58.7 F
Chicago
Wednesday, October 28, 2026
Home Blog

Are Investors Finally Waking Up To “The Great Rare Earth Disconnect”?

0
Are Investors Finally Waking Up To “The Great Rare Earth Disconnect”?

Last week, Canaccord’s critical minerals team highlighted what we call the “great rare earth disconnect”: tight supplies and elevated spot prices alongside a vicious bear market in mining stocks that began in early summer and extended into October. 

William Blair’s rare-earths analysts also commented on the downturn, challenging the market’s expectations that Chinese supply constraints would ease and calling that view “incorrect.”

The divergence between ongoing critical-material supply constraints, driven by China’s “resource nationalism,” and depressed mining stocks has some traders weighing whether shares near 52-week lows represent a buying opportunity.

The VanEck Rare Earth and Strategic Metals ETF (REMX) has fallen roughly 55% from its peak over about 24 weeks, reversing much of its advance from around $32 in spring 2025 to $111 in spring 2026. 

The fund, which holds SQM, Albemarle, China Northern Rare Earth, MP Materials and Almonty Industries, among others, rose about 4% in early Tuesday trading.

The rebound could reflect technical buying after a prolonged selloff, with shares trading near the 76.4% Fibonacci retracement of the prior rally. It could also signal that investors are reassessing expectations of easing supply constraints and recognizing that China’s “quasi-monopoly” on critical materials and resource nationalism won’t break anytime soon.

Tyler Durden

Why Saudi Just Abandoned Its Core Oil Rule

0
Why Saudi Just Abandoned Its Core Oil Rule

Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice,

Few could argue with U.S. President Donald Trump’s key objective in launching ‘Operation Epic Fury’ against Iran on February 28 – to prevent Iran from ever being able to develop a nuclear weapon. All members of his Cabinet fully backed this aim at the time, as they did the other three: to effect regime change, to critically degrade Iran’s ballistic missile capability, and to neutralize the ability of its proxies, especially Hamas and Hezbollah, to cause mayhem across the Middle East and the world. 

The degree to which these objectives have been achieved so far is a matter for debate, but what is not is that Washington’s closest Arab allies now harbor deep misgivings over America’s ability to shield them from the Iranian hornet’s nest that U.S. attacks have provoked. This has again made them more susceptible to the soothing assurances from Beijing that it can keep them safe from the terror of Tehran over the long term. This situation, in turn, threatens Trump’s ‘Abraham Accords’ plan that lay at the heart of his Middle East foreign policy, as fully examined in my latest book on the new global oil market order. Several recent moves by leading Middle East power Saudi Arabia underline this threat.

The most recent was the announcement from Saudi oil and gas flagship Aramco that it and the Kingdom are seeking to partner with other countries to expand their strategic oil stockpile. Despite the perennial taking up of its crude production capabilities to boost its global profile over the years, Saudi Arabia’s average oil output from 1973 to yesterday is 8.295 million barrels per day (bpd), and it is currently around 8 million bpd. That said, Saudi expects oil demand to bounce when the war ends and is also working on alternative export routes to circumvent the likely ongoing Iranian threat around the Strait of Hormuz, Bab al-Mandab Strait and Suez Canal. 

Perhaps the single-most strategically important component of this effort to reduce dependence on the Strait of Hormuz remains the long-planned but now dynamically expedited India – Middle East – Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). Originally launched at the 2023 G20 Summit but stalled by regional conflict, the project has been turbocharged by the Strait of Hormuz blockade, with planners now estimating it could eventually divert around 60 percent of container traffic that historically has transited the Strait of Hormuz. Its architecture is built around two integrated corridors: an eastern maritime leg linking India’s western ports to the Arabian Gulf, and a northern overland rail network running through Saudi Arabia and Jordan to Israel’s Port of Haifa, from where short-sea shipping connects directly to Europe. 

Crucially, the 2026 wartime redesign anchors the eastern maritime leg in Oman rather than the UAE, allowing ships from India to unload entirely outside the Strait of Hormuz before transferring cargo onto the Arabian Peninsula rail grid. Additional ‘IMEC Plus’ nodes through Egypt and Syria are under discussion to create a wider lattice of land-based alternatives, while new legal frameworks – including the India – European Union (EU) free trade agreement and the U.S. Senate’s ‘Eastern Mediterranean Gateway Act’ – have formally designated Greece as Europe’s entry hub, a very senior source inside the EU’s security complex exclusively told OilPrice.com. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is eyeing the expansion of its East-West Pipeline (1,200 km long, moving crude from eastern oil fields across the Arabian Peninsula to the Red Sea port of Yanbu) to 10 million bpd within the next two to three years.

Saudi Arabia’s desire to partner with other countries to expand its strategic oil stockpile marks a seismic shift in policy. Historically, the Kingdom responded to oil demand spikes by simply pumping more crude from its domestic oilfields, drawing down from its own domestic storage, or securing barrels in the international spot and forward markets. However, this announcement signals that Saudi Arabia can no longer rely solely on its own geography and security to guarantee oil delivery. By seeking access to the strategic, government-owned stockpiles of foreign nations – particularly in Asia – Aramco wants to double its overseas storage capacity. That necessitates moving enormous volumes of Saudi oil out of the volatile Gulf region ahead of time and placing it directly into the backyards of its biggest customers.

