The launch suggests the armed forces are prepared “to thwart any aggression,” officials have said

The Pakistani military has successfully test launched a Fatah series short-range surface-to-surface missile, according to the country's armed forces press service.

Monday’s launch was the second such event in three days, and comes as tensions between Pakistan and neighboring India remain high following last month’s deadly terrorist attack in Kashmir.

The test launch of the missile, which has a range of 120 kilometers (74.5 miles) was “aimed at ensuring the operational readiness of troops and validating key technical parameters, including the missile’s advanced navigation system and enhanced accuracy,” according to a statement from The Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR).

The Fatah missile series is a family of domestically developed surface-to-surface guided rocket systems produced by Pakistan’s state-owned defense conglomerate, Global Industrial & Defence Solutions (GIDS).

The event “was witnessed by senior officers of Pakistan Army” who “expressed complete confidence in the operational preparedness… of Pakistan Army to thwart any aggression against the territorial integrity of Pakistan,” added the statement.

On Saturday, Islamabad successfully tested a surface-to-surface missile called the Abdali Weapon System, which has a range of 450km (280 miles). Both missile tests were part of a military drill named Exercise Indus.

India has not officially commented on the tests yet. However, the Hindustan Times reported before the first drill that New Delhi had condemned the planned Pakistani ballistic missile test as a “reckless act of provocation.”

The escalation between Islamabad and New Delhi came after terrorists gunned down 26 civilians in the Baisaran Valley, a popular tourist destination in Indian-administered Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir on April 22.

The Resistance Front, which is suspected to have links to the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, first took credit for the attack but later appeared to retract its claim. Indian authorities have named three individuals as suspects; two of them are Pakistani citizens.

Following the incident, India accused Pakistan of supporting armed militants involved in cross-border operations—an allegation that Pakistan has strongly rejected.

Last week, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi granted the country’s armed forces “full operational freedom” to respond to the terrorist attack.

READ MORE: Putin calls Modi and condemns Kashmir terror attack

Both nations have expelled diplomats, closed airspace, and engaged in cross-border shelling along the Line of Control (LoC), a military demarcation line that divides the two nations.

Have you heard the endearing story about how the ladybug earned its name?

Ladybugs are associated with various symbols, including luck and good fortune. However, did you know there is a symbol from a Catholic perspective?

The story goes that in Europe during the Middle Ages, swarms of pesky insects (probably aphids) destroyed crops and threatened faithful farming communities with starvation.

In desperation, the farmers, who had a devotion to the Blessed Mother, turned to the Virgin Mary for help!

Soon after, a cloud of black-spotted, red-orange insects came and devoured the plant-destroying pests, saving the crops!

The farmers considered this an answer to their prayers and a sign of Our Lady’s intercession. They began referring to these life-saving, beautiful insects as “Our Lady’s Bugs.”

Variations of this name, including "The Beetles of Our Lady" and "Lady Beetles,” came about. In Germany, the term "Marienkäfer" means “Marybeetle.”

The bug’s red-orange wings represent the mantle of the Blessed Virgin Mary, while the black spots symbolize her joys and sorrows.

Here are some of our favorite prayers for gardeners and farmers:

Prayer to Saint Fiacre, Patron of Gardeners

Prayer in Honor of Saint Isidore the Farmer

President Trump has proposed using the revenue from his increased tariffs to lower or even eliminate income taxes — with a priority on removing Americans making less than 200,000 dollars a year from the tax rolls. Exempting more Americans from income taxes — and lowering taxes on other Americans— is certainly a worthwhile endeavor. However, replacing income taxes with tariffs may have negative consequences for the very Americans President Trump wants to help.

Replacing with tariffs what the government raises from income taxes may require raising tariffs even higher than President Trump’s “liberation” tariffs. This would cause more price increases and encourage other governments to retaliate by raising their tariffs, further disrupting supply chains and leading to even higher prices and shortages. The negative impacts of tariffs could dwarf the benefits of lower, or even no, income taxes.

Consumers can try to avoid tariffs on goods. Massive avoidance of tariffs could lead to the imposing of higher tariffs or new taxes. The reason politicians must play the game of “offsetting” tax reductions with tax increases is they refuse to make meaningful reductions in government spending. The politicians’ favorite tax is the Federal Reserve’s inflation tax because it is hidden. It is also regressive, making it the worst type of tax.

