Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

American troops have been deployed in the Middle Eastern country since 2014

US President Donald Trump’s administration is considering a significant reduction of American troops in Syria, the Washington Post reported on Thursday, citing officials familiar with military planning.

American forces have been illegally stationed in Syria since 2014. Washington insisted they were deployed to counter ISIS, though they have remained in the years since Syria’s war ended.

A US official focused on the region told the WaPo there’s an expectation that troop numbers would be cut “to a bare minimum,” adding “I think we’re going to go down to one very small place in the northeast.”

A defense official confirmed ongoing plans to “reduce” and “consolidate” Washington’s troop presence but insisted a full withdrawal is not currently under discussion.

“Stuff is already moving, although they likely won’t announce anything before the Iran talks,” referring to US-Iran nuclear negotiations that began last week, with a second round set for this weekend in Rome.

Any withdrawal plans could be derailed by Islamic State’s increased attacks in eastern Syria, according to the WaPo.

In December 2024, shortly after Syrian President Bashar Assad was ousted, the Pentagon acknowledged having 2,000 troops in Syria – more than double the previously reported 900. Later that month, several media outlets reported that US military convoys carrying weapons and equipment had crossed into Syria from Iraq.

Both the former Assad government and Russia have repeatedly condemned the US presence as an illegal occupation, arguing that Washington was never granted permission to station troops in Syria. Damascus has also accused Washington of stealing Syrian natural resources, given that the US bases are located in the country’s oil-rich northeastern regions.

During his first term, Trump had ordered a partial withdrawal from Syria, though it was never completed. Since returning to office, he has largely avoided the topic, stating only that Syria is a “mess” and doesn’t need American involvement.

Last month, Washington handed Damascus a list of conditions for partial relief from Assad-era sanctions. The list, a copy of which was seen by the WaPo, included demands to allow US counter-terror operations on Syrian soil and a formal declaration of support for Operation Inherent Resolve – a US-led campaign against terrorism in Syria and Iraq.

Moscow is now being accused of orchestrating Islamist terrorism, among a litany of other ridiculous claims

Like people almost everywhere in NATO-EU Europe, Germans are currently being subjected to a relentless barrage of shameless, often astonishingly crude propaganda. That’s because their political elites and mainstream media are desperately trying to prepare them for war against Russia. And this time, not by proxy, that is, by way of a devastated Ukraine and dead Ukrainians, but directly.

As a former, very evil but in his prime all-too-popular German master of mass manipulation – who also happened to love war with Russia more than was good for him (or Germany) – explained a century ago, effective propaganda keeps the world very, very simple. Or, to add a little detail, propaganda’s sometimes literally stunning success is built on two primitive yet powerful – and very old – tricks: the broken-record principle and the litany effect.

Their meaning, too, is elementary: In essence, if your image of reality is delusional, you don’t have sound arguments, and your case is absurd, do not despair. Instead, ceaselessly drum in a few very basic and bogus ideas until the audience is dizzy with repetition (the broken-record principle), while also eliciting frequent consent from it (the litany effect). In short: Keep shouting the same nonsense at them and make them bleat back “yes” regularly. You know, like a ritual, really.

In the case of the manufacturing of the current iteration of traditional German the-Russians-are-coming hysteria as well, it is easy to identify its handful of specious, daft, and childishly simplistic key motifs: Russia and Russia alone is to blame for the war in Ukraine; Russia intends to attack Europe (if not the world) – and soon; and Russia is incredibly devious and scheming, so you cannot find a reasonable compromise with it.

Yet what about the nuts and bolts of this propaganda campaign? Even a simple story needs detail, and, if told and retold almost without letup, that detail at least needs to vary: Same old story but different flavor. That’s where things get tricky.

For one thing, if you pick the wrong flavor, your propaganda may start looking as silly as it actually is. A current example in Germany – as well as the EU parliament – would be the recent hysteria over the global hit Sigma Boy from Russia. Its brilliantly catchy tune is a piece of art, like it or not. But its lyrics are about as profound as a margarine commercial.

Yet that won’t stop Germany’s radical-Centrist elite from exploring the song’s ominous depths as a weapon of nefarious Russian cultural warfare. Because Sigma Boy, one EU parliamentarian from Hamburg has noticed – with a little help from Ukraine – is really “a viral Russian trope used on social media that communicates patriarchal and pro-Russian worldviews” as well as “only one example of Russian infiltration of popular discourse through social media.” Also, you see, Sigma Boy is really just code for – scary sound effect – PUTIN!

Silly? So ridiculous it gives you that cringey feeling you get when someone else is making a total fool of themselves and all you want to do is tell them to shut up already and save whatever maybe left of their credibility? Yes, obviously.