In other words, the Saudis are saying that the physical infrastructure inside the Middle East is too exposed to rely on exclusively, and to ensure seamless supplies in the future, they are transitioning from a model of ‘we will get it when you need it’ to ‘we will store millions of barrels in your country so a local drone strike cannot trigger a global economic collapse.’ In fact, the first such deal was quickly struck by Saudi Arabia on October 26 to store crude oil at Singapore’s Jurong Rock Caverns from the second half of 2027. The caverns can store up to 1.47 million cubic metres of liquid hydrocarbons such as crude oil and condensate.

Whilst sensibly pragmatic on Saudi Arabia’s part, given recent events, this general strategy is disastrous for the U.S.’s image in the Middle East. In recent years, Saudi Arabia has consistently spent tens of billions of dollars annually on American-sourced defense systems, with historical and recent baseline arms agreements valued at roughly USD75 billion a year. While Riyadh has recently allocated roughly USD83 billion per year to its total national defense budget, the U.S. remains its primary provider, accounting for nearly 80 percent of all Saudi weapons imports. However, none of this has counted for much in the face of sustained attacks from Iran. Worse still was that back in September 2019, Iran had already signaled it had no qualms about authorizing its Yemen-based Houthi terrorist proxy to attack key Saudi Arabian oil targets, with drone and missile strikes against the Abqaiq and Khurais oil processing facilities. 

At the time, these two facilities represented around 50 percent of Saudi Arabia’s oil production, or about 5 percent of the global oil supply, so the attacks caused an immediate spike of up to 20 percent in global oil prices and were considered one of the most strategically significant energy-infrastructure strikes ever recorded. Riyadh consequently increased its investment in U.S. defense technology aimed at nullifying these threats, including Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors, Patriot defences, and early-warning radars. Despite this, Iranian proxy forces in Iraq and the Tehran-backed Houthis launched repeated successful drone strikes targeting the East-West Pipeline. Meanwhile, waves of Houthi ballistic missiles and explosive drones struck deep inside the Saudi homeland, with the primary targets being vital energy nodes, including an Aramco facility and the major Rabigh refinery. A similar pattern manifested itself with other U.S. allies in the region. Having bought vast amounts of American defense equipment beforehand, Iranian strikes destroyed or disabled the AN/FPS-132 early-warning radar in Qatar, multiple AN/TPY-2 THAAD radars across the region, the AN/TPS-59 radar in Bahrain, and a string of MQ-9 Reapers. This exposed the uncomfortable truth that the U.S. could not adequately defend these states, either directly with its own forces or indirectly through the systems it had sold them.

A tell-tale sign of Saudi Arabia’s increasing lack of trust in being reliant on the U.S. for its security came in on August 7 when it announced the formation of the ‘Makkah Defense Alliance’, together with Turkey, and Pakistan. It is modeled around the core collective defense principle enshrined in NATO’s Article 5 – that is, that an armed attack on one member shall be considered an attack against them all. Saudi Arabia brings deep financing ability and a vast network of regional intelligence contacts to the grouping. Turkey – itself a member of NATO and tied into the U.S. and its key Western allies – has advanced military hardware, high-tech defense equipment, and a well-established production line for artillery and drones to the alliance. And Pakistan provides a huge frontline military and nuclear weapons. Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Asif stated that its ‘full military capabilities’ would be available under their defense agreements. Subsequently, it was clarified that the Alliance pact is strictly defensive and conventional – but it still has the weapons.

So far, the Alliance has not achieved much, and its future effectiveness looks uncertain at best. What is not uncertain is that China could stop any attacks on all these Arab states with a few words to Iran: such as, ‘stop doing all this, or we will immediately cease buying oil and gas from you, and will stop supplying you with critical materials, equipment, and expertise that you need to keep fighting the U.S. and its allies’. Up until recently, as analyzed in full in my latest book on the new global oil market order, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iraq – among others – had all heavily leaned into Beijing’s sphere of global influence, and the situation looks ripe for the same to happen again.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden

Nordic Leaders Hold Rare Putin Call, Suddenly Eager For Say In Ukraine Peace Talks

0
Nordic Leaders Hold Rare Putin Call, Suddenly Eager For Say In Ukraine Peace Talks

At a moment Washington and Moscow are seeking to improve bilateral relations, and as the Trump administration continues pressuring Ukraine’s Zelensky to essentially shut-up and make compromise, European leaders are scrambling for a seat at the table regarding any potential peace deal.

Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store held rare phone calls with President Vladimir Putin Tuesday, after years of lack of any direct contact or diplomacy amid the Ukraine war. The two European presidents later touched base with Zelensky in a phone call as well. The Putin conversation was reportedly initiated by the Finnish and Norwegian sides, and not by Moscow.

Nordic leaders hold 'frank and substantive' talks with Putin
via Reuters

The Kremlin, which feels itself in the driver’s seat given Trump has lately been publicly chiding Zelensky, issued a statement: “It was emphasized that achieving a just and long-term peace is possible only if the legitimate interests of the Russian Federation are fully and unconditionally taken into account,” it said.