The media and big spenders in both parties are screaming about how President Trump’s budget proposal contains large reductions in federal spending. However, even if all of President Trump’s 163 billion dollars of proposed cuts are enacted in law, the federal government will still spend about 1.7 trillion dollars next year in its “discretionary” budget. The cuts would be less than eight percent.

While President Trump is proposing many necessary cuts in federal agencies and programs, including those concerning the use of taxpayer money to promote “wokeness,” his budget increases military spending to around a trillion dollars. It also makes no changes to Social Security or Medicare. This means President Trump’s supposed radical spending plan does not reduce spending on three of the four largest items in the federal budget. The fourth is interest payments on the national debt, which Congress cannot reduce except by cutting spending.

Of course, it is unlikely that all, or even most, of President Trump’s spending cuts will be enacted into law. Prominent Republicans have already announced opposition to some of President Trump’s spending cuts. Some Republican defense hawks, including the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, have criticized President Trump’s budget plan for not spending enough on the military!

The truth is that, if the president and Congress were serious about cutting spending, they would start by slashing the Pentagon’s budget. Very little of the military spending actually goes to defending the American people. Instead, much military spending goes to maintaining a global empire and lining the pockets of the military-industrial complex. Does anyone believe the safety of Americans depends on the US government maintaining over 700 military bases abroad?

The fiscal crisis facing America is rooted in a larger philosophic crisis. Too many Americans have embraced the notion that the US government has the moral right and competence to run the economy, run the world, and even run our lives. This system will not change until a critical mass of people embrace the ideas of liberty. Those of us who know the truth must do all we can to spread the message of liberty, peace, and prosperity.

Trump Is Destroying America, but He Is Making Israel Great

Paul Craig Roberts

Presidents, like corporate CEOs and everyone else, have a limited span of control.  They can’t know everything or focus on everything.  Most presidential decisions are just acceptances of subordinate’s decisions. I know it.  I have been there.  I have seen it, both the President of the United States and the CEOs and boards of corporations are dependent on information that comes from below. And often in the case of government the information from below is from outside.

We are now witnessing this in the Trump regime. Real ID is a George W. Bush/Cheney regime measure from the fake “war on terror” that was used by Washington to remove Arab governments opposed to Greater Israel.  Until Trump, no president wanted the flack of imposing it on “free” American citizens, thus revealing to them how unfree they are.  But the police state crowd see Trump’s concern with illegals as an opportunity to finally get their old handiwork from the “war on terror” Implemented.  And Trump has obliged. 

We are also witnessing the ruling establishment’s success in removing Trump’s people in the hopes of replacing them with one of theirs.  Having learned nothing from failing to stand by General Flynn, Trump’s national security adviser for ten minutes in Trump’s first term, Trump has repeated his mistake.  He kicked his national security advisor upstairs to be US Ambassador to the UN.  Why?  Because someone mistakenly included the Jewish editor of the leftwing magazine, The Atlantic, in on a meeting about bombing Yemen.  

Clearly, the invitee list was a staff responsibility.  The real problem is that Atlantic editor Goldberg did not announce at the meeting that he doubted he was supposed to be present in a national security discussion.  Instead he kept silent, took notes, and published an article.  I do think that his dishonest behavior displaying a total lack of integrity is indictable.  Instead of kicking his national security advisor upstairs, Trump should have had AG Bondi arrest and prosecute Goldberg for revealing national security secrets. But Trump would be too afraid to treat an Israeli-protected person that way. So Trump sacrificed his national security advisor.

Trump’s failure signals weakness or inattention, and now they are after his Defense Secretary. Same kind of charge. Hegseth let some confidential information out via some communication service to the delight of the Israel Lobby, which is using the mistake to have Hegseth removed. 

People are confused about this, because Hegseth is a Zionist, a full-time supporter of Israel. What got Hegseth in trouble is that he listened to knowledgable Pentagon personnel who explained to him that a US war with Iran for Israel was fraught with danger. He was advised, correctly, that once the US ignited a war Washington had no ability to control it.  The consequence could be the destruction of Washington’s bases in the Middle East and loss of every Navy aircraft carrier in the vicinity.  Hegseth backed off, Israel hit the roof, and Hegseth had to fire the advisers who told him the truth.

According to the liberal/left, the Democrats, and the media, Trump is tyrannical strength itself, imposing dictatorship on America, but neither Trump nor his administration have the strength to stand up to Israel.

What Trump is going to do is to make Israel great, not America.

