlit. Recently, Nigeria intimated that it might intervene in Mali, and French media revealed that their country is already involved there. Here are three background briefings:
* 26 December 2025: “Why’d Trump Bomb ISIS In Nigeria On Christmas? ”
* 3 May 2026: “The Latest Malian Crisis Risks Spiraling Into A Regional War ”
* 11 May 2026: “French Media Confirmed That Paris Is Backing Ukraine In Mali ”
To elaborate on their relevance to the joint US-Nigerian anti-terrorist operation, they shed light on just how close their security cooperation has become in less than half a year’s time, thus lending credence to the Nigerian Defense Minister’s intimation earlier this month that it might intervene in Mali. In that scenario, the US would likely play a public role as well, even if only limited to sharing intelligence and launching drone strikes from its reported bases in neighboring Ghana or nearby Cote d’Ivoire.
Meanwhile, Nigeria could only reach Mali via either Niger, via Burkina Faso by means of Cote d’Ivoire, or via Ghana, but the first two aren’t expected to authorize transit unless Niger – perceived as the Sahelian Alliance’s weakest link – breaks rank with its allies. As for the Ghanaian route, JNIM isn’t as active in the part of Mali on the other side of the border, so Nigeria would either have to receive permission to transit to the northeast or it might wait to unilaterally intervene till Bamako is seriously threatened to captured .
However the Nigerian intervention scenario might unfold, the top takeaway from the US’ joint operation with Nigeria is that it’s becoming increasingly likely whether the Sahelian Alliance authorizes it or not, which thus suggests that behind-the-scenes talks might already be underway with them. The West wants to break this bloc’s unity so that its countries resubordinate themselves to France, and if this can’t be achieved via diplomatic means under terrorist pressure, then military ones might be soon employed.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/16/2026 - 23:25 Close
Sun, 17 May 2026 02:45:00 +0000 Establishment Media Outraged By White House Sponsored Christian Prayer Event
Establishment Media Outraged By White House Sponsored Christian Prayer Event
The mainstream media's outrage over religious expressions by government institutions and politicians is highly selective. At bottom, it the event is Chris
Read more.....
Establishment Media Outraged By White House Sponsored Christian Prayer Event
The mainstream media's outrage over religious expressions by government institutions and politicians is highly selective. At bottom, it the event is Christian, they attack. If it's any other religion, they applaud.
Did the mainstream media publish indignant diatribes when leftist NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani held Muslim dinners at City Hall and Gracie Manor for Ramadan? The answer is no, of course they didn't. Because Islam is celebrated by modern liberal movements and Christianity is despised. And, it's important to take note of what leftists hate, because if they hate it, it's probably good.
Progressive outlets are in an uproar this week over a White House sponsored Christian prayer event scheduled to take place on this Sunday at the National Mall. The Trump administration and the Freedom 250 nonprofit will host "Rededicate 250," which will feature Cabinet members and conservative religious leaders to mark the nation's 250th anniversary.
According to event organizers, the program aims to reflect on the faith of America's founders and serve as a national moment of rededication. Participants include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and House Speaker Mike Johnson.
Leftists journalists and Democrats are accusing the Trump Administration of violating the US Constitution and the "separation of church and state" by sponsoring the event. This is, of course, a blatant misinterpretation of the 1st Amendment, but it's also an opportunity to debunk many of the claims made by the left-wing when it comes to religious expression by government officials.
VIDEO
It might come as a shock to those that religiously follow leftist propaganda, but the words "separation of church and state" do not appear a single time in the US Constitution. The phrase comes from a 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, where he described the First Amendment as building "a wall of separation between Church & State."
The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Jefferson was primarily concerned with the use of government as a weapon to persecute people of various denominations that refused to submit to a singular state sponsored church, which was a common practice of the English Crown. It should be noted that there was, essentially, no other prominent religious groups beyond Christians recognized in the colonies at the time of the formation of the United States, aside from a small population of around 2000 Jewish settlers.
The US was, by every measure, founded as a Christian nation, even if there was no official state church.
The Founding Fathers are often described by leftists as "followers of the Enlightenment", as if this means they were not Christian. All of them were in fact Christian while also promoting some ideals of the Enlightenment. Many prominent figures of the enlightenment were religious, including Isaac Newton, John Locke, and Christian Wolff.
Their goal was to seek harmony between faith and reason, not erase the practice of faith from society or government. As John Adams said:
“The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity...I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
He also stated:
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
We have seen how governments devoid of religious principle behave - The atheistic regimes of communist Russia, China, Cambodia and North Korea have murdered millions upon millions in the name of "saving" the populace from the "opiate of religion". We have also seen how movements like the political left behave when they gain power, injecting authoritarianism and degeneracy into every facet of society and even targeting children with irrational and anti-science indoctrination.
The phrase "separation of church and state" was popularized by the Supreme Court in 1947, notably in Everson v. Board of Education, as a metaphor for interpreting the First Amendment. It is not the law, however. In the sense that it is not illegal for government officials to sponsor religious events or to speak their minds when it comes to religious issues.
Furthermore, it's not against the law for government officials to point out that the US was founded as a Christian nation; the Founding Fathers did the same. No one's religious practice is being suppressed and no state religion is being established by doing so. The media's efforts to shame this generational reality by exploiting misinterpretations of the Constitution might have worked a decade ago, but not anymore.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 05/16/2026 - 22:45 Close