“At the same time, attention was drawn to the confrontational policies of EU and NATO countries, which are contributing to the prolongation of the hostilities.”

Stubb’s office confirmed that much of the conversation centered on preparations for trilateral technical-level meetings set for Abu Dhabi in early November, involving the US, Russia, and Ukraine.

The Finnish readout said (with a hint of defensiveness), “The discussion was frank and substantive. We are neighboring countries to Russia. The outcome of this war will have a direct impact on our and broader European security. Ending the war requires direct discussions.”

Last week, after Trump’s envoy met with Putin in St. Petersburg, a Kremlin readout indicated “Our president informed Steve Witkoff that we are ready in principle to resume the above-mentioned trilateral talks around November 10 on the main subject. This topic is about building a security system for Russia and Ukraine.”

So now that there’s clear forward momentum, which is fully backed by the US, European leaders are hurrying to have a say, jumping on the trilateral talks bandwagon.

Russia’s RT has noted, “The two Nordic leaders said they took part in the call as leaders of their countries and were not speaking on behalf of Europe.”

The expected denunciations fly from other European capitals…

And, “They added that the call was held in consultation with Ukraine to convey its position ahead of the Abu Dhabi talks, and vowed to continue to support Kiev.”

Sounding the alarm… over talking about how to achieve peace:

There has of late been significant changes in Washington’s posture in Ukraine, the Kremlin has noted this month, and this has caused Moscow’s stance to in turn be “re-evaluated, taking into account the signals received from the Americans.”

Tyler Durden

Spain, Brazil ‘Allies In Global Progressivism’ Says Lula After Sánchez Congratulates Him On Election Victory

0
Spain, Brazil ‘Allies In Global Progressivism’ Says Lula After Sánchez Congratulates Him On Election Victory

Authored by Remix News Staff via Remix,

Following his victory in the second round of Brazil’s presidential election, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva thanked Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez for his congratulations.

Sánchez had posted to X: “A great victory for Lula. What has happened in Brazil will happen in Spain.”

Reposting Sánchez, Lula emphasized: “Brazil will stand alongside Spain in defending democracy, social justice, multilateralism, and peace. We are allies in global progressivism!”

Spain’s upcoming general elections are scheduled for Nov. 29. Recent polling shows Sánchez’ PSOE at 26 percent, trailing the conservative PP, which stands at 31.2 percent. The right-wing VOX party now stands at 18.6 percent.

Following his election defeat in Brazil, Flávio Bolsonaro announced he had been demanded to surrender his passports. He also denied stating that he would leave the country were he to lose the election, something his brother, Eduardo Bolsonaro, had previously told a podcast he had said, according to TOI.

Federal Police agents reportedly delivered the travel ban, issued by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, a central figure in legal investigations involving the Bolsonaro family. The demand is said to be part of a Federal Police investigation into Bolsonaro regarding suspected money laundering linked to online sports betting.

The order heightens political tensions and accusations of lawfare following the election. Flávio Bolsonaro has stated that he will seek to annul the results, citing voting irregularities tied to a controversial two-hour voting extension at polling stations.

U.S. President Donald Trump chimed in, questioning Brazil’s election outcome and noting a “terrible look.” Trump pointed to the “strange” two-hour extension of Sunday’s polling station closing times, although he has made no indication that he will seek to get involved in the matter. “I’m not running Brazil. I’m running the USA,” Trump told press.

Spain’s upcoming election comes as many in Spain have been alienated by Sánchez’s mass amnesty program for illegal migrants. Data from 2025 indicated that foreigners, who make up 31 percent of Spain’s prison population, commit per capita 500 percent more rapes and 414 percent more murders than Spanish citizens.

Tyler Durden

Alastair Crooke: The Iran War & The ‘Terrible Power Of The Purse’

0
Alastair Crooke: The Iran War & The ‘Terrible Power Of The Purse’

Authored by Alastair Crooke

The “Grand Design” to “maintain [western civilization’s] place at the head of the world” (as U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio put it) requires the tools for ensuring compliance are two-fold: The creating of destructive revolutionary fervor from below (now termed “regime change”); and secondly, the use of what Theodore Herzl in a now famous phrase termed “the terrible power of the purse to exert irresistible pressure on international politics” in order to co-opt the ruling strata into a power network that would advance the Grand Design “project.”

This is what we are observing with Trump’s war on Iran. The June 2025 Israeli-American attack was primarily a decapitation attack designed to disable both Iran’s political and military leadership, whilst armed Mossad trained elements, the MEK and Baluchi separatists inter alia would be inserted into Iran to foment revolution from the street below. At that time, the former Shah’s son – implausibly – was being presented to the western media as the incoming leader of Iran.

It did not work. And now Netanyahu is touting that Israel has “fresh evidence” that Iran is moving towards producing a weapon component to its nuclear program. He is telling Trump that he needs now to finish the job of destroying Iran. And to motivate Trump further, leading Israeli daily Ma’ariv reports that Israel stove-piped Likud polling directly into the White House to the effect that Netanyahu might win the Israeli elections on October 27. According to the report, this Likud information (that runs counter to most other Israeli polls) prompted Trump’s full-hearted election endorsement of Netanyahu.