Indeed, in the case of the Great Sigma Boy Panic Attack, even Spiegel – a usually reliably Russophobic and NATO-militarist publication now – has mildly demurred. Dedicating a whole podcast to the phenomenon, it had an editor and journalist deliberate on the Sigma Boy case in all earnestness and with proverbial German thoroughness and faces serious enough for Kant and Hegel hashing out the nature of TikTok. The result: Maybe, just maybe, it’s really simply a pop song.

Now you could say “Great. At least someone is not completely falling for the mass hysteria.” But that would be too optimistic. In reality, the real question is how could things get so absurd in the first place? What is the Zeitgeist environment in which an EU parliamentarian is not ashamed to display so much provincial paranoia and Germany’s major news magazine needs intensive research and a long discussion to find out that, perhaps, she does not have a point?

In that regard, another recent propaganda fiasco is instructive. Its essence is simple: Some may know the ZDF, one of Germany’s most popular and influential public – that is, de facto state – TV channels most of all as a rock-solid mouthpiece of Israeli propaganda, especially during the ongoing Gaza genocide.

But the ZDF also has a substantial line in Russophobia. And for once, it went a little too far in its never-slackening eagerness to stick it to the big bad Russians: In its main news show and a long, sensationalist pseudo-documentary in its Terra X History program – under the title “Spying, Sabotage, Fake News. Putin’s war against us” – the broadcaster claimed, in effect if with some cheap pro forma hedging, that Russia was behind, among other nefarious schemes, an Islamist terror attack in the city of Mannheim in May 2024.

This was, obviously, an extremely serious allegation, in principle as well as in detail: the attack, carried out by a man from Afghanistan who had lived in Germany for ten years, left five victims injured and one, a policeman, dead. Moreover, in the consciousness of the German public, this particular terror attack is only part of a whole series of unrelated yet similar violent assaults that have taken place over the last year, including another one in Magdeburg as well as in the cities of Solingen and Aschaffenburg.

Hence, pointing a finger at Russia over one of these traumatizing onslaughts inevitably implied that Moscow may have had a hand in the others as well. Et voila! A new and particularly horrifying accusation against Russia had been manufactured: Moscow, so the essence of this wildest of many wild tales, was using migrants to instigate bloody Islamist terror in Germany.

And this big fat lie started working quickly: Various major mainstream media in Germany and abroad began to uncritically repeat the story, such as Britain’s Telegraph and The Sun, the German Merkur, and the French Sud-Ouest.

Yet the “research” on which ZDF had based this specific propaganda strike against Moscow was so breathtakingly sloppy that, this time, even Germany’s BND foreign intelligence service had to object.

Shortly after the ZDF had made its splash, the BND publicly contradicted it, pointing out that the method – basically a childish misreading of Google Trend data – used to produce these allegations against Russia is, in essence, ridiculously unreliable. Indeed, it turned out that several German intelligence agencies had warned the ZDF already before the Terra X pseudo-documentary was broadcast. Even Germany’s highly conservative Welt newspaper called the ZDF’s handiwork – with massive understatement – “negligent.”

So far, so bad. Just another case of propaganda becoming self-defeating by going too far. Let’s move on. And that is, of course, what is happening now. While the very worst lie about Russia has been discredited, there are virtually no consequences.

Yet, in reality, this is where the whole daft affair is only beginning to get interesting. For one thing, the Terra X feature, almost 45 minutes long, was packed with other, equally unfounded accusations against Russia. Indeed, it consisted of a long sequence of one hearsay after another speculation, all based on profound evidence of the “Western-intelligence-services-believe” type.

At Terra X, have they ever heard of those Iraqi weapons of mass destruction? The babies torn from incubators in Kuwait? Or Gaddafi handing out Viagra to his troops to promote rape? All of them, of course, lies; all, in their time, spread by those famously reliable Western intelligence agencies and mass media functioning as their servile propaganda arms. And all of these lies, these actual cases of “hybrid warfare” – by Western elites on their own populations – have always had the same purpose: prepare and justify Western military aggression.

Yet, in the Terra X case as well, the fact that the single most egregious anti-Russian allegation of many has been, for once, exposed quickly as at best reckless nonsense if not a deliberate lie, makes no dent in the story as a whole.

On the contrary, all that happens is that one scapegoat is singled out and sacrificed: Steven Broschart, the discredited “data profiler” and self-appointed “digital behavioral analytic.” It was all him, is the message now. But that is clearly untrue. Long stretches of the Terra X tale consisted of various, often much more prominent talking-heads lending their authority to a long list of equally unsubstantiated allegations of Russian crimes and, in general, helping beat the war drums against Moscow.

There was, for instance, an official of Germany’s domestic intelligence service – the Verfassungsschutz – who first conveniently confirmed that the internet is a “treasure chest” of information revealing sabotage and attack plans and then informed viewers that they are already at war with Russia, even if they haven’t noticed yet. No biggie in Germany now: at war, not yet at war with Russia… Who cares once we all know where we are supposed to be going anyhow, and so soon, too.