All over the Western world it is already the case in many countries, such as Great Britain and Germany that criticism of Israel or of Jews is a criminal offense, and it is becoming the same in every Western country, eventually even in Russia. In America the Trump regime is deporting students who protest Israel’s American-supported genocide of the Palestinians.  Long ago Israeli propagandists convinced Americans that every Palestinian, even 3-year old children, was a terrorist who wore bomb vests in order to kill Israelis.  All the while Israel killed Palestinians, 3-year olds included, by the bomb load.

Even in the Red State of Texas, if you protest Israel’s genocide of Palestine, you are ineligible to have a state contract.

America is totally owned by Israel.  So is Trump.  So how can America be “made great again”?

Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher reveals alarming new data on mRNA-driven mass harm and death

https://www.globalresearch.ca/data-time-cancel-mrna/5885742 

This is US Representatie Marjorie Taylor Greene: the Firebrand Republican Member of the house: 

https://x.com/RepMTG/status/1918351681374581181 

She says Trump is losing support.

Hollywood is dying a “very fast death,” the US president has claimed  

US President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that he would impose a 100% tariff on foreign-produced films, marking the first time his restrictive trade policies have been extended to the entertainment industry.

In his post on the Truth Social platform, Trump claimed the American film industry was dying a “very fast death” due to incentives offered by foreign countries to lure US filmmakers.

Since returning to office in January, Trump has imposed sweeping tariffs, culminating in his ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs introduced on April 2. They target more than 90 US trade partners. Most were paused for 90 days, though a baseline 10% remains in effect. China was excluded from the pause and was hit with a tax of 145% on all imports. Beijing retaliated with 125% tariffs and new export controls on US goods.

Trump said he had directed agencies, including the Commerce Department, to begin “immediately” imposing a 100% tariff on all foreign-produced films entering the US.

“We’re on it,” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick responded on X. It remains unclear, however, whether the measure would target foreign studios, US companies filming abroad, or both.

The US president also framed foreign film productions as a national security threat, asserting that other countries were using cinema as a vehicle for “messaging and propaganda.”

 “WE WANT MOVIES MADE IN AMERICA, AGAIN!” he declared.

Trump’s post came after weekend meetings at his Mar-a-Lago Club with actor Jon Voight and his manager, Steven Paul, Bloomberg said citing people familiar with the matter. They reportedly presented the president with their plans for more federal tax incentives for US film and TV production.

In January, Trump appointed Voight, along with actors Mel Gibson and Sylvester Stallone, as special ambassadors to Hollywood to help promote US job growth in the entertainment sector.

Hollywood production has been increasingly shifting overseas, as countries such as the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand expand tax incentives to attract film and TV projects.

Film and television production in Los Angeles has declined by nearly 40% over the past decade, according to FilmLA, the region’s film office.

The trend has contributed to a decline in US-based shoots, with studios seeking lower costs and bigger rebates abroad. According to Ampere Analysis, global content spending is expected to hit $248 billion in 2025, driven largely by streaming platforms – further fueling the push for more affordable production hubs.

Trump’s move follows China’s decision last month to “moderately reduce” the number of Hollywood films permitted in the country, a retaliatory step against his aggressive tariff policies.

William Reinsch, a former senior Commerce official and CSIS fellow, warned that retaliation against Trump’s film measures could be devastating.

“We have a lot more to lose than to gain,” he told Reuters, adding that justifying tariffs on national security or emergency grounds would be difficult.

Press title for this man who is a doctor, had a Protestant father and became a bishop in the most liberal post-Vatican II Church everrrr!

Each day between now and the May 7 conclave to elect a successor to Pope Francis, John Allen is offering a profile of a different papabile, the Italian term for a man who could be pope. There’s no scientific way to identity these contenders; it’s mostly a matter of weighing reputations, positions held and influence wielded over the years. There’s also certainly no guarantee one of these candidates will emerge wearing white; as an old bit of Roman wisdom has it, “He who enters a conclave as a pope exits as a cardinal.” These are, however, the leading names drawing buzz in Rome right now, at least ensuring they will get a look. Knowing who these men are also suggests issues and qualities other cardinals see as desirable heading into the election.

ROME – In a conclave in which many cardinals don’t know one another, there’s probably a premium on familiarity – the better known and more established a given figure is, the greater the odds that others might see him as a viable candidate – if for no other reason, then simply on the basis of a “bird in the hand” sort of logic.

By that standard, Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith has to be considered a potential contender, if only by virtue of having been around. He’s been a cardinal for 15 years, a Vatican official before that, and got a look as a papal candidate 12 years ago during the run-up to the conclave that elected Francis.