At the same time, the pro-Zionist billionaire donors are wielding the “terrible power of the purse” at Trump: We will not accept anything less than the defeat of Iran. If you continue to seek a deal we will pull our financial support from you.

Senior current and former security officials in Israel however, refute the need for an imminent attack on Iran and Netanyahu’s claim of new evidence of Iran moving toward a nuclear weapon –

IDF Chief of Staff Zamir told Israel’s Channel 13: “We don’t see a need to attack Iran before the elections.”

Leading Israeli military strategist Udi Evental has cautioned:

A war to thwart the elections and democracy, not to thwart Iran’s nuclear programme. Netanyahu, who is suspected of being up to his neck in extraneous political and personal considerations, is unfit to make such a decision. He must not be allowed to.

Whether or not there is such evidence really does not matter. Likely it doesn’t exist. The claim simply forms the peg on which the US is being told to take action to “finish the job” on Iran.

As ever, Netanyahu said in the last days:

Iran is once again trying to develop its weapons of death … There is only one way to remove this threat once and for all – to topple the regime in Iran, and that is my directive to the IDF, the Mossad and the security agencies.

A senior Iranian official told Drop Site that Tehran’s current internal intelligence assessment indicates a high likelihood that large-scale bombing may begin – even before Tuesday’s Israeli elections.

The point here is that Iran does not care who wins in the midterms, nor who will win the U.S. Presidency in 2028. For the Iranian leadership it is all the same. They well understand the concept of the “Grand Design” (how could they not?).

It is well understood in Iran that they are engaged in a long war confronting the entire Atlanticist bloc – Israel, its intelligence services, its arsenals, its satellites, its military industry, and its media machine. It does not matter whether it is a Republican or a Democrat in the White House. Senior Iranian officials see both parties to have been bought by the Zionist terrible power of the purse.

Understanding the “Design” is to understand that the Zionist donor class will never be satisfied by some “deal or trade-off.” They claim it to be certain that Iran ultimately would renege on any mooted acquiescence to U.S. demands. Israelis and their donor class auxiliaries simply do not believe (and repeat incessantly) that Iran would ever accept compliance to Israel, or to accept US political and cultural dominance.

They may be right. Why?

Simply because Iran has a deep civilization, stretching back to a specifically Persian-Iranian complex of beliefs and practices of the second millennium BCE – Mazdaism, a cosmology of divine drama, represented by the continuing struggle between Light and Darkness.

The renown scholar, Professor Henri Corbin, has argued that “Iran was situated at a center… it being not only a nation or an empire, but a spiritual universe.” He understood Iran therefore, as a mediating force, both geographically and metaphysically.

For millenia, Iranians have experienced the world as having a clear metaphysical dimension – and history. It is therefore unlikely that they would be attracted to a western nihilistic material posture. Civilizational states, whether Iran or Russia, that embrace contrarian values would never succumb to the “Grand Design.” Hence, they must be destroyed.

What does this metaphysical history mean? It means that Iran is preparing for war, not for a “deal.” Mohsen Rezaei, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and personal representative of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, stated that,

If the question is whether Iran still has the ability to continue missile and drone operations [in the event of an attack], the answer is ‘yes’ … The United States has valuable assets in the region. In the event of war, cables, data centres and artificial intelligence facilities could also come within range. If the conflict begins again, we will have a broader plan.

Everyone must understand that action against Iran carries a cost.

Senior Iranian officials believe that war is coming. Iran has extensive plans (in the event of an attack) that encompasses Saudi Arabia and its leadership, too, a senior Iranian hinted. Karl Miller (from the field) states that in this respect, already a quarter of Saudi oil production has been destroyed and that the damage as a result of AnsarAllah’s retaliatory attacks runs through the whole Saudi production chain – “from wellhead to the gas station” – and that Saudi Arabia has been covering the gap by draining their tanks.

Miller’s report, quoted by Larry Johnson, warns that,

if Saudi Arabia’s export outlets close, its oil has nowhere to go but to its own refineries, its own power plants and its storage tanks. Once the storage is full, that is roughly the ceiling on what Saudi Arabia could keep producing. Close Ras Tanura and Yanbu at the same time, and the Kingdom would have to shut in most of its oil fields. That is exactly the scenario Ansar Allah’s campaign against the pipeline, the Red Sea and the Gulf terminals, is built to produce.

“Any new American or Israeli campaign against Iran will land on a Saudi energy system that has no slack left to absorb it,” Larry Johnson observes.

Any new attack on Iran, by extension, will mean the end to the Gulf as we know it, an end to the petrodollar, and an end to the Gulf as the primary supplier of hard cash to Wall Street and the Tech world.

Nonetheless, Trump reportedly has said that the U.S. is not currently negotiating with Iran, and something will happen “fairly soon.” Maybe. (But with Trump everything distils into speculation). But if he is bluffing, it won’t work, and his humiliation will be all the deeper.