To be fair, the man from the Verfassungsschutz had his entertaining side: You don’t need tanks to bring down a country, he enlightened us, because you can also strike at its vital infrastructure. Really? You don’t say! You mean the way that Germany’s “allies” in Washington and its spongers in Kiev struck at the Nord Stream pipelines? No, just kidding. Of course, he did not mean that. Because that would be reality, and his job clearly is the opposite, propaganda.

Quintessential German professor Martin Schulze Wessel added platitudes about Putin, who, we learn, thinks in categories of East and West and antagonism. Wow! Aren’t we lucky that no one does so in Garden Value Europe and a Germany that has decided to quite literally define itself, again, via antagonism toward Russia.

In addition, the professor confirmed that Russia is a “direct” threat to Germany – clearly unlike, again, Ukraine and the US, obviously, even if they have actually committed the largest act of infrastructure sabotage in German peacetime history. And the German public must be made aware of that non-fact, the professor lectured. Thank you for summarizing the essence of propaganda so selflessly: making the people aware of what isn’t there. And, if we may add, the opposite is also important: that that same public is made unaware of what does, actually, exist, for instance that Nord Stream attack that must go forever unmentioned.

My only caveat regarding Schulze Wessel’s amusing contribution is that, as a matter of transparency, he could have let viewers know that he is heavily networked with Ukraine and in particular the rather nationalist city of Lviv. Again, no biggie: On the big crusade against bad Russia, minor sins are forgivable.

The cast of Terra X was rich and not everyone can be mentioned here. But we would be amiss to omit Anton Shekhovtsov. Ironically now based at some “Center for Democratic Integrity,” he is the commentator who publicly celebrated the Odessa Trade Union House fire, while comparing its victims to vermin, literally. Dehumanizing? A little on the fascist side psychologically, perhaps? Oh, come on! Once again, on the grand campaign against Moscow, a little excess of eagerness is more than welcome.

On Terra X his function was unspoken yet clumsily clear: He served as the “expert” explaining that everything alleged in the show is “hard to prove.” But, of course, not as in not likely to be true, but as in: absolutely true even without any evidence. Thank you, too, Anton, for demonstrating a basic yet always popular trick of gutter propaganda: “You can’t see them,” as it were, “but that’s only because they are so well hidden. Which proves again how dangerous they are.”

The single worst irony about this piece of weaponized “journalism” from one of Germany’s biggest broadcasters is its flatfooted hypocrisy. For, in the context of the Ukraine War, provoked and fought via proxy by the West, there are real sabotage and terrorism, namely by Ukraine and the West: The attack on the Crocus City venue in Moscow, the assassination of General Igor Kirillov, the heinous murder of Darya Dugina, the Ukrainian attacks on the Kerch Bridge and on Nord Stream, of course – and this list could be prolonged – are all clear examples of Ukraine using terrorism. And we have known for years now, from Western mainstream media, that behind these activities, there has been hands-on and proud support from Western intelligence services.

Is it possible that, in a conflict where the West and Ukraine have liberally deployed “hybrid war” tactics, Russia is sometimes paying them back in the same coin? Yes, in principle. You could even make a plausible argument that it has to do so to remain credible.

Accusations of promoting Islamist terrorism, from which Russia has suffered greatly, in any case, should be off-limits to anyone with half a brain and some elementary decency. And the West would do very well to mind the beam in its own eye.

For Western media that would mean that, even apart from the straightforward lying, against this background, it is not just dishonest but ridiculous to produce “journalism” that focuses on Russia alone. The very least a serious investigation would have to do is look at all sides and treat information from all sides critically.

But then, that would be a piece of practical enlightenment, intellectually and politically empowering viewers and citizens, and it would not be effective war-in-sight propaganda anymore. It might even end up – oh horror! – promoting compromise and peace.

As it is now, in Germany and elsewhere in Western Europe, journalists, security service officers, experts, and academics – all are perfectly fine with lending their name to propaganda of the basest form. What a shame.

Holy Thursday marks the institution of the priesthood and the Eucharist. What an incredible gift, and yet how very much it is ignored, or worse. Get to Confession, folks. Sorrowful Mysteries these three days. Blessed Triduum, all. -nvp

“Holy Thursday celebrates especially the institution of the Mass at the Last Supper as the Sacrifice and Sacrament of Christian unity. On this day also, Jesus first shared His priesthood with men by ordaining the Apostles. Then He uttered the command that is the reason for every Mass: “Do this in remembrance of Me.” This is a day to think of the great love Jesus showed in instituting the Eucharist and to return that love by receiving Him in Holy Communion. Through Holy Communion we are united to Christ and to one another.”

THE STRIPPING OF THE ALTARS
During the Stripping of the Altars, the celebrant recites the following antiphon and begins Psalm 21.

They have divided my garments among them, and for my vesture they have cast lots.

