Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

Authored by Teresa Manning via American Greatness,

On May 21, the House Education Committee held a hearing, Restoring Excellence: The Case Against DEI , or “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion,” a euphemism for neo-racism and therefore a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Thankfully, the hearing got this message across and the presiding chairman, Congressman Burgess Owens of South Carolina, should be commended for convening it.

The panel had four witnesses: a Manhattan Institute Fellow named Renu Mukharjee; Dr. Shaun Harper, a TProvost Professor from the University of Southern California; an attorney from the American Civil Rights Project, Dan Morenoff; and Kurt Miceli, a Medical Director of Do No Harm, an organization focused on protecting medical care from identity politics.

The testimonies made good, if basic, points, though no one mentioned President Trump’s January 21 Executive Order Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit Based Opportunity , an excellent backdrop and guide for the hearing, and only passing reference was made to the 2023 United States Supreme Court opinion banning racial preferences at universities, including when they’re rationalized for the sake of diversity.

But the witnesses did point out that a focus on diversity means competence and excellence take a back seat.

That’s bad for any activity, not just medical care, but also engineering (will bridges collapse?) and flight school (will planes crash?), as well as the arts, athletics, etc. Mediocrity takes over when excellence yields to the race industrial complex.

First, Ms. Mukharjee said that racial minorities are actually harmed by diversity practices, as others presume those minorities are less qualified, calling them “diversity admits” or “diversity hires,” which just reinforces destructive racial stereotypes. Medical Director Miceli also mentioned the concept of racial concordance creeping into medical practice, or the idea that black patients need black doctors.  That such nonsense gets any traction at all is a bit depressing. Patients obviously want competent doctors, just as Americans want competence generally.

Only one witness was an ardent defender of diversity ideology—Dr. Shaun Harper. He insisted that DEI had been proven to be beneficial on campus in “dozens of essays,” and in “dozens of books” and “hundreds of peer-reviewed academic journals.” His written remarks go so far as to suggest that abolishing DEI puts higher education at a greater risk of violence on the grounds that DEI reduces institutional susceptibility to racial crises, sexual harassment, and other abuses. This seems a stretch, as claims of racial discrimination and sexual harassment have increased alongside diversity initiatives.

Harper makes other questionable claims, insisting, for example, that attacks on DEI are “politicized.”

Actually, advocating a merit-based society is apolitical. The idea is to let the best man win or to have the cream rise to the top regardless of skin color.

Harper must know that it is diversity ideology itself that is simply politics—identity politics and racial politics designed to divide and conquer the American people, to destroy our national unity, and to keep us fighting each other instead of fighting for a stronger country. A strong America would include a strong national economy using our own, homegrown American students and workforce. For those unaware, diversity is often a moral-sounding cover for cheap labor. Foreigners flood schools and companies, taking seats and jobs from Americans, since they will work for less. This undercuts and depresses the compensation for workers at home, both blue- and white-collar. The recent H1B visa debate on X raised all these issues. In short, illegal immigration, coupled with top-down diversity ideology, has destroyed the national economy and workforce.

Second, no one should be wedded to labels such as “DEI,” since the labels change all the time. Congressman Burgess pointed this out, calling it the rebranding phenomenon. Not only are university DEI offices renaming themselves things like Access, Compliance, and Community offices, but the concept of diversity itself previously went by other terms, such as multiculturalism. But even before that, it was racial preferences, or affirmative action, or reverse discrimination. Americans reject them all. Americans believe in equal opportunity, not playing favorites, much less playing favorites based on skin color.

Third, Harper also seems oblivious to the real target of diversity ideology: Western Civilization and especially the Christian ethics that formed it. In his long list of groups that supposedly contribute to diversity, for example, Christians of European descent are conspicuously absent. DEI’s animus against Christianity is clear from its promotion of sexual degeneracy. DEI encourages all manner of sexual activity except within the context of marriage and family. But traditional Christian teaching specifically protected human sexuality by honoring it within marriage and ordering it toward children and family life. In short, DEI agitators covertly target Christian morals with race as cover.

Obsessing about race in the West is ironic since the West is probably the least racially bigoted region in the world. After all, most of the globe is beset by ethnic tension—India still informally has a caste system, for example; the Middle East and Africa are still largely tribal, as is much of Asia. Witness China’s subjection of the Uyghur people. Ugly tribalism is the norm, not just throughout human history but still in much of the world. While the West had different tribes or nations, its Christian heritage tried to unify them since Christianity was for “all nations” and depended on individual belief, not tribal supremacy.