One man who knows Trump better than most (having authored four books on him), Michael Wolff, opines that if the Democrats win in the 3 November midterms –

They will be trying to impress upon the world that it is ‘a new day.’ Trump, for his part, will be trying to impress upon the world that he still controls the stage. There will be a series of these kinds of things (such as a putative invasion of Cuba, for example) greater than anything we may have imagined. He will not be humbled. The idea of humility does not exist in Donald Trump’s soul. Therefore he will do – the opposite.

He concluded, “Not retreat but attack.”

Tyler Durden

Startup Unveils “Big Iron” Rocket Whose Upper Stage Is An Orbital Data Center

0
Startup Unveils “Big Iron” Rocket Whose Upper Stage Is An Orbital Data Center

Cowboy Space Corporation, the former Aetherflux founded by Robinhood co-founder Baiju Bhatt, on Monday unveiled “Big Iron,” a rocket whose upper stage is designed to stay in orbit as a megawatt-class data center, rather than be discarded or release a separate satellite, according to the company.

Render of Big Iron in orbit. Image: Cowboy Space via Payload

The rocket stands 86 meters (about 282 feet) tall, and its stainless-steel first stage is powered by nine liquid oxygen and methane “Clydesdale” engines rated at 300,000 pounds of thrust each, or 2.7 million pounds in total. The company says it can lift more than 15,000 kilograms to sun-synchronous orbit.

Once deployed in a dawn-dusk orbit, the upper stage becomes a satellite measuring 132 by 73 meters that can carry five racks of Nvidia Vera Rubin GPUs. The design is meant to do double duty: the rocket’s skin serves as the radiator, its ammonia propellant doubles as coolant, and the nitrogen used to pressurize the stage also unfolds the solar wings.

“Our design puts us on a path to cost parity with terrestrial data centers,” Bhatt said in the release. Chief operating officer Joseph Yaffe told Axios the company aims to build the first rocket by the end of 2027, with a first flight in 2028.

Nothing here has flown. Yaffe told Payload that government customers “want to see a completed rocket,” and Payload notes that many alternative launch vehicles, Big Iron among them, have yet to reach orbit. The company says part of a Clydesdale engine was tested last week at NASA’s Stennis Space Center, where a team of about 30 built and tested the combustion chamber in 90 days.

The rocket is the launch half of a larger bet. In May, Cowboy filed with the FCC for a 20,000-satellite constellation called Stampede, and it has no approval yet while asking the commission to waive its deployment schedule and milestone rules. It says commercial service could begin with as few as one satellite in orbit. The company raised a $275 million Series B this spring, and its first demonstration satellite, Reason-1, launched Oct. 1 on SpaceX’s Transporter-18 to test laser power beaming from orbit to Earth. Reason-2, due in 2027, is slated to run GPUs in orbit.

Cowboy is also selling rides. The company’s “Big Iron Express” program offers the launch to outside customers who need up to a megawatt of power in orbit, and Yaffe said it wants the military’s National Security Space Launch business too, where Axios reports SpaceX plans to retire its Falcon 9, citing Politico. “We’ve commenced discussions with the right folks to walk down that path,” Yaffe told Axios.

The competitor looming over all of it is SpaceX, which filed in January for a million data-center satellites, roughly 100 gigawatts of compute, and already flies the rockets that would be needed to launch them. Cowboy’s pitch is that it can build the launch vehicle and the data center as one machine.

Bhatt left Robinhood in March 2024, and the company began as Aetherflux, a space solar power venture. Cost parity with terrestrial data centers, the 2028 first flight and the FCC waiver are the company’s own claims or requests, and none of them has been tested or approved.

Tyler Durden

Why Can’t Farmers Butcher Their Own Animals? A New Bill Could Change That

0
Why Can’t Farmers Butcher Their Own Animals? A New Bill Could Change That

Authored by Mollie Engelhart via The Epoch Times,

This past weekend, I was sitting at the Weston A. Price Foundation’s Wise Traditions Conference when Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) took the stage. Before he could say a word, the audience rose to its feet in a standing ovation.

During his speech, he mentioned legislation he had introduced that would allow small American farmers to slaughter and process their own livestock and sell that meat directly to consumers without mandatory federal inspection.

I was stunned. Not because I disagreed with the legislation, but because I hadn’t heard about it.

Just two months earlier, I had been with Massie at Joel Salatin’s Polyface Farm when President Donald Trump posted on social media that he wanted to make it possible for farmers and ranchers to process their own meat.

I agreed wholeheartedly with the president’s sentiment, and obviously Massie did too. But I remember having a conversation with the congressman that day about the reality of making such a change. The president could announce his intentions, but changing federal meat-inspection law would require an act of Congress, not simply an executive order.

I subsequently wrote an article about Massie’s PRIME Act, legislation he has championed for years to expand opportunities for small-scale meat processing. With the president now publicly invested in the idea, I wondered whether we might finally have the political momentum to get meaningful meat-processing reform across the finish line.

Then life on the ranch continued. Animals needed feeding, fences needed repairing, customers needed serving, and thousands of dollars continued flowing out of our farming operation every time we took livestock to the butcher.

Meanwhile, Massie introduced the Red Meat Inspection Exemption Act, alongside Reps. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.).