Psalm 21: O God my God, look upon me: why hast thou forsaken me? Far from my salvation are the words of my sins. O my God, I shall cry by day, and thou wilt not hear: and by night, and it shall not be reputed as folly in me. But thou dwellest in the holy place, the praise of Israel. In thee have our fathers hoped: they have hoped, and thou hast delivered them. They cried to thee, and they were saved: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded…

They have divided my garments among them, and for my vesture they have cast lots.

London’s global influence is dead – only the bluster remains

There are only two countries in the world that have exercised full autonomy over major political decisions for more than 500 years: Russia and Britain. No others come close. That alone makes Moscow and London natural rivals. But now, we can say with confidence that our historical adversary is no longer what it once was. Britain is losing its foreign policy clout and has been reduced to what we might call “Singapore on the Atlantic”: an island trading power, out of sync with the broader trajectory of world affairs.

The fall from global relevance is not without irony. For centuries, Britain caused nothing but harm to the international system. It played France and Germany off one another, betrayed its own allies in Eastern Europe, and exploited its colonies to exhaustion. Even within the European Union, from 1972 until Brexit in 2020, the UK worked tirelessly to undermine the project of integration – first from within, and now from without, with backing from Washington. Today, the British foreign policy establishment still attempts to sabotage European cohesion, acting as an American proxy.

The late historian Edward Carr once mocked the British worldview with a fictional headline: “Fog in Channel – Continent Cut Off.” This egoism, common to island nations, is especially pronounced in Britain, which has always existed beside continental civilization. It borrowed freely from Europe’s culture and political ideas, yet always feared them.

That fear was not unfounded. Britain has long understood that true unification of Europe – especially involving Germany and Russia – would leave it sidelined. Thus, the primary goal of British policy has always been to prevent cooperation between the major continental powers. Even now, no country is more eager than Britain to see the militarization of Germany. The idea of a stable Russia-Germany alliance has always been a nightmare scenario for London.

Whenever peace between Moscow and Berlin looked possible, Britain would intervene to sabotage it. The British approach to international relations mirrors its domestic political thought: atomized, competitive, distrustful of solidarity. While continental Europe produced theories of political community and mutual obligation, Britain gave the world Thomas Hobbes and his “Leviathan,” a grim vision of life without justice between the state and its citizens.

That same combative logic extends to foreign policy. Britain doesn’t cooperate; it divides. It has always preferred enmity among others over engagement with them. But the tools of that strategy are disappearing. Britain today is a power in steep decline, reduced to shouting from the sidelines. Its internal political life is a carousel of increasingly unqualified prime ministers. This is not simply a result of difficult times. It reflects a deeper problem: the absence of serious political leadership in London.

Even the United States, Britain’s closest ally, is now a threat to its autonomy. The Anglosphere no longer needs two powers that speak English and operate under the same oligarchic political order. For a time, Britain found comfort in the Biden administration, which tolerated its role as transatlantic intermediary. London leveraged its anti-Russian stance to stay relevant and inserted itself into US-EU relations.

But that space is narrowing. Today’s American leaders are uninterested in mediators. During a recent trip to Washington, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer could barely answer direct questions on foreign policy. His deference reflected a new reality: even the illusion of independence is fading. Meanwhile, France’s Emmanuel Macron, for all his posturing, at least leads a country that actually controls its nuclear arsenal.

Britain claims to have authority over its nuclear submarines, but many doubt it. In ten years, experts believe it may lose even the technical capacity to manage its nuclear weapons without US support. At that point, London will face a choice: full subservience to Washington or exposure to EU pressures, especially from France.

Recent talk in London of sending “European peacekeepers” to Ukraine is a case in point. Despite the unrealistic nature of such proposals, British and French officials spent weeks debating operational details. Some reports suggest the plan stalled due to lack of funds. The real motive was likely to project relevance and show the world that Britain still has a role to play.

But neither the media spin nor the political theater can change the facts. Britain’s global standing has diminished. It is no longer capable of independent action and has little influence even as a junior partner. Its leaders are consumed by domestic dysfunction and foreign policy fantasy.

In practical terms, Britain remains dangerous to Russia in two ways. First, by supplying weapons and mercenaries to Ukraine, it increases our costs and casualties. Second, in a moment of desperation, it might try to manufacture a small nuclear crisis. If that happens, one hopes the Americans would take the necessary steps to neutralize the threat – even if that means sinking a British submarine.

There is nothing positive for Russia, or the world, in the continued existence of Britain as a foreign policy actor. Its legacy is one of division, sabotage, and imperial plunder. Now, it lives off the crumbs of a bygone empire, barking from the Atlantic like a chihuahua with memories of being a lion.

The world moves on. Britain does not.

This article was first published by ‘Vzglyad’ newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team.

Officials believe that even the US president’s closest aides do not have decision-making power, the report says

European officials are seeking to establish a “direct line” of communication with US President Donald Trump, unsure whether his team can make any real decisions or is willing to cooperate at all, the New York Times reported on Thursday, citing sources.