Having kicked the ties on Ranjith once, it’s possible his fellow cardinals might be motivated to do so again.

With the formal name of Albert Malcolm Ranjith Patabendige Don, the future Prince of the Church was born in the small Sri Lankan town of Polgahawela in 1947 as the eldest of what would eventually be fourteen children. In a 2006 interview, he said his vocation was stirred by the example of a French missionary from the Oblates of Mary Immaculate who served in his parish.

After earning his undergraduate degree in theology from the Urbanian, Ranjith earned his licentiate at the prestigious Pontifical Biblical Institute in 1978, with a thesis centered on the Epistle to the Hebrews. (While there, he studied under two future Jesuit cardinals – Carlo Maria Martini and Albert Vanhoye.) Ranjith also did postdoctoral work at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

Marked out from the first as a rising star, in 1991 Ranjith became an auxiliary bishop of Colombo at the tender age of 43. In 1994, as a young bishop, Ranjith led a commission that denounced the theological work of Sri Lankan theologian Tissa Balasuriya, charging that he had questioned original sin and the divinity of Christ, as well as supporting women’s ordination. The resulting furor first brought Ranjith into contact with then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who backed his position.

Ranjith coordinated John Paul II’s January 1995 visit to Sri Lanka, and one can infer that he acquitted himself well from the fact that he was named the first bishop of Ratnapura nine months later.

Among other things, Ranjith has promoted inter-faith dialogue. Buddhism is Sri Lanka’s dominant religion, but the country also has significant pockets of Hindus and Muslims, while Christians make up roughly seven percent of the population of 20 million.

In 2001, Ranjith was brought to Rome to work at Propaganda Fidei and was simultaneously named president of the Pontifical Mission Societies, giving him a wide network of contacts across the developing world.

Ranjith was dispatched in 2004 as the papal ambassador to Indonesia and East Timor, becoming the first Sri Lankan to serve as a nuncio. It was an unusual move, since Ranjith was not a graduate of Rome’s Accademia Ecclesiastica and did not come out of the Vatican diplomatic corps. At the time, there were whispers that perhaps Ranjith had been “exiled” because he was seen as slightly too conservative for some prelates, either in the developing world or his superiors at Propaganda Fidei.

That cloud seemed to lift nine months later, when the new pope, Benedict XVI, called Ranjith back to Rome to serve as the number two official at the Congregation for Divine Worship.

Over the next four years, Ranjith became something of a bête noire for liturgical progressives. He criticized communion in the hand, saying it was not envisioned by the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) and became widespread only after its “illegitimate introduction” in some countries. When Benedict authorized wider celebration of the old Latin Mass in 2007, Ranjith openly blasted bishops who didn’t move quickly to implement it, accusing them of “disobedience … and even rebellion against the pope”.

During his various stints in Rome, Ranjith was dubbed il piccolo Ratzinger, or “the little Ratzinger”, both because of his short physical stature and also his close affinity for the positions of Ratzinger both before and after his election to the papacy.

Four years later he was moved out of Rome again, this time to become the Archbishop of Colombo. Some read this as a second exile on the basis that he was too close to the traditionalist wing of the Church. Others, however, argued that it was a genuine promotion, intended to give Ranjith pastoral seasoning as the head of the diocese and to set him up as Benedict’s point man across Asia.

He certainly didn’t waste time. Four months after arriving, Ranjith issued new liturgical rules for Colombo requiring that communion be received on the tongue and in a kneeling position, forbidding laity from preaching, and barring priests from bringing customs from other religions into Catholic worship.

In the years since, Ranjith has profiled as a staunch conservative on doctrinal matters and sexual morality, while also embracing the peace-and-justice elements of Catholic social teaching.

“Love for the liturgy and love for the poor, two true and proper treasures of the Church, one might say, have been the compass of my life,” he said. Ranjith once added that although he’s not an “adherent”, he shares some of the values of the “no-global” movement protesting neo-liberal models of economic globalisation. In 2015 he hosted Pope Francis on a successful trip to Sri Lanka, which came against the backdrop of a deep economic crisis and political instability.

Ranjith has been a strong voice for the victims of violence and persecution, including the survivors and families of the roughly 300 people who lost their lives in a coordinated series of terrorist attacks on Easter Sunday in 2019. He’s never been shy about wading into national politics; amid a deep financial and institutional crisis in 2022, he demanded that then-President Gotabaya Rajapaksa resign and new elections be called, which is precisely what happened.