Somehow, I missed it.

I raise cattle, pigs, sheep, and goats. I operate a farm store and restaurant, and I write about the obstacles facing American farmers almost daily. This particular issue is at the very center of my argument for food freedom. I believe farmers should have the right to raise animals, process those animals, and sell the meat directly to informed customers who choose to purchase it.

So when I heard Massie mention the bill, I was genuinely excited. After years of discussing this problem, there was finally new legislation specifically addressing on-farm slaughter and direct-to-consumer meat sales.

Why Can We Process Chickens but Not Cows?

Under existing federal law, qualifying poultry producers can slaughter and process thousands of chickens annually without continuous federal inspection. Some exemptions allow as many as 20,000 birds, depending on the operation and applicable state requirements.

Why chickens?

Anyone who has ever processed poultry knows that removing the intestines from a small bird without contaminating the carcass requires care. Chickens are well-known carriers of Salmonella and Campylobacter, two major causes of foodborne illness.

There is nothing inherently safer about a chicken than a cow.

Yet our regulatory system allows qualifying poultry producers to sell their products while generally prohibiting cattle, pig, sheep, and goat farmers from doing the same without inspected processing.

I am not suggesting we eliminate the poultry exemption. Quite the opposite. I am asking why we have not extended comparable opportunities to other livestock producers.

If we trust farmers to process thousands of chickens for their neighbors, why can’t we trust them to process a handful of cattle?

The Forgotten Lamb and Goat Markets

One of the most significant consequences of this legislation could be its impact on American lamb and goat production.

In my area of Texas, the kill and disposal fee alone for a lamb is $130. That is before anyone cuts a chop, grinds the meat, or vacuum-seals a package.

Spread that $130 across 600 or 700 pounds of packaged beef, and it adds approximately 19 to 22 cents per pound. But spread it across the 30 or 40 pounds of meat you might get from a lamb or goat, and suddenly that same fee adds $3.25 to $4.33 per pound.

That is before additional processing charges, transportation, refrigeration, feed, labor, or the cost of raising the animal.

We have animals capable of turning grass and brush into valuable protein. We have farmers willing to raise them and consumers interested in buying locally produced meat. But the economics of getting those animals from pasture to plate can make the entire operation unprofitable.

Allowing farmers to process their own sheep and goats could open an entirely different economic opportunity for small livestock producers.

The Thousands of Dollars We Pay to Sell Our Own Meat

Every time I take animals to the processor, I write a check for thousands of dollars.

These are animals my husband and I have raised, fed, watered, and cared for, sometimes for years. We have invested in land, fencing, pasture management, equipment, veterinary care, and countless hours of labor. We have assumed the risks of drought, disease, predators, and fluctuating markets.

Then, when the animal is finally ready to become food, we must pay someone else a substantial percentage of what we expect to receive for that meat, before selling a single pound.

If my husband could process two steers a month for our farm store and restaurant, we could potentially avoid $3,000 in outside processing charges every month. That is $36,000 annually.

Of course, processing animals ourselves would still involve labor, equipment, sanitation, refrigeration, and other expenses. And the proposed legislation does not clearly establish whether meat processed under this exemption could be served in restaurants.

I am grateful to the representatives who introduced this legislation. It is a meaningful step toward restoring food freedom to American farmers. But I believe it is missing one important provision: restaurants.

If an on-farm restaurant or local restaurant wants to purchase meat directly from a farmer who raised and processed that animal, that should be allowed, provided the restaurant clearly discloses on its menu that the meat was farm-processed without government inspection.

Consumers would know exactly what they were purchasing and could make their own decisions. For a farm like ours, which operates both a farm store and a restaurant, that distinction is enormous. Without restaurant sales, we could not realize the full potential savings of processing our own livestock. With them, we could potentially keep $3,000 a month in our farming operation instead of paying it to outside processors. That is $36,000 annually that could go toward employees, infrastructure, and keeping our farm financially sustainable.

I am grateful to the legislators who are working to expand food freedom, and I respectfully urge them to include restaurants in this legislation. If food freedom is really about informed consent, why should that freedom disappear simply because someone chooses to eat their locally raised beef at a restaurant rather than cook it in their own kitchen?

I also believe we would recover more usable meat. My husband is meticulous about harvesting animals. He knows these animals, has cared for them, and understands the value of every pound. We have seen firsthand how much control a farmer loses when an animal leaves the property for processing.

The bill proposes exemptions involving 25 cattle, 60 pigs, 250 sheep, or 250 goats, although its eligibility rules are more complicated than simply counting animals. I would like to understand why Congress believes a farmer should be trusted to process 25 cattle but not 26.

A Me Neither Movement

Toward the end of Massie’s speech, someone in the audience asked him what we could actually do. Could we vote our way out of the situation we find ourselves in?

His answer was no.

He talked about resistance. Be the person who refused to wear the mask on the airplane. Be the person who refused to participate in the COVID card system. Be the person who says no when everyone else is going along.

He also talked about refusing the photograph and body scanner at the airport. He mentioned that his wife never goes through the scanner.

From the audience, I yelled, “Me neither!”