The report, based on interviews with numerous unnamed European officials, describes the US president as “the ultimate decision maker” who is often difficult to predict, making the goal of getting Trump’s ear a priority for the Europeans.

Many top-level negotiators in European NATO countries have found traditional diplomatic channels – such as the State Department and embassies – ineffective, the report said. The confusion is compounded by the fact that the most effective interlocutors on the US side are not career diplomats but rather trusted special envoys and advisers, such as Elon Musk and Steve Witkoff, the article said.

The officials also told the NYT that their US counterparts are primarily focused on fulfilling the president’s wishes, showing limited interest in the perspectives of America’s allies.

The Trump administration is “not terribly interested in what the Europeans have to say,” a NYT source said. “It’s all about unilateralism and they don’t consult much. After all, if they don’t consider us allies to that extent, why would they?”

While senior Trump officials have held “cordial” talks with their European counterparts on a number of issues, “it is never clear to allies” whether they have “real power over foreign policy or trade,” the article said.

”Everyone in D.C. says you have to talk to Trump directly,” a senior European official told the NYT.

However, this has proved difficult even for the highest-ranking EU officials, as Trump “despises the collective power of the European Union and sees many NATO allies as freeloaders,” the paper said, adding that leaders such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen are struggling to get on Trump’s calendar.

The communication breakdown comes at a time of tenuous US-EU relations, marred by Washington’s decision to slap the bloc with tariffs and its push to make European NATO members pay more for their defense. Differences over the Ukraine conflict have also come into play, with Trump pursuing active diplomacy with Russia to end the conflict while the EU insists on supporting Kiev for “as long as it takes.”

Israel has seized over half of the Palestinian enclave in a renewed offensive after a ceasefire with Hamas collapsed last month

Israeli troops will remain indefinitely in the so-called security zones it has established within Gaza, the defense minister said on Wednesday. He added that their forces will also stay in similar zones in Lebanon and Syria.

West Jerusalem has said the buffer zones are necessary to protect its communities and prevent future attacks by military groups. In Gaza, the military has established corridors to separate areas under Hamas control.

Israel has also refused to withdraw from some areas in Lebanon following a truce with Hezbollah last year, and it seized a buffer zone in southern Syria, following the ousting of former President Bashar Assad.

“Unlike in the past,” the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) “is not evacuating areas that have been cleared and seized,” Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a statement. The IDF “will remain in the security zones as a buffer between the enemy and [Israeli] communities in any temporary or permanent situation in Gaza – as in Lebanon and Syria.”

Israeli forces have taken control of more than half of Gaza in a renewed offensive following the collapse of a ceasefire and the stalling of hostage negotiations last month. The IDF has resumed airstrikes in Gaza to increase pressure on Hamas to release the remaining captives who were taken during the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on southern Israel.

Katz also stated that Israel will block any humanitarian aid from entering Gaza.”No humanitarian aid will be allowed into Gaza,” he said on X on Wednesday.

Preventing humanitarian aid from entering the enclave “is one of the main pressure tools that stops Hamas from using this means against the population,” he added.

Israel’s stance could further complicate negotiations with Hamas over a ceasefire in the Palestinian enclave and the release of the remaining hostages. Palestinians, as well as Lebanon and Syria, regard the presence of Israeli troops as a military occupation that violates international law.

On Wednesday, Palestinian health officials reported that Israeli strikes in Gaza killed 22 people, including a girl under the age of one. More than 50,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, according to the Palestinian authorities, since Israel launched its military operation in response to the Hamas attack.

Hamas has stated that it will not release the remaining hostages without a permanent ceasefire and a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. The Israeli authorities have reported that 59 hostages remain in the enclave, with 24 believed to be alive. Dozens of others were previously released through ceasefire agreements or separate deals.

The Palestinian organization representing the families of the hostages accused the Israeli government of prioritizing territorial control over the lives of the captives, despite earlier promises to put the hostages first, according to AP.

 Saint Pope Paul VI certainly embraces the trappings of the papacy and does so in great humility out of respect for this high office which transcends His Holiness! This synopsis of the consecration is very clear and beautiful as are the Ancient Rites of the Church for this occasion! However, at this period, the Italians assisting the pope act in rather hysterical ways almost like the keystone cops. That seems to have been reformed in Italian culture today. 

The Spanish Government, Like All Western Governments, Hates Its Own People

This young woman was sentenced to a year in prison, where she will be raped multiple times, for saying the truth:  “This is not migration, it’s an invasion” and “Spain is Christian, not Muslim.”

https://media.scored.co/post/QQMc5LhShmqz.jpeg 

Americans Cannot Get the Truth About Anything

Allegedly a free people in a free country with free speech, Americans are kept forever in the dark.  