The case for Ranjith as pope?

Most basically, he incarnates the ethos of Catholicism across much of the developing world: Strongly “progressive” on social justice issues such as poverty, climate change and migration, but staunchly “conservative” on doctrinal questions and matters of sexual morality. In that sense, he would be seen as representative of the “two-thirds” world which, these days, actually represents almost three-quarters of the global Catholic population of 1.3 billion.

Ranjith has extensive Vatican experience, so he wouldn’t require the same on-the-job training as a complete outsider. Given that everyone believes the next pope has to be a strong governor, capable, among other things, of addressing the Vatican’s dire financial situation, that’s a real asset.

In terms of the conventional handicapping categories, he passes with flying colors. For one thing, he’s said to be fluent in ten languages, obviously giving him the linguistic range to lead a global institution. At 77, he’s also right in the wheelhouse of the average age of the last two popes, who were 78 and 76 respectively at the time they were elected.

The case against?

Most basically, his stances might be seen as too far to the right for the comfort level of some electors. In addition, the likelihood that he might revive celebration of the older Latin Mass probably would be seen as a direct repudiation of Pope Francis’s legacy, which is an impression some cardinals may not wish to foster.

Some might also worry that Ranjith was twice sent packing from the Vatican. Whatever the actual motives, that history may suggest to some cardinals that he has a track record of ruffling feathers at a time when many are looking for a pope who can bring together diverse camps and mediate some of the Church’s internal tensions.

Finally, there may be a root sense in some quarters that Ranjith’s time has passed, that he had his shot twelve years ago and to consider him again now would represent a step back rather than forward. Whatever one makes of that assessment, it’s worth recalling that much the same thing could have been said for Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina in 2013, and we all know how that turned out.

Photo: Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, the head of Sri Lanka’s Catholic Church, speaks to media personnel in Colombo on April 3, 2025, announcing plans to mark the 6th anniversary of the 2019 Easter Sunday bomb attacks. (Photo by Ishara S. KODIKARA / AFP)

The post ‘Papabile’ of the Day: Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, ‘the little Ratzinger’ from Sri Lanka first appeared on Catholic Herald.

The post ‘Papabile’ of the Day: Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith, ‘the little Ratzinger’ from Sri Lanka appeared first on Catholic Herald.

The US president has said top Western officials are urging him to maintain communication with the Kremlin

US President Donald Trump has claimed that EU leaders are imploring him to engage diplomatically with Russian President Vladimir Putin, as the Kremlin allegedly refuses to respond to their calls.

The Russian government had been open to engaging with EU leaders, notably German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who reached out to Putin last November. Kiev criticized Berlin for the move, which it labeled a form of appeasement towards Russia.

Trump emphasized his role as a mediator during an interview with NBC News on Sunday, stating, “Do you know that the European Union leaders have asked me to call Putin so many times? Because he doesn’t return their phone calls.”

The Trump administration is acting as a mediator between Russia and Ukraine in an effort to broker an end to the ongoing conflict. Most European NATO members have pledged continued military support to Kiev. Some have discussed potential troop deployments to the region, rejected outright by Moscow.

He remarked that his Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, had not reached out to Putin at all, seemingly referencing the period following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Trump said his administration is “closer with one party, and maybe not as close with the other,” regarding a peace agreement, without specifying which is which.

Moscow has consistently expressed a desire to resolve its differences with the West through diplomatic means, although its proposals concerning NATO expansion in Europe were dismissed in 2021. 

Russia aims for an indivisible security framework in Europe, where the safety of one nation cannot come at the expense of another, Putin stated during a government meeting in February.

“We understand that not everyone welcomes the revival of Russian-American contacts. Some Western elites are intent on perpetuating global instability, and those forces will attempt to undermine or sabotage our dialogue,” he added.

In March, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov criticized French President Emmanuel Macron for publicly stating his willingness to talk directly with Putin but never acting on it.

"Resistance is futile" was a sentence that struck fear in the hearts of Trekkie fans during "Star Trek: The Next Generation," specifically in both of the "Best Of Worlds" and "First Contact" episodes. In those episodes, the "Starship Enterprise" crew encountered a species called the "Borg." The Borg's primary purpose was to achieve "perfection" by assimilating other beings and technologies into their "hive mind," known as the "Collective." They viewed assimilation as a means to expand their collective knowledge, power, and ultimately, their vision of a perfect and harmonious existence. The reason "resistance was futile" was that the centralized control, driven by the Borg Queen, allowed for swift and coordinated actions across vast distances. At the same time, the assimilation process threatened to erase individuality and homogenize the galaxy. 