Then other people started joining in. “Me neither! Me neither!”

Massie laughed and said from the stage that what we needed was a “Me Neither” movement, not a “Me Too” movement.

I have written before about refusing the body scanner and facial photograph at the airport. It is a small act of resistance, and sometimes an inconvenient one. But I believe freedom is something we practice, not simply something we vote for every few years.

And I think the same principle applies to food.

We can wait for Congress to pass the PRIME Act or the Red Meat Inspection Exemption Act. We can wait for the USDA to make exceptions, for politicians to recognize the struggles of small farmers, or for another election to deliver the changes we want.

But we also have to build the food systems we believe in. We have to buy from farmers, develop relationships with the people producing our food, and support the local infrastructure that allows communities to feed themselves.

I was standing with Massie at Polyface Farm two months ago, wondering how we could turn the president’s words into legislation. This weekend, I learned that he had already taken that step.

Now Congress has an opportunity to act. But the rest of us have work to do, too.

Maybe food freedom needs a little more of the “Me Neither” movement.

Tyler Durden

Top Women’s Podcast Promotes Divorce Because “There’s Always Something Better”

0
Top Women’s Podcast Promotes Divorce Because “There’s Always Something Better”

If you want to know why 60% of men in the US (35-years-old or younger) have never been married and say they don’t plan on getting married, study the behavior of modern women and you will find your answers in abundance.  In other words, women are the problem. 

Around 43% of first-time marriages in the US end in divorce.  But that’s just the beginning – 67% of second marriages end in divorce and 75% of third marriages end in divorce.  In 1960, the national divorce rate was less than 1%.  What happened?  The cancer of feminism happened.  

Women are psychologically far more likely to embrace group cooperation, group compliance and communal orientation.  Feminism taps into these inherent collectivist tendencies and uses female group-think to encourage destructive and morally reprehensible behavior in individuals.  Many women follow along; some fear being ostracized from the group, and others simply love the feeling of power that the mob gives them.

(This is how we get millions of women showing blind support for a child killer like Lindsay Clancy)

Another weapon used by feminism is the concept of “manifestation”; a fantasy which suggests that women have “magical powers of the mind” and the ability to make things happen the way they imagine them happening.  Instead of working hard to make their lives better, or learning to accept the blessing they already have, the notion of manifestation has modern women thinking that they can always get something better without any struggle or work whatsoever.

Feminism holds up a tiny percentage of “successful women” as examples of the dream life, then encourages the other 99.9% of ladies to go out there, sacrifice everything they already have, and one day soon, their fairytale vision will come true.

This is why there are millions of post-wall women ages 40 and up chasing a second or third marriage.   Millions of middle-aged women still planning on snatching up a corporate position on the way to becoming CEOs.  Millions of women trying to become rich as Instagram models or online influencers instead of maintaining a healthy relationship.  Out of all of these ladies, maybe a handful will actually make it work. 

The rest end up becoming more bitter and more insane as time slips by them.  

This is where the women’s podcasts and social media come in.  In past generations, every married man had to deal with one or two of his wife’s obnoxious single friends or relatives who were constantly trying to convince her that “she can do better.”  In recent decades, husbands then had to contend with malicious therapists who did the same thing while also charging them hundreds of dollars per session. 

Today’s generation of men, though, must deal with the internet, where women have thousands upon thousand of “friends” telling them “they can do better” and rewarding divorce with perpetual thumbs up.  This is the service podcasts like “Call Her Daddy” provide.  

In a recent episode of the show, host Alex Cooper interviewed aging TV actress Sophia Bush, who apparently won a lot of Teen Choice awards back in 2007.  A clip from the show has gone viral after the two women in their 40s stroke each other’s egos and revel in the idea of “never settling for less.”  The discussion derailed when they encouraged women to get a divorce because it’s “never too late” and there is “always something better” out there.

For those who are interested, the full podcast can be viewed here.  Call Her Daddy is one of the biggest podcasts in the country with over 10 million listeners per episode.

It should be noted that Sophia Bush has had two previous marriage; one lasting only 5 months and the other lasting only 13 months.  If the statistics are any indication, her third marriage will also end quickly.  She bragged that she was the person who popped the question, which is not surprising given the quiet desperation women in their 40s feel when it becomes obvious that their youth is fading. They don’t have time for the man to ask. 

Bush is an irrelevant celebrity figure, however, the show’s horrific commentary and terrible advice is emblematic of a core narrative preventing modern women from being happy.  Namely, the narcissistic belief that too many women settle and these women are more valuable in the dating marketplace than they actually are. 

It turns out that people who espouse a secular worldview, people who identify as liberals, and people who never attend religious services report the lowest levels of personal satisfaction, but they also report the highest levels of support for feminism. As feminism’s influence has grown over the past half century, women have become far less happy.

They are more unhappy, and more crazy.  Around 7% of American women were on drugs for anxiety, depression, and other mental health disturbances back in the mid-1990s.  Today, that number has skyrocketed to 25% of all women.  This is twice the rate of American men.  It also means that every time a man rolls the dice and asks a woman out, he has a one-in-four chance of pulling a mental case.  Those are dangerous odds.