Mel Gibson calls for ‘truth’ about 9/11

The actor has described the 2001 attacks as “the biggest scandal in American history”

https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/615816-mel-gibson-911-truther/ 

All Gulf States want to join diplomatic efforts to end the Ukraine conflict, Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed Al-Ansari has told RT

Qatar advocates for peaceful solutions to global conflicts, including the Ukraine crisis, Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed Mohammed Al-Ansari has told RT. According to the diplomat, Doha backs efforts to end the hostilities between Russia and Ukraine and is ready to contribute further.

Al-Ansari spoke to RT ahead of a visit to Russia by Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, who arrived in Moscow on Thursday.

“Qatar has always advocated for peaceful resolutions to all conflicts. This stance… reflects Qatar’s belief that all crises should be resolved at the negotiation table, not on the battlefield,” Al-Ansari said in an interview aired on Wednesday.

He praised Gulf states’ diplomatic initiatives, including recent Ukraine-related talks hosted by Saudi Arabia.

“These efforts undertaken by the Gulf states… demonstrate that our region strives to become a center for peaceful resolution rather than a battleground for wars and conflicts,” he said. “We hope to see positive outcomes from these efforts for both our region and the entire world.”

Al-Ansari said Qatar is “ready to act as a mediator” and help facilitate dialogue between all sides of the Ukraine conflict. He noted Doha’s past role in reuniting children evacuated from the combat zone with their families and contributing to the now-defunct Black Sea grain deal, which enabled food exports via the freight route early in the conflict. Qatar, he added, wants to play an even “more active role” in resolving the crisis.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that the Ukraine conflict and related peace efforts are on the agenda for the meeting between Al Thani and Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as bilateral ties and Middle East affairs.

“Qatar plays an important role in attempts to resolve many crises,” Peskov said, adding that Moscow “highly appreciates a trusting dialogue” with Doha on international issues. He said Putin and Al Thani are also expected to discuss expanding cooperation in trade, energy, agriculture, and industry.

“We have good prospects for expanding mutually beneficial trade cooperation,” Peskov stated. “We hope to launch major joint logistics projects soon and broaden cooperation in the transport sector overall.”

Recent consumer sentiment readings have been horrendous. For instance, the University of Michigan's latest consumer expectations and the Conference Board’s consumer confidence index are at or near their lowest levels in ten years. However, despite poor sentiment and concerning outlooks, recent consumer spending reports show increased spending. We, and many economists, believe this is a function of consumers frontrunning tariffs. If you think that tariffs will increase the price of goods appreciably, frontrunning, or buying more than you need, or in advance of a need, makes sense.

The latest Johnson Redbook weekly retail sales index argues consumers are frontrunning tariffs despite having historically poor sentiment. This odd divergence can be seen on the graph on the right. The Johnson Redbook index measures year-over-year same-store sales growth for a sample of large U.S. general merchandise retailers, covering about 9,000 stores. Because the index is released weekly, it provides one of the most real-time indicators of consumer spending. The change in spending over the last two weeks is near its peak for the last few years. Further confirming the Johnson Redbook data was Wednesday's Retail Sales data, showing the largest gain since January 2023. Motor vehicles, a likely candidate for tariff frontrunning, drove the strong spending.

Remember, the surge in spending today, especially that related to front-running tariffs, will result in less spending tomorrow as consumer needs are sated.

What To Watch Today

Earnings

Economy

Market Trading Update

In yesterday's update, we discussed the decline in the dollar relative to the "bear porn" parade of people trying to get clicks and views by promoting the "death of the dollar." The next "bear porn" headline will be the "death cross" of the S&P 500. It sounds ominous when couched in those terms, but all it means is that the 50-dma has crossed below the 200-dma.

I don't want to dismiss the importance of that negative crossover, as it does provide significant overhead resistance to market prices during its tenure. But also, as is ALWAYS the case, the crossover will end and markets will begin to rise once again. For investors, the "death cross" is the duration during which such negative price pressure will remain applied to the market. Sometimes, the "death cross" is associated with more significant bear markets; however, it usually tends to occur in shorter-term corrections. I will discuss this in more detail in Monday's blog post, but the chart below shows the S&P 500 versus historical "death crosses."

There were three periods when the "death cross" signaled a larger risk-off environment. In 2000, it was the beginning of the Dot.com crash, in 2008, the "Financial Crisis," and in 2022, as the Fed hiked rates. Other than those three periods, the other "death crosses" triggered near correction period lows.

What is important is to separate out the difference between an "event" driven downturn and a "structural" downturn. 2000, 2008, and 2022 were structural in nature as companies collapsed during the dot.com crisis, banks were on the brink of failure in 2008, and recession risks were elevated with high inflation in 2022. Those structural events cause a significant repricing of earnings and valuations, requiring more time for markets to realign with future expectations. "Event-driven" downturns like the 2012 Eurocrisis, Brexit in 2016, and the Fed's taper tantrum in 2018 typically evoke short-term market corrections as the markets quickly return their focus to future expectations once the event passes.