Furthermore, millions of migrants risk their lives to live in the West and America. But we’re told we’re systemic racists in need of DEI?

Last, pointing to dozens of studies to rationalize DEI is unserious. First, such publications are self-serving; these authors often have academic positions dependent on DEI bureaucracies. But more importantly, everyone knows that universities were captured by the political left decades ago. “Republicans need not apply” is an understatement; many academic departments actually have zero registered Republicans.

The result is that the American college campus is now a place of left-wing political agitation, not a place of serious learning or research.

Consider that Harvard’s own former President Claudine Gay was a serial perjurer. And Oregon professor Pete Boghossian exposed fraud in academic journals when he famously accepted an essay on dog-on-dog sexual assaults in Portland public parks.

Modern academics cite studies because they get to conduct them—they ask the questions, they decide which findings to publish, and they decide what to promote, all the while pretending the content is objective or serious. It’s not. Witness the rise of fake science.

In saner times, academics used words such as reason, understanding, and even wisdom (philosophy), not studies, articles, and journals.

In the end, among the best and most real teachers are experience and reason. Reasonable people know that a country needs unity and excellence to be strong, not diversity—just as the title of the House Education Committee Hearing suggests.

The FBI and Department of Homeland Security warned of an “elevated threat” to the U.S. Jewish community following an attack last weekend in Boulder, Colorado, and last month’s killing of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington.

In a bulletin issued on Thursday, the agencies said that the Israel-Hamas conflict “may motivate other violent extremists and hate crime perpetrators with similar grievances to conduct violence against Jewish and Israeli communities and their supporters.”

“Foreign terrorist organizations also may try to exploit narratives related to the conflict to inspire attacks in the United States. The FBI and DHS therefore urge the public to remain vigilant and to report any threats of violence or suspicious activity to law enforcement,” the joint statement added.

As Jack Phillips report for The Epoch Times, the statement made references to both the Boulder attack, in which an Egyptian national and illegal immigrant allegedly threw Molotov cocktails at people who were protesting in solidarity with Israel and sought the release of Israeli hostages in the conflict. Prosecutors said that 15 people were injured in the incident.

Mohamed Soliman, the suspect, allegedly yelled “free Palestine” during the attack, federal officials have said.

Prosecutors also said that Soliman told officials that he “wanted to kill all Zionist people” and that he also expressed no regret about the attack.

Soliman was charged with a federal hate crime, as well as 118 state charges, including attempted murder, use of an incendiary device, and assault. He has not entered a plea in the two cases against him.

Federal authorities have said Soliman has been living in the United States illegally. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said on Wednesday that his family was being processed for removal, though a federal judge later stopped their deportation.

Before moving to Colorado Springs three years ago, Soliman spent 17 years in Kuwait, according to court documents.

The FBI and DHS notice Thursday also made reference to the attack in Washington, where suspect Elias Rodriguez shot and killed two Israeli embassy staffers after they attended an event at the Capitol Jewish Museum. Video footage and charging documents said that Rodriguez yelled “free, free Palestine” while he was being arrested and handcuffed.

The two staffers, Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Lynn Milgrim, were a young couple who had worked at the embassy. Lischinsky was an Israeli national and Milgrim was a U.S. citizen from Kansas, family members have said.

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino has described both the Washington and Boulder attacks as terrorist acts.

“We are investigating this incident as an act of terror, and targeted violence. All of the necessary assets will be dedicated to this investigation,” Bongino said in a statement on the social media platform X this week, in reference to the Boulder attack.

“If you have any investigative tips please contact the FBI. And if you aided or abetted this attack, we will find you. You cannot hide.”

Later in the notice, the FBI asked people to “promptly report information concerning suspicious activity” to the FBI’s tip website or local field offices.

Authored by Peter Hussey via RealClearWire,

With the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, and for now the passing of the immediate danger of a nuclear conflict in South Asia, it would make sense to review the current world-wide nuclear state of affairs, especially as we honor those who sacrificed to protect our freedoms.

Much of the recent news has concentrated on the buildup of China’s nuclear forces and the Russian threats to use their nuclear forces against Ukraine and its allies. In addition, there have been reviews of North Korean missile tests and to what degree Iran has enriched uranium.

Although all serious developments, what is missing is an appreciation of what these four rogue states wish to do with their nuclear capability, whether numbering in advance centrifuges or dozens, hundreds, or thousands of nuclear warheads.

As has been often argued, numbers do matter in the nuclear balance. And thus, increasing numbers should be of growing concern to U.S. security analysts.

But what is it that these states wish to do with these nuclear weapons?