I could go on, but you are asking yourself two questions. First, is Lance a total sci-fi geek? Second, what does this have to do with the markets and investing? The answer to the first question is "yes," as I grew up with William Shatner as James T. Kirk in the original Gene Roddenberry "Star Trek."

However, let's dig deeper into the second question.

Over the past two weeks, the market has had a furious nine-day rally, the longest winning streak in 21 years. However, there are two takeaways from such a historic advance. First, it is "bullish" as investors return to the market. However, investors should also recognize that if the rally is the longest in 21 years, then previous such rallies failed. As shown in the chart below, there have been longer rallies, with 14 trading days being the peak. But in every case, it is worth remembering the following:

"'Record levels' of anything are records for a reason. It is where the point was reached where previous limits existed. Therefore, when a 'record level' is reached, it is NOT THE BEGINNING, but rather an indication of the MATURITY of a cycle.”

That reality exists for any data set, at either extreme. Let's look at two examples.

The Bearish Example

On April 7th, the day the market bottomed, I wrote an article entitled "Hope In The Fear," in which we discussed the extremes of "bearish sentiment" and technically oversold conditions. To wit:

"There are times when the probabilities of something happening outweigh the possibilities. Following last week’s market crash, the “probability” of at least a near-term rally outweighs the possibility of a further decline. Does that mean it is guaranteed to happen? No. But, several indicators have historically tilted the odds in the investor’s favor."

The reason was the extreme technical oversold conditions that existed.

"Whether or not the current market crash is the beginning of a larger corrective cycle, such low readings have, without fail, marked the near-term low of a market correction. While the market has previously continued its corrective process after such low readings, such did not occur without a meaningful reversal rally first."

When analyzing the market from a technical perspective, technicians watch two primary levels: support and resistance. As always, the demand between buyers and sellers determines stock prices. When the supply of stock for sale overwhelms the demand from buyers, "resistance" occurs, which impedes prices from moving higher. The same happens during declining markets, where resistance (support) to lower prices forms as the demand from buyers overwhelms the supply of stock for sale.

In that April 7th article, we stated that the markets were three standard deviations below long-term moving averages and challenging rising trend lines. In other words, those were previous levels where "resistance was futile," such oversold conditions typically precede short-term rallies to allow investors to reduce exposure to equities. We also noted that the target for a tradable rally was between 5500 and 5700. (The market closed at 5686 on Friday.)

Such is why we focus heavily on investor sentiment and positioning. When investors are extremely bearish and are "panic liquidating" equity exposure during a market decline, that is often a contrarian indicator that resistance to a further decline is forming. When sellers become exhausted, it only takes a few buyers to push higher prices. Of course, when resistance to lower prices forms, the media headlines are often the most negative, and investors' "loss aversion" behavior is the most extreme.

As we concluded in that article:

"It won’t take much for the market to find a reason to rally. That could happen as soon as next week. If the market rallies, we suggest reverting to the basic principles to navigate what we suspect will be more volatile this year. However, at some point, just as we saw in 2022, the market will bottom. Like then, you won’t want to believe the market is bottoming; your fear of buying will be overwhelming, but that will be the point you must step in.

Buying near market lows is incredibly difficult. While we likely aren’t there yet, we will be there sooner than you imagine. As such, when you want to 'sell everything,' ask yourself if this is the point where you should 'buy' instead."

But what about the bull case?

Resistance For The Bulls

As with the bears, "resistance is futile" for the bulls just as much. As noted above, the market has had the longest "positive day" stretch in 21 years. While the media is becoming more convinced that the "bulls are back in town," which is probably true, it should also be a warning that "resistance" to higher prices is forming since such previous winning streaks have failed.

As noted above, the relentless market rally has pulled many investors back into the market over the last few weeks. Sentiment has quickly changed from extremely bearish to bullish, and professional investors have rapidly ramped up exposures. While sentiment and positioning are not yet back to extremes, the market has technically reversed much of its previous oversold and technically deviated conditions.

Most notably, the market is now approaching the 200-DMA, which is a level at which many buyers were stepping in before the "Liberation Day" market plunge. Many buyers are close to getting back to even and will likely be inclined to sell as they approach breakeven. Furthermore, the 100-DMA, which is close to crossing the 200-DMA, provides further resistance. As noted in "Death Cross," these moving average crossovers impede further price advances until they reverse.