While the current downturn and triggering of the "death cross" are certainly worrisome, this "event-driven" downturn will quickly pass as economic policy uncertainty fades. As the Administration begins repealing tariffs and negotiating deals with China, the relief of tariff fears will become supportive of deeply negative market sentiment and oversold conditions.

The point is not to overreact to the surge in "death cross" stories. They are important, but more often than not, they are indicative of near-term market bottoms rather than the beginning of a larger bear market cycle.

China Trade Restrictions Make NVDA Attractive

Nvidia shares (NVDA) are again under pressure due to tariffs and trade-related restrictions. On Tuesday afternoon, they announced that the US government would indefinitely ban them from selling their H20 chips to China. Consequently, they are taking a substantial charge-off to first-quarter earnings. Per the company:

First quarter results are expected to include up to approximately $5.5 billion of charges associated with H20 products for inventory, purchase commitments, and related reserves.

The graph below shows that 10-15% of Nvidia's revenue is from China. Losing Chinese revenue, even if temporary, will sting. But is the stock price already pricing in the bad news and not factoring in NVDA's growth potential?

While we do not know the ultimate resolution regarding tariffs and trade restrictions, we do know NVDA is cheap. The Tweet of the Day at the bottom of this Commentary shows NVDA valuations are at or below their respective 10-year means. NVDA has a forward P/E of 18, below the S&P 500 (21). Furthermore, NVDA is growing its earnings and revenues at many multiples of the market. Accordingly, NVDA has a PEG ratio of 1.15, less than half of the S&P 500. NVDA shares may stay under pressure for the foreseeable future, but they present investors with the rare opportunity to buy a value stock with high growth potential.

Swaps And Basis Trades Warn Of Mounting Liquidity Problems

Extreme volatility in a highly leveraged financial system inevitably results in liquidity issues. Hence, recent instability is generating mounting signals that liquidity is becoming scarce. This is most evident in the sharp increase in risk-free Treasury yields over the last week. Before the yield surge, liquidity problem warnings appeared in lesser-followed places like Treasury basis trades and interest rate swap spreads.

As we have learned repeatedly, the Fed will take extensive emergency measures if it perceives liquidity problems. Even above their Congressional-mandated objective of managing employment and prices, the Fed’s top priority is preserving the banks. Accordingly, following markets that can provide early notification of liquidity problems will go a long way toward foreshadowing the Fed’s next action and ultimately effectively managing wealth during this volatile period.

READ MORE...

Tweet of the Day

“Want to achieve better long-term success in managing your portfolio? Here are our 15-trading rules for managing market risks.”

Please subscribe to the daily commentary to receive these updates every morning before the opening bell.

If you found this blog useful, please send it to someone else, share it on social media, or contact us to set up a meeting.

The post Frontrunning Tariffs Boosts Economic Activity appeared first on RIA.

Social Security plays a crucial role in retirement income planning. Making informed decisions about when and how to claim benefits can maximize your Social Security benefits and significantly impact your long-term financial security. Claiming Social Security wisely requires a deep understanding of how benefits are calculated, the impact of different claiming ages, and the strategies available to optimize your payout.

In this guide, we’ll explore how Social Security fits into an overall retirement plan, how to navigate tax implications, and the best ways to strategically claim your benefits for long-term financial stability.

How Are Social Security Benefits Calculated?

The Social Security Administration (SSA) determines your benefit amount based on:

• Lifetime Earnings – Benefits are calculated using your highest 35 years of earnings. Low or zero-earning years can lower your benefit.
• Full Retirement Age (FRA) – The age at which you are entitled to receive 100% of your primary insurance amount (PIA), which varies depending on your birth year.
• Age When You Claim – Claiming before or after your FRA affects your monthly payments.
• Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) – Benefits adjust annually to account for inflation.

The Impact of Claiming at Different Ages

When you claim Social Security greatly impacts the total amount you receive over your lifetime.

Claiming Early (Age 62-66)

• Provides immediate income but results in permanently reduced benefits.
• May be necessary for those with health concerns or financial hardship.
• Can impact spousal benefits if married.

Claiming at Full Retirement Age (FRA 66-67)

• You receive 100% of your benefit.
• No reduction in spousal or survivor benefits.

Delaying Until Age 70

• Boosts benefits by 8% per year after FRA
• Provides maximum lifetime benefit if you expect to live longer.
• Can significantly increase survivor benefits for a spouse.

Strategies for Maximizing Social Security Benefits

1. Delay Claiming for Higher Payouts

If you don’t need immediate income, delaying benefits until age 70 can provide substantially higher lifetime earnings.

2. Optimize Spousal Benefits

• Spouses can claim up to 50% of their partner’s FRA benefit.
• This is particularly beneficial when one spouse has lower lifetime earnings.
• Claiming spousal benefits does not reduce the higher-earning spouse’s benefit.