That’s where the rubber meets the road.

Three of the four are seeking to build “empires” of sorts while the fourth (North Korea) is a cooperative adjunct of the other three and undertakes whatever the three require.

President Putin has said he does not wish to re-create the Soviet Union. However, he apparently does want to re-create Russia as an empire, including and particularly incorporating Ukraine, the Baltics, Finland, and much of Eastern Europe. Russia is not only terrorizing Ukraine with drones and missiles but also engaging in sabotage and cyber war against nations in eastern Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.

China sees its rightful place in the international firmament as the world’s hegemon having a right under heaven to be the world’s premier power, even as Gordon Chang has cautioned, including dominion over outer space, the moon, and even Mars to achieve these goals. China has unleashed unrestricted warfare against the United States and its allies especially in the economic field and harms our social cohesion with what Xi calls a reverse opium war.

Iran is guided by its constitutional mandate to export its violent and terrorist Islamic doctrine through the use of multiple proxy, terror organizations, such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.

After 56 years of such terror, Iran has caused the death of tens of thousands at a cost of multiple trillions of dollars. Contrary to popular belief, Iran’s terror campaigns are not going to be settled with the adoption of an unattainable but pretend two state solution between Israel and the Palestinians.

Iran seeks to build an Iranian condominium of allies in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria as well as Gaza and the West Bank with which to attack Israel and U.S. interests in the Middle East. That Israel and the United States have seriously eroded this Iranian objective is good news, but the bad news remains that Iran fiercely holds onto this objective.

As long as the United States maintains military forces in the Republic of Korea, North Korea will probably not invade. However, North Korea’s role is to pin down American resources in and around the Republic of Korea and Japan, in order to force the United states to provide resources in the area while Chinese created conflict is initiated elsewhere in the western Pacific, particularly with respect to Taiwan. You can be sure that the CCP will cleverly use North Korea as a proxy force to make it all the more difficult for the United States to defend its other allies in the region.

In addition, it is well known North Korea and Iran cooperate on missile and nuclear technology developments. North Korea and Russia cooperate similarly, as well as having the former provide troops for Russia’s war against Ukraine. In addition, North Korea serves as China’s agent whenever the CCP decides to create military mischief somewhere against American interests. And China buys Iran and Russia energy, helps Iran arm the Houthis piracy, and underwrites most of the North Korean economy.

These enemy forces in Europe, the Middle East and Asia confront the United States with serious military threats that cannot be thwarted by any U.S. quick pivot to Asia. All our allies must pivot as well to all three geographic areas as the United States cannot deter these threats alone. That is why the administration as far back as 2017 pushed hard to get NATO to the 2 percent\GDP defense level and why now in 2025 that goal has rightly extended to 5 percent.

Europe has a GDP closing in on $20 trillion, with a population of 449 million, and a per capita income of $62,000. America’s Indo-Pacific allies number two billion people, with a GDP of $20 trillion and a per capita income reaching $34,000 in the Republic of Korea and Japan, $84,000 in Singapore and $10,000 in India.

All can contribute to freedom’s collective security which is precisely what the Administration is seeking, and putting America first is not putting the U.S. alone. The U.S. investment in defense is now approaching $1 trillion which is necessary to protect our security and deter bad “hombres.” When measured in what it would cost the United States to buy the military fielded by China and Russia, the U.S. defense spending matches but does not exceed Moscow and Beijing. Given the United States has global obligations and security requirements, the resources applied to defense and security make sense but cannot be expected to meet all our collective and joint security needs. Real allies pull their own weight and do not depend solely on their friends for security.

Together America and her allies can pivot to the growing dangers. And if proceeding with the moral clarity of peace through strength, we can protect our security through deterrence and welcome indeed many future decades of peace and prosperity.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

Where have all the globalists gone? Yes, unfortunately they’re still out there free when they should be rotting in a frozen gulag or fertilizing an unmarked field somewhere.  I get that.  However, if you’ve been tracking the elitist cabal as long as I have you might have noticed a sudden and abrupt shift in public activity among the most prominent globalist institutions.

From at least 2019 onward the mask had come completely off. The elites were flooding western media with woke propaganda through their NGO operations. You couldn’t go anywhere without being bombarded with multiculturalism, DEI and LGBT nonsense. There was a clear attempt to engineer a massive cultural shift in the western world; an expedited progressive coup.