The 100 and 200-DMA moving averages have historically defined market trends. For example, the 100-DMA (blue line) supported market pullbacks during 2021 and since the October 2022 lows. Conversely, those moving averages defined the peaks of reflexive rallies during the 2022 correction. With the markets again trading below those averages, seeing sellers emerge as markets approach those resistance levels would be unsurprising.

Is the current correction over, and is the bull market resuming? Maybe. We certainly saw such a situation in the summer of 2023, when the markets declined 10%, a "death cross" occurred, and markets immediately bottomed and surged to new highs. Then, like today, there was a surge in corporate buybacks and a quick reversal of very bearish sentiment. However, as shown in the chart above, even if we are experiencing a 2023-type scenario, there will be short-term corrections and pullbacks, providing investors an entry point to increase equity exposure as needed.

So, how do we know if the current market is like 2022 or 2023? Should investors be selling rallies or buying dips?

Beating The Borg

In Star Trek, the crew of the Enterprise eventually defeats the Borg through a combination of strategic attacks and exploiting weaknesses in their collective structure. The crew of the USS Enterprise-D, led by Captain Picard, used their access to the Borg collective, through Picard's assimilation, to their advantage and were able to disable and destroy the Borg cube by exploiting its regeneration subroutines. Unfortunately, defeating the "collective" of our emotional biases when investing isn't much easier, but it is possible.

Interestingly, when I write posts like these, someone often comments, "Why won't you just tell us whether the market is going up or down?" It's a fair statement, but unfortunately, I am not prescient, nor is anyone else, and navigating markets does not work like that.

If I want to be bearish, it is easy to state the market is at resistance and about to crash, so you better "get out now." Or, if I wanted to be bullish, I could point to October 2022 and make the case why markets are about to surge higher. Either prediction has a decent chance of being wrong, leaving investors on the wrong side of the trade. As such, this is why we don't predict, but instead navigate the current market for the possibilities versus the probabilities.

Historically speaking, when markets break longer-term moving averages, the first attempt at reversal often fails. Notice that I said "often" and not "always." That is because sometimes markets do the unexpected, and, as investors, we must be able to recognize the change and respond accordingly. Such is why we never recommend entirely getting out of markets.

In a recent #BullBearReport entitled Spock & The Logic-Based Approach To Investing, we discussed that as investors, we must weigh possibilities and probabilities and manage our risk accordingly. To wit:

"Investing means cutting through noise, avoiding speculation, and relying on data. For example, the media is jammed with emotionally charged headlines about tariff-induced trade wars, recessions, and de-dollarization. In reality, those events rarely occur. The chart below shows a normally distributed bell curve of potential events and outcomes. In simple terms, 68.26% of the time, typical outcomes occur. Economically speaking, such would be a normal recession or the avoidance of a recession. 95.44% of the time, we are most likely dealing with a range of outcomes between a reasonably deep recession and standard economic growth rates. However, there is a 2.14% chance that we could see another economic crisis like the 2008 Financial Crisis. But what about “economic armageddon?” That event where nothing matters but 'gold, beanie weenies, and bunker.' That is a 0.14% possibility."

So, Where Are We Now

If you want my best guess, here it is:

• We've likely seen the market lows for this year.
• We've likely seen the highs as well.

Navigating a market trapped between support and resistance becomes emotionally challenging. Investors face sharp rallies into resistance — and retracements back to support — wearing down sentiment until mistakes happen.

Therefore, this is how we are positioned in this current and uncertain market environment.

• Primarily long equities, as the market structure remains bullish.
• Increased cash levels to manage policy and growth uncertainty.
• Short S&P 500 index to hedge downside risk.

We also recommend a healthy portfolio and risk management regimen.

1. Tighten up stop-loss levels to current support levels for each position.
2. Hedge portfolios against more significant market declines.
3. Take profits in positions that have been big winners.
4. Sell laggards and losers.
5. Raise cash and rebalance portfolios to target weightings.

Here’s the hard truth: you can’t measure risk in advance.

Markets are unpredictable, and while we can guess what might happen, the future is uncertain. When we think about risk, most of us focus on the risk of losing money. However, there are other risks we should be aware of, like missing out on gains by playing it too safe or being forced to sell investments during a market crash. Both can be just as damaging to our portfolios in the long run. We don't have any foresight into what the market will do next week or month.