3. Take Advantage of Survivor Benefits

• Widowed spouses can claim the higher of their own benefit or their deceased spouse’s benefit.
• Delaying a claim increases the survivor’s lifetime payout.

4. Minimize Taxes on Benefits

• Up to 85% of Social Security benefits may be taxable depending on total income.
• Consider Roth conversions or tax-efficient withdrawal strategies to lower taxable income.

5. Work While Receiving Benefits? Understand the Limits

• If you claim before FRA and continue working, benefits may be reduced if you earn over $22,320 (2024 earnings limit).
• Once you reach FRA, there’s no penalty for working while receiving benefits.

How Social Security Fits Into Your Retirement Plan

Social Security should be one piece of a diversified retirement income strategy.

• Pair It with Other Retirement Accounts – Combine Social Security with 401(k)s, IRAs, and taxable investments to create a sustainable income stream.
• Manage Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) – Understand how RMDs impact taxable income to avoid unnecessary tax burdens.
• Consider Healthcare Costs – Medicare premiums can be deducted from Social Security benefits, impacting cash flow.

A well-planned Social Security strategy ensures long-term financial stability and helps retirees avoid common pitfalls.

Claiming Social Security Wisely

Deciding when and how to claim Social Security benefits is a critical retirement decision. By understanding the impact of timing, spousal benefits, tax considerations, and overall financial planning, you can make choices that maximize your lifetime income.

At RIA Advisors, we provide expert retirement planning strategies to help you maximize your Social Security benefits and ensure long-term financial security. Contact us today to build a Social Security strategy that aligns with your retirement goals.

FAQs

What is the best age to claim Social Security for maximum benefits?

The best age depends on your health, financial needs, and life expectancy. Delaying until age 70 provides the highest payout, but claiming earlier may be necessary in some cases.

Can I work and collect Social Security at the same time?

Yes, but if you claim before FRA, earnings above the limit ($22,320 for 2024) may temporarily reduce your benefit. Once you reach FRA, there is no earnings limit.

Are Social Security benefits taxable?

Yes, up to 85% of benefits can be taxed depending on your income. Tax-efficient withdrawal strategies can help minimize the tax impact.

What are spousal benefits, and how do they work?

Spouses can receive up to 50% of their partner’s FRA benefit if it’s higher than their own. This strategy is useful when one spouse has lower earnings.

Can I change my mind after claiming Social Security?

Yes! You can withdraw your claim within 12 months and repay benefits to restart at a later date. After FRA, you can also suspend benefits to allow them to grow.

The post The Ultimate Guide to Social Security: When and How to Claim for Maximum Benefits appeared first on RIA.

Every year as we approach Holy Week, a story appears in which it is alleged some misguided organization or other has just “cancelled Easter” by removing all official mention of it from their output. Concerned Christians and conservatives then move in to object, calling such measures yet another case of politically correct pandering to hair-trigger minority groups like Muslims or queers. Usually…

Source

 Holy Thursday Chrism Mass at St. Peter’s. Grand Ma Ma, what big urns you have!

Holy Tuesday’s Chrism Mass at the Cathedral Basilica of St. John the Baptist, Savannah. Can you pick out yours 

Mary Clark Rechtiene, photo credit:

The bloc must look for new partners as trade tensions with the US increase, the European Commission president has said

The traditional idea of a united West is a thing of the past, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has admitted.

In an interview with the German newspaper Die Zeit published Tuesday, she claimed the EU no longer sees the US as its most important trading partner, after sweeping tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump.

“The West as we knew it no longer exists,” she said. “The world has become a globe also geopolitically, and today our networks of friendship span the globe, as you can see in the debate about tariffs.”

Her comments come after the Trump administration imposed a sweeping 20% tariff on all EU goods and a 25% tariff on all car imports. The EU responded by introducing its own retaliatory 25% tariffs on US imports. Trump later announced a 90-day pause on most global tariffs, pending negotiations with trade partners.

According to von der Leyen, tensions with the US have had a “positive side effect” in the form of numerous states attempting to court the EU. “Everyone is asking for more trade with Europe – and it’s not just about economic ties. It is also about establishing common rules and it is about predictability,” she said.

Asked whether her remarks about the West should be interpreted as “a final farewell to the United States,” von der Leyen stressed that she “firmly believe[s]” in the US-EU friendship. “But the new reality also includes the fact that many other states are seeking to draw closer to us. 13% of global trade is with the United States. 87% of the world’s trade is with other countries,” she said.

The EU should therefore “open up new markets for our companies and establish as close a relationship as possible with many countries that have the same interests as us,” von der Leyen added.

As tensions with the US continue to rise – with Trump even suggesting that the EU “was formed in order to screw” America – some leaders in the bloc have called for a review of bilateral ties. Earlier this month, French President Emmanuel Macron urged European firms to halt new investments in the US, asking: “What message would we send by investing billions… while they are hitting us?”