Conservatives were relentlessly targeted as “insurrectionists” and a “threat to democracy”. Pandemic hysteria opened the door to an array of mandates as well as legislation designed to erase constitutional protections in the name of “health safety”. The plan was openly admitted: An endless cycle of covid lockdowns and vaccine passports. A perpetual loop of medical tyranny. Globalists were ecstatic, reveling in the fear and calling for the implementation of forced vaccinations, covid tracking apps and even covid camps for people who refused to comply.

In the midst of the frenzy the WEF and other organizations pushed their economic agenda, asserting that the world needed to go cashless, that carbon controls and “climate lockdowns” needed to become normalized.  They wanted what they called a “Great Reset” of the global financial framework. Everything was admitted, they barely tried to hide their intentions. It was the New World Order we “conspiracy” analysts had been warning about for decades.

In the past they would mention details of the plan in obscure white papers or in moments of unguarded discussion. Over the past five years the globalists were essentially dancing in the streets and advertising the NWO for all too see. Why? Because they thought they had already won.

Fast forward to 2025 – The covid mandates and lockdowns are defeated and abandoned. The multicultural invasion is being reversed with a majority of the American population in support of secure borders and deportations. Bans on the transing of kids are being established across the US and LGBT propaganda is being removed from schools. DOGE and Trump instituted cuts which have greatly damaged the government-to-NGO revolving door (which is why many DEI programs are disappearing).

BLM is dead. Pride Month is a dud (so far). Covid is being exposed as the nothingburger it always was. The climate change agenda is fading. The masses are generally suspicious of organizations like the WEF and no one supports a cashless CBDC based system. The globalist ideal has been relegated to the garbage heap and we didn’t even need to fire a shot. Is this what winning looks like?

Not quite.

We have won the information war in the US (for the most part). Europe is taking longer, but conservatives movements are gaining ground; so much ground, in fact, that the elites are arresting people for speech, not to mention arresting their political opponents for being right leaning. This is a sign of panic, not power.

The globalists flew too close to the sun too fast and they got burned. Nearly every major elitist institution has stopped openly promoting “Great Reset” related policies. They’ve limited their media interviews and their think tanks have stopped releasing revealing white papers. Some globalists have suggested in media encounters that globalism is dead. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink even used a Financial Times op-ed to argue that “globalization is over”.

I’ve never seen them back off from their agenda so completely, and I’m highly suspicious of the radio silence.

As I warned in my article ‘World War III Is Now Inevitable – Here’s Why It Can’t Be Avoided’, the globalist plan for a Bolshevik coup has failed, but this only means they will move on to more historically predictable tactics. Meaning, exponential economic crisis and world war.

European political leaders have made it nearly impossible to negotiate a legitimate ceasefire in Ukraine because they continue to give Kyiv hope that NATO will step in with boots on the ground. Even if the US completely pulls all support, the Ukrainians believe Europe will fill the gap. This is ridiculous, of course; the EU has no capacity to fight an attrition war with the Russians and they are much more likely to trigger a nuclear event than liberate Ukraine.

What concerns me more, though, is a specific strategy being used by NATO and Kyiv:  I’m talking about the deliberate targeting of Russian nuclear infrastructure. This has been an ongoing problem since the beginning of the conflict and it seems to me as if the elites WANT some kind of catastrophic escalation.

Ukraine has used multiple drone attacks to strike nuclear power plants, including its OWN Zaporizhzhia and Chernobyl plants. The Kursk offensive (now failed) pushed towards a nuclear power plant in the region and Russia accused Ukraine of trying to hit the plant with drones. In early 2024, Ukraine long range drone and missile attacks hit two separate Russian “over the horizon” early warning nuclear radar installations.

The Voronezh-DM stations were positioned outside the city of Orsk and the region of Krasnodar (Armavir); far away from the front lines in Ukraine. I warned about this development in June of last year in my article ‘False Flag On The Horizon? The Strange Case Of The Destroyed Russian Nuclear Radar’.

This past week confirmed my suspicions when Ukraine initiated a complex covert strike on a base holding Russian long range bombers. These bombers were primarily nuclear readiness aircraft and are not generally used to launch FABs or other weapons against Ukrainian targets. The attack could not have been achieved without NATO aid and once again follows the odd pattern of targeting Russian nuclear infrastructure.

There are two obvious dangers attached to this scenario: First, Russia responds with a devastating bombardment of population centers to prove the strike on the bombers did nothing to prevent them from hitting Ukrainian cities from afar. Second, Russia assumes that NATO’s plan is to weaken their nuclear readiness in preparation for European troops entering the war, or in preparation for a nuclear exchange.