All we can do is remain focused on our portfolio, manage the risk of "being wrong," and realize that "resistance is futile" when investing in the market. As Howard Marks once penned:

"Too little skepticism and too much eagerness in an up-market – just like too much resistance and pessimism in a down-market – can be very bad for investment results."

Just something to think about.

Now, "Make it so."

The post “Resistance Is Futile” – For Both Bulls And Bears appeared first on RIA.

The Ukrainian leader realizes Washington still needs him and he is becoming more authoritarian, Aleksandr Dubinsky has said

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky is testing America’s tolerance for abuses of power by sanctioning his critics, jailed Ukrainian MP Aleksandr Dubinsky has said.

Last week, Zelensky announced measures targeting his former top adviser Aleksey Arestovich, historian Konstantin Bondarenko, who published a biography of the Ukrainian leader, titled “The Joker,” and several other journalists and political analysts. Penalties have included asset freezes, restrictions on trade and financial transactions, travel bans and the revocation of state awards.

“By imposing sanctions against media people and political scientists, Zelensky is also testing the US tolerance for his dictatorship,” Dubinsky, who was detained by Kiev authorities in November 2023 on charges including high treason, wrote in a post on Telegram on Sunday.

The fact that the restrictions were announced a day after the signing of the minerals deal between the US and Ukraine was no coincidence, he suggested.

Zelensky is trying to find out “if there will be any reaction” to such a move from Washington when “the agreement is signed, but not yet ratified” by Ukraine’s parliament, the ousted legislator wrote.

The deal, which was agreed upon on Wednesday after months of difficult negotiations, established a joint investment fund and gave the US preferential access to Ukraine’s natural resources.

The American security guarantees which Zelensky’s government had been demanding were not part of the agreement, according to Ukrainian Prime Minister Denis Shmigal.

“Furthermore, Zelensky is also needed to sign the peace treaty [with Russia]. This gives him the opportunity to test the limits of what is allowed. Europe is satisfied with him, and the US seems to be satisfied with him now too,” Dubinsky stressed.

The Ukrainian leader sees the situation as an opportunity to get rid of his political opponents, he added.

Legislators from Zelensky’s Servant of the People party, who are “joyfully applauding the tyranny… do not understand that they are next. A dictator does not need fellow travelers, he only needs a show of force,” the MP wrote.

READ MORE: Ukraine exhibiting ‘classic terrorist behavior’ – Russian Foreign Ministry

Zelensky remains in power in Ukraine despite his presidential term officially expiring last May. He canceled the election citing the martial law he had imposed due to the conflict with Russia. In mid-April, the Ukrainian leader prolonged the emergency measures another three months.

The president envisions an expanded facility to house the “dregs of society”

US President Donald Trump has said he plans to revive Alcatraz Island’s historic role as a maximum-security federal penitentiary.

The US requires a place for the “dregs of society,” Trump wrote in a social media post on Sunday, as his deportation initiatives continue to face opposition in the courts.

Originally constructed as a military fortress off the coast of San Francisco, Alcatraz served as a correctional facility for nearly 30 years before its closure over six decades ago, subsequently transforming into a popular tourist destination.

Trump said he had instructed the Department of Justice “to reopen a substantially enlarged and rebuilt ALCATRAZ, to house America’s most ruthless and violent Offenders.”

“We will no longer be held hostage to criminals, thugs, and Judges that are afraid to do their job and allow us to remove criminals, who came into our Country illegally,” Trump proclaimed, describing the impending conversion as a “symbol of Law, Order, and JUSTICE.”

Having campaigned for the presidency with a promise to deport illegal migrants, Trump has encountered resistance from the courts, which interpret his administration’s procedures as violations of due process rights.

Positioned in a remote location around 2km off the Californian coast, Alcatraz – often referred to as “the Rock” – is notorious for its supposed inescapability. Of 36 inmates who attempted to flee, none were confirmed to have succeeded, though five remain listed as “missing and presumed drowned.”

The structure atop the island was initially erected in the 1850s as a military citadel to safeguard San Francisco Bay. The Department of Justice assumed control in 1933, utilizing it as a prison until 1963. The culturally significant landmark, regarded as a symbol of governmental pushback against rampant crime in the early 20th century, was eventually deemed too expensive to maintain compared to similar facilities.

Today, Alcatraz stands as a designated National Historic Landmark, attracting over a million visitors annually, with the National Park Service overseeing its management. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose district includes the island, dismissed Trump’s announcement as “not a serious one.”

Later in the day, the president told journalists that reopening the prison was “just an idea I’ve had.”