Add to this the near-certainty of a woman getting half a man’s wealth in a divorce (after lawyers take their cut), along with an 80% chance that she will get full child custody, and the average guy simply can’t afford to take the risk, especially not on older women with previous divorces.   

 

Another trend that is rising on social media is middle-aged women posting sob stories about not being able to find positive long term relationships after they divorce.  They have their fun for the first year, then realize their prospects are limited to pointless flings.  Prince Charming never shows up, because Prince Charming doesn’t exist accept in their minds.  The women who are most happy bag their Prince Charming in their 20s and they stick with him.  

These podcasts act as constant reinforcement for women’s bad decisions by telling them that they are not accountable for their failures.  Instead, the world is accountable, men run the world, and women are victims.  The message?  If an action “feels” correct to her, then it is, in fact, correct. 

And, if there are any negative consequences then those consequences were created by the “patriarchy” trying to punish her.  It’s a catastrophic cycle that is destroying western society and turning a large number of women into vain, egomaniacal monsters that men want nothing to do with.           

Tyler Durden

First US Submarine Revealed For Deployment To Australia Under AUKUS

0
First US Submarine Revealed For Deployment To Australia Under AUKUS

Authored by Jerry Zhu via The Epoch Times,

The United States has named the first nuclear-powered submarine to be deployed to Western Australia under the AUKUS defense agreement, marking a significant milestone in Australia’s plan to operate its own nuclear-powered submarine fleet.

The Virginia-class fast attack submarine USS Colorado (SSN 788) is seen before at the commissioning ceremony at Naval Submarine Base New London in Groton, Conn., on March 17, 2018. Dana Jensen/The Day via AP

The Virginia-class fast-attack submarine USS Colorado (SSN 788) will be the first vessel assigned to SRF-West at HMAS Stirling, with the rotational deployment scheduled to begin in late 2027.

The announcement was made on Oct. 27 by Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles, U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, and UK Secretary of State for Defence Wes Streeting.

SRF-West will see up to four U.S. Virginia-class submarines and one British Astute-class submarine rotate through the Western Australian naval base.

Australian Submarine Agency Director-General Vice Admiral Jonathan Mead said the announcement demonstrated progress in implementing the AUKUS agreement.

“The designation of the first submarine assigned to SRF-West signals the transition from planning to implementation,” he said.

Mead said the presence of American submarines would help Australian personnel develop the skills and experience needed to operate the country’s future fleet.

“[The USS Colorado and its crew] at HMAS Stirling will help accelerate the development of the skills, experience and knowledge transfer that are fundamental to delivering Australia’s future conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability,” he said.

Established in September 2021, AUKUS is a trilateral security partnership between Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom, aimed at strengthening defense cooperation and security in the Indo-Pacific.

A central component of the agreement, known as Pillar I, involves Australia acquiring conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines to eventually replace its aging Collins-class fleet.

Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Matt Buckley, said the announcement marked a “significant milestone for Australia, our Navy and the AUKUS partnership.“

“For our sailors, this is about working alongside the world’s most experienced nuclear-powered submarine operators and building the skills, knowledge and experience that will underpin Australia’s future conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability,” he said.

Under the submarine acquisition pathway announced in 2023, SRF-West represents a transitional step before Australia takes ownership of its first nuclear-powered submarines.

Australia has already undertaken maintenance activities involving U.S. submarines at HMAS Stirling, including work on the USS Vermont in 2025.

The next major milestone is expected in the early 2030s, when Australia is scheduled to receive its first Virginia-class submarine from the United States.

Tyler Durden

“US Gov’t Must Fall”: Analyst Says She Infiltrated Teachers Union Members’ Call Urging Violent Revolution

0
“US Gov’t Must Fall”: Analyst Says She Infiltrated Teachers Union Members’ Call Urging Violent Revolution

Karlyn Borysenko, a self-described anti-communist analyst who monitors the far left, published an alarming video highlighting what she characterizes as calls for a violent communist revolution to topple America from within. Among those featured is a man identified as a Chicago Public Schools employee advocating revolutionary politics.

The footage raises serious questions about the Chicago School nurse’s potential overlap between far-left activism and taxpayer-funded educational institutions. 

Borysenko writes:

I just infiltrated and recorded a call hosted by the Chicago Teachers Union in the United States with leftist students activists and the teachers helping them in France. The teachers in the USA are actively coordinating with the unions in France. And they’re calling explicitly for the fall of the United States government. 

Borysenko cited a far-left student activist on the Zoom video call who said, “The United States Government must fall.”

Borysenko continued, “On that call, they explicitly called for violence, destruction, killing, and the fall of the United States Government.”

The student activist said, “I think that our challenge will be to get people to move like they’re doing in France. It will be getting people to be completely destructive and to allow our fellow Americans – for there to be freedom – the US Gov’t must fall.”

She continued, “There must be destruction to the material wealth that they’ve built. There must be a willingness to kill.”

Separately, Borysenko offered her view of the unrest in France and what’s driving the riots and chaos: 

And this:

The view is that communist movements are seeking to destabilize and destroy Western institutions and society from within. 

Tyler Durden