In either case, WWIII is the result. Establishment commentators have tried to spin the bomber attack as a Ukrainian victory without consequence, but they deliberately omit the primary purpose of the aircraft.  Best case scenario, Russia pounds a few Ukrainian cities with massive ordnance. At worst, the nuclear threat becomes tangible and we edge towards a missile exchange.

I continue to believe that the globalists want to avoid full spectrum nuclear war.  Why would they deliberately vaporize the very control grid it took them decades to build?  But I do think we will see a limited nuclear event in the near future (perhaps a limited nuke event in Ukraine).

The continuing attacks on nuke related armaments and infrastructure suggest to me an attempt by Kyiv and NATO to create a situation so chaotic that it opens the door to troop deployments and direct confrontation with Moscow before anyone can catch up to what is happening.

Without war, the globalists have nothing. Maybe they can pull off an economic crisis (all the pieces are certainly in place), but in a vacuum they could get the blame. War offers a valuable distraction for the masses and an ever adaptable scapegoat. People broke and starving? Well, that’s just war. The dollar crashing? Currencies are at risk during war. Freedoms being curtailed? Hey, people need to set aside their liberties for the sake of “security”.

There’s a reason why multi-nation wars almost always occur just after historic economic declines.  The two crises feed into each other, but the wars also provide cover for extensive centralization schemes.  Each successive world war brings us a step closer to world government and a centrally controlled global economic system.

The globalists in Europe are doing everything in their power to prolong the conflagration. They know Ukraine is never going to get their lost territory back. They know that Russia is generating a massive breakout on the front lines in the east. They have no peace plan. Their purpose is to force a direct confrontation between NATO forces and Russian troops. It’s the only explanation for the attacks on Russian nuclear armaments. It’s a provocation designed to end all chances of a ceasefire and take the war to the next level.

The unsettling quiet from normally boisterous NWO reps within think tanks and the media suggests to me that a memo has been posted from on high.  All other programs have been scrapped and all eyes are on Ukraine and Russia.  Perhaps the globalists have suddenly gone quiet because they’ve set Plan B in motion, and this time they don’t want any of their people talking out of turn until total war is accomplished?

As the old saying goes, loose lips sink ships…

Of course, there’s always the chance we see escalation in Iran, or a Chinese move on Taiwan.  There are more than a few precarious powder kegs in place right now.  What I see, though, is an inordinate amount amount of financial and political energy going into the Ukraine affair.  The elitists are mostly tight lipped about it, but an inordinate amount of financial and political energy is flowing into the region.  It’s clear that the next couple of months will be highly unstable as tensions mount.

Diplomatic pathways are fading fast.

Most likely scenario?  Ukraine cities get hammered in a relentless Russian bombardment and Europe vows to deploy its forces to intervene.  Even if Trump cuts off all US ties to Ukraine and walks away, there’s little that can be done to prevent the disaster that comes next. 

It’s not necessarily a scorched earth option for the globalists, but it certainly seems like a last resort – Conjuring a calamity big enough to distract the masses while total centralization is instituted.  I’m not saying the plan will work, I’m just saying that this is their most viable strategy.

Authored by Daniel Oliver via American Greatness,

Seventy-one years ago next month, a young man went with his parents and siblings to Europe on a Cunard liner, the MV Britannic.

On the liner with them was a middle-aged couple going to France to visit, for the first time, their son’s grave in Normandy, France.

The beaches of Normandy are where thousands of soldiers, including their son, landed and died on D-Day: June 6, 1944.

The young man, then aged fifteen, had, at best and generously, little understanding of what that couple was doing. Oh yes, he remembered the war from his earliest childhood: he remembered blackouts in New York City, remembered his mother putting the heavy blue paper that cotton came in those days over the windows of their apartment so the “Jerries” (Germans) wouldn’t see any light, remembered hearing planes fly overhead, wondering whether they were “ours” or “theirs,” and remembered his father going at night to stand on the roofs of buildings to be a spotter of German aircraft.

And he remembered hearing the church bells ring when the war in Europe ended—but he was only six then, so his memory was, and is… sketchy.

Seventeen years later, when he was serving in the army in Germany, the horror of war intruded into his faint memory—and almost entirely literary understanding—of armed conflict.

He was a linguist, trained to understand Russian, and particularly Russian military language and jargon. In the unit he was serving with, the best duty, but only for the best linguists, was “plane duty”: the soldiers flew along the East German border most of an afternoon and night, listening to whatever they could pick up, and then had several days off! Our young man was selected for plane duty but was scrubbed from it, permanently, because he was going home for a few weeks of leave.

One night after he returned from leave, the plane crashed. All on board were killed. The official explanation was engine failure, but all the soldiers on the base “knew” it had been shot down by the East Germans (probably the pilot had strayed over the border) and that the U.S. government (the Kennedy administration) had decided not to make a cause célèbre out of it.

Our then-young man remembers seeing the married men’s wives (some of them no more than about eighteen years old) come to the base and collect their husbands’ belongings. That’s when the horror of war hit home.

No movie, not even Saving Private Ryan, could produce the effect of seeing those young girls collecting, grasping at the scanty memorabilia that remained from their very short married lives.

Twenty-seven years later, on a Sunday afternoon, our young man, by then middle-aged, took his children to Coleville-sur-Mer, which is where the Normandy American Cemetery is located. It was officially dedicated on July 19, 1956. Before 1956, the remains of American soldiers who died during the Normandy campaign were temporarily interred at various sites, including the original cemetery established at Saint-Laurent-sur-Mer shortly after D-Day. It was to one of those sites that the couple on the Cunard liner were going.

That Sunday afternoon, the sun was bright and the weather warm, not at all like D-Day, when the temperature there had been around 55 degrees and the water temperature 59 degrees. (When was the last time you went swimming in 59-degree water?) The wind had been blowing 10 to 20 mph, gusting higher at times, which created the waves and surf that complicated the beach landings and made airborne drops difficult—facts you know if you’ve seen the movies.

But on that sunny day so many years later, our middle-aged man watched two of his sons stroll up from the landing beach in their Brooks Brothers blazers and loafers. He stood transfixed, watching, appreciating the study in contrast—and his good luck of not being on the army plane that had crashed in the line of duty.

Today, the cemetery at Coleville-sur-Mer, burial ground of 9,387 soldiers, is, some of its visitors think, the eighth wonder of the world. Rows and rows of graves marked by crosses, and some by Stars of David, remind us that greater love hath no man than this: that he lay down his life for a friend.

Yes, yes, those soldiers didn’t plan to lay down their lives. Most were drafted, although about a quarter had volunteered. But still, they did lay down their lives, and you can, and should, visit their graves at the American Cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer before you… join them. And if you can’t get to Normandy, there are 156 military cemeteries in the U.S.—one of which is bound to be near enough to you to coax a visit.

Can those of us today, in our Brooks Brothers suits, or BB look-alikes, ever really appreciate the grind and sacrifice of war? Or is it all simply beyond most of our ability to imagine?

There’s a museum at the Normandy cemetery that displays letters from some of the young soldiers who went from America to those beaches, so many of them to die. Their letters show that many had no idea where they were going or even where Normandy was. But there they were, nevertheless, saving Western Civilization.

World War I was called “the war to end all wars.”

But of course it wasn’t, as the world discovered only twenty-one years later.

Can wars ever end? Probably not, because some things are worth fighting for. And dying for. Is Western Civilization one of those things? Do most Americans think it is? Do enough Americans think it is worth dying for? Will we have to find out?

That is worth contemplating on June 6 this year, as we remember—as the once-young, and then middle-aged, and now old man remembers—those who died for us eighty-one years ago, some of whom are buried in the American Cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer, Normandy, France.

A new public opinion poll shows that most Russians no longer consider the United States to be their number one global enemy, which suggests that Trump administration's stance on the Ukraine conflict has served to soften public opinion in Russia.

"The U.S. dropped from first to fourth on this list for the first time in 20 years of measurements," the independent pollster, Levada Center, said in a newly published survey.

Via Reuters

The top three most hostile countries, according to the Russian respondents, were named as Germany (55%), the United Kingdom (49%) and Ukraine (43%).

This interestingly coincides with Trump's return to the White House and repeat pledges to deescalate and ultiamtely end the war in Ukraine. He has also thus far refrained from calls to slap new sanctions on Moscow in order to give peace negotiations a greater chance.

At the same time, both the UK and Germany have been urging a 'coalition of the willing' to boost defense spending and present a united front against Russia. Berlin and London have become more and more hawkish.

Among past Russian public opinion polls, past downturns in US favorability followed the 2008 Russo-Georgian war and the 2014 annexation of Crimea, and resulting Washington sanctions and pressure.

The Levada Center survey shows Russians view there closest allies to be Belarus (80%), China (64%), Kazakhstan (36%), India (32%), and North Korea (30%).

Interestingly, Iran's support fell significantly, despite Tehran now being a main drone supplier for Russia's military. Only 11% of Russians surveyed named Iran as a top ally, which is down from 22% in 2024.

The  Levada Center noted of this particular survey that it was conducted in person among over 1,600 Russian adults from May 22–28.

Another general observation is that there is probably growing war weariness among the Russian public. Well over three years after the Ukraine war kicked off with intensity, there are grim estimates that hundreds of thousands of young Russian men may have been killed. Certainly war weariness has also take hold of Western populations for some time now. It appears common Russians are increasingly blaming the leading European countries for recent escalations.

The Kremlin on Friday responded to President Trump's prior day's comments which likened the Ukraine war to a schoolyard fight. 

"Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy, they hate each other and they're fighting in a park," Trump said on Thursday. "Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart," he added.

via TASS

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that while the US leader has a right to his own opinion, it remains that for Russia this conflict is an existential matter of ensuring its own security and stability and the nation's future.

"Here, of course, the U.S. president may have his own point of view on what is happening," Peskov said. "For us, this is an existential issue, it is a matter of our national interests, a question of our security, the future of us and our children, the future of our country," he added in remarks translated from Russian.

President Trump was trying to be optimistic in his Thursday meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House. "We'd like to see it end, and maybe it'll end," Trump had told Merz of the Ukraine war.

"But we get some news, there'll be some fighting. Something happened a couple of days ago," he noted of the recent drone attack escalations and that he's "unhappy about it."

"But I think eventually we're going to be successful in stopping the bloodshed," the US president then emphasized.

Watch Trump given his latest thoughts on the crisis:

Trump revealed his Ukraine strategy.

He had a 2 hour 15 minute call with Putin just before Merz arrived.

His approach? Let them "fight like children in a park" before pulling them apart.

But there's a hidden deadline that changes everything... pic.twitter.com/Y0Q8yXy4AL

Trump has continued to hold off on yet another round of anti-Russia sanctions, while seeking to keep peace negotiations open:

U.S. President Donald Trump has asked the Senate to delay voting on a bipartisan Russia sanctions bill, Republican Senator Roger Wicker said on June 4.

...The bill, introduced on April 1 by Senators Lindsey Graham (R) and Richard Blumenthal (D), seeks to impose a 500% tariff on imports from countries that continue purchasing Russian oil and raw materials.

"I know that he (Trump) asked the leader (Senate Majority Leader John Thune) not to bring the bill to a vote this week," Sen. Wicker had said.

While the so-called Big Beautiful Bill may have killed the bromance between Elon Musk and President Trump, House Republicans released a bill on Friday that would rescind $9.4 billion in federal spending ahead of a floor vote next week - largely made up of waste, fraud and abuse found by DOGE. 

The U.S. Capitol building in Washington on June 3, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

The seven-page bill would rescind $22 million from the US African Development foundation, $15 million from the US Institute for Peace, and billions of dollars in bilateral economic assistance. It would also codify some of the cuts identified by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 

As the Epoch Times notes further, the White House sent the package to Congress last week under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

Under it, the president sends rescission requests to Congress, which has 45 days to take action on them.

It is not subject to the 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate.

Republicans have already expressed support for the package.

“Now that this wasteful spending by the federal government has been identified by DOGE, quantified by the administration, and sent to Congress, House Republicans will fulfill our mandate and continue codifying into law a more efficient federal government,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote on social media platform X.

“This is exactly what the American people deserve.”

Rep. Dan Meuser (R-Pa.) wrote on X: “These packages will be a key step toward codifying President Trump’s agenda and delivering lasting spending reductions in government.

“With nearly $7 trillion in annual federal spending, we need to prioritize the ’must-haves’ over the ‘nice-to-haves,’ to address our enormous national debt.”

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) told The Epoch Times: “I haven’t seen the USAID rescissions to know exactly where they are, because ... I don’t know what’s in the package to know what they’re exactly implementing rescissions on.

“I have no concern with [NPR rescissions]. I understand from my staff, it’s only about 1 percent of their funding today. I haven’t heard a lot of people reporting that consistently. But if, in fact, that’s the case, it seems like they should be able to manage that.

“And if that’s the president’s priority, we should move forward with it.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller wrote on X why a rescission package was needed.

“DOGE cuts are to discretionary spending [for the federal bureaucracy]. Under Senate budget rules, you cannot cut discretionary spending in a reconciliation bill,” he said.

“So DOGE cuts would have to be done through what is known as a rescissions package or an appropriations bill.”

Nathan Worcester contributed to this report.

Authored by Rudy Blalock via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Certain ground beef products distributed to Whole Foods Market locations nationwide have been pulled from shelves due to potential E. coli contamination, according to a June 3 U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) notice.

Image of the ground beef product detected to have been infected with E. Coli. Courtesy of June 3/FSIS public safety alert

The alert applies to 1-pound vacuum-packed packages of “ORGANIC RANCHER ORGANIC GROUND BEEF 85% LEAN 15% FAT,” marked with “Use or Freeze By 06-19-25” and “Use or Freeze By 06-20-25.”

The meat products, produced on May 22 and May 23, 2025, bear the establishment number “EST. 4027” inside the USDA mark of inspection, according to FSIS.

While a recall was not requested because the products are no longer available for purchase, FSIS urges consumers to check their refrigerators and freezers for the ground beef.

The product was initially shipped to distributor locations in Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, and Maryland, where it was then distributed to Whole Foods Market stores across the United States, the agency said.

The potential contamination was discovered when the producer of the products alerted FSIS that ground beef shipped into commerce had tested positive for E. coli O157:H7.

At this time, there have been no confirmed reports of illness associated from consumption of the affected products. Regardless, FSIS advises anyone concerned about a possible illness to contact a health care provider.

E. coli O157:H7 is a potentially life-threatening bacterium that can cause symptoms such as dehydration, bloody diarrhea, or abdominal cramps two to eight days after exposure, with most cases occurring three to four days after ingestion.

Most individuals recover within a week, but some, especially children under five and the elderly, may develop hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a form of kidney failure.

FSIS notes that HUS is characterized by easy bruising, pallor, and decreased urine output, and urges anyone experiencing these symptoms to seek emergency medical care immediately.

FSIS is concerned that some consumers may still have the affected ground beef in their possession.

The agency advises, “Consumers who have purchased these products are urged not to consume them. These products should be thrown away or returned to the place of purchase.”

FSIS says that all consumers should safely prepare raw meat products and only eat ground beef that has been cooked to an internal temperature of at least 160 degrees Fahrenheit.

For food safety questions, consumers can call the USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at 888-MPHotline (888-674-6854) or email MPHotline@usda.gov. Problems with meat, poultry, or egg products can also be reported online 24 hours a day via the Electronic Consumer Complaint Monitoring System at https://foodcomplaint.fsis.usda.gov/eCCF/, according to the agency.

From NTD News

Last month we described how North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was left humiliated and outraged after personally witnessing the May 21st botched launch of a new, 5,000-ton destroyer, after which he called it a "criminal act" and a "political issue directly related to the prestige of the state."

North Korea now says Thursday it has successfully raised the capsized warship and moored it at a port in the country’s northeast for repair. KCNA reports that "after restoring the balance of the destroyer early in June, the team moored it at the pier" in the city of Chongjin.

The flipped-over 5,000 ton destroyer before it was set upright, via Airbus Defence and Space

South Korea's military has cited recent commercial satellite images to assess that the 5,000-ton destroyer has indeed been finally restored to an upright position.

The failed side-launch of the ship reportedly resulted in damage to the hull, due to a transport cradle having detached prematurely, allowing the vessel to be wrongly aligned upon entering the water.

North Korean officials are vowing that the "perfect restoration of the destroyer will be completed without fail" before the deadline set by Kim, which is a major ruling party meeting later this month.

Al Jazeera cites KCNA to say, "Experts will now examine the warship’s hull for the next stage of restorations, to be carried out at Rajin Dockyard over the coming week to 10 days."

According to further prior reporting in KCNA, the ship was left with holes torn into its hull, but the outlet didn't report if there were any human casualties. Kim blamed the incident on "unscientific empiricism" and said it "lowered the dignity and self-respect" of the country - or essentially national humiliation.

North Korea confirmed its capsized warship was upright and stable, but a layer of intrigue lingers: Why the armada of massive balloons? https://t.co/paIp9rOXyD

He ominously promised that consequences would be revealed at the ruling Worker's Party meeting in June, and had set the daunting deadline for the vessel to be repaired by the time of that same event. 

"No matter how good the state of the warship is, the fact that the accident is an unpardonable criminal act remains unchanged, and those responsible for it can never evade their responsibility for the crime," said the Central Military Commission. The manager of the shipyard was immediately summoned by police as they set out to investigate the incident and detain potentially culpable individuals.  

KCNA blamed "inexperienced command and operational carelessness." The outlet reported that the destroyer's starboard hull was scratched, and water entered the stern section.

North Korea was excited to launch their new "Unsinkable" warship.. but it crashed and sank when they launched it pic.twitter.com/iWyc6cmYh4

While the official line is that the damage was "not serious," outside observers have had major doubts. Given the entrance of water, "The propulsion systems and electronic components are likely beyond repair,” a naval construction expert told South Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo.