Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Columbia University has agreed to pay $9 million to settle a proposed class-action lawsuit by a former student who claimed the school submitted inaccurate data to U.S. News & World Report, artificially inflating its position in the publication’s annual ranking of American universities.

In a statement to The Epoch Times, a university spokesperson said Columbia did not admit to any wrongdoing as part of the agreement and is entering into the settlement to “avoid protracted and costly litigation.”

“Columbia University has reached a settlement agreement regarding the alleged misreporting of data to U.S. News & World Report in connection with its Best Colleges rankings,” the spokesperson said.

The settlement covers about 22,000 undergraduate students at Columbia College, Columbia Engineering, and Columbia’s School of General Studies who were enrolled from the fall of 2016 to the spring of 2022, the spokesperson said.

“While the University denies any wrongdoing, it deeply regrets deficiencies in prior reporting and has adopted new steps to improve the quality and accuracy of information available to prospective students,” the spokesperson added. “Since 2022, the University has published Common Data Sets for all three undergraduate schools which are reviewed by a well-established, independent advisory firm to ensure reporting accuracy.”

The settlement stems from a lawsuit filed against Columbia’s Board of Trustees in August 2022 by a former student who accused the university of misrepresenting some of the data it submitted to U.S. News & World Report’s (USNWR’s) annual list.

According to the complaint, Columbia’s USNWR ranking has steadily risen from 18th place in 1988 to 2nd place in 2022 through the reporting of false data.

The lawsuit stated that USNWR’s yearly college rankings are popular with the general public and influence university application patterns. It further said the publication relies on universities, including Columbia, to self-report the data, which is then used to determine the universities’ rankings.

In March 2022, Michael Thaddeus, a professor of mathematics at Columbia, published an article concluding that the university had misreported data to USNWR.

The lawsuit said that Thaddeus found, among other things, that Columbia reported to USNWR that 82.5 percent of undergraduate classes enroll fewer than 20 students, which marked a higher percentage than any other school in the top 100 USNWR rankings.

His analysis of data from Columbia’s Directory of Classes indicated that the correct figure was likely between 62.7 percent and 66.9 percent, the lawsuit said.

Columbia also told USNWR that 8.9 percent of undergraduate classes enroll 50 students or more, but an analysis of data from Columbia’s Directory of Classes indicated that figure was more likely between 10.6 percent and 12.4 percent, according to the lawsuit.

The university also told the publication that 96.5 percent of its non-medical faculty are full-time, but the analysis by Thaddeus found that the correct figure was likely 74.1 percent. It also reported that its student-faculty ratio is 6:1, but Thaddeus found it was likely 11:1.

The lawsuit stated that Colombia’s actions were “objectively false, misleading and deceptive.” They also led to students paying “premiums for tuition, fees and costs based, in material part, upon Columbia’s USNWR ranking,” according to the lawsuit.

It alleged breach of contract, unjust enrichment, common law fraud, and violation of New York General Business Law.

In September 2022, the university said that it had “previously relied on outdated and/or incorrect methodologies” for some of the data it had submitted to USNWR and said it had changed those methodologies for current and future data submissions.

Then-Provost Mary Boyce said in a statement that “anything less than complete accuracy in the data that we report—regardless of the size or the reason—is inconsistent with the standards of excellence to which Columbia holds itself.”

“We deeply regret the deficiencies in our prior reporting and are committed to doing better,” Boyce added.

In June 2023, Columbia said its undergraduate schools would stop submitting data to the U.S. News rankings, saying it remained “concerned with the role that rankings have assumed in the undergraduate application process.”

It said the rankings appeared to have an outsized influence on prospective students and may “distill a university’s profile into a composite of data categories.”

Across the United States, what qualifies as “middle class” varies widely depending on where you live.

This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, breaks down the median household income for each U.S. state, revealing sharp contrasts in earning power. It provides a snapshot of where families may feel more or less financially secure based on local income benchmarks.

The data for this visualization comes from SmartAsset.

Editor’s note: This map uses median household income as a simple indicator of the middle class in each state. True middle class status typically spans a range of incomes.

Top Earners Cluster in the Northeast

Maryland, Washington D.C., and Massachusetts lead the nation with household incomes at or above $90,000. High concentrations of federal jobs, tech firms, and elite educational institutions contribute to these numbers. According to Pew Research Center, these regions also report strong access to health care and education, reinforcing higher cost-of-living dynamics.

The South Continues to Lag Behind

Southern states like Mississippi, and Alabama have the lowest median household incomes, under $54,000. Economic mobility in these regions is often hindered by lower investment in public infrastructure and education. As Brookings notes, many Southern states also experience higher poverty rates and limited access to high-paying industries.

States with Growing Incomes

Several states in the West and Midwest—including Oregon, and Utah—are emerging with stronger income levels, typically in the $70,000-$80,000 range.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out U.S. Workers Earning Under $17/Hour by State on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Authored by Jo-Anne Nadler via DailySceptic.org,

Glancing upwards only to spot a drone hovering over their gardens last week was the last straw for residents of Welford Place SW19, whose homes overlook the much lauded All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC). While the eye in the sky probably belongs to an accredited broadcaster scouting out local colour ahead of the annual championships, the intrusion felt all too typical of the approach that the Wimbledon high command itself takes to its near neighbours. The annual championships may charm a world audience with its cultivated celebration of grass court tennis, strawberries and a nostalgic evocation of English fair play, but for neighbours this image, as carefully manicured as its famous lawns, is virtually shredded. From a highly controversial planning application to a woke offer of 1,000 free tickets for refugees, local Wimbledonians feel excluded as never before from the international spectacle on their doorsteps.

Nowhere in the mainstream media’s fawning previews of Wimbledon 2025 has there been mention of the battle commencing next week in a quite different London court. On July 8th, just as the tournament heats up in its final week, a determined group of local activists is challenging the basis of planning permission granted by the Mayor of London’s office to the All England Lawn Tennis Club in the High Court. Save Wimbledon Park will be pinning its hopes on a judicial review. The group which has fought the plans tirelessly has secured pro bono legal support, but is still crowdfunding towards the £200,000 necessary to take their case to the High Court.

At stake is a public park designed by Capability Brown and since designated metropolitan open land, with an adjacent golf course. In its place the All England Club intends to relocate its training facility to build 38 new courts, an 8,000-seat stadium, a 30,000 sq. ft maintenance operation and nine kilometres of roads and paths. Along with 21,000 locals who signed a petition in protest, the area’s neighbouring MPs (Lib Dem and Labour) are united in opposition, although after revisions the plans were approved by Merton’s Labour council and last September by the Mayor of London. Were it not for the determination of local activists it would have been game, set and match to the Wimbledon overlords.

Along the way the AELTC had paid out nearly £80,000 to each of the golf club members, including Ant and Dec and Piers Morgan, for their share of the remaining lease on the land. To the club’s immediate neighbours its territorial ambitions having been making themselves blatantly clear for years now. Until recently, it was possible to drive past the club – along the only road directly connecting the busy London ‘villages’ of Wimbledon and Southfield – during the championships. A realistic fear now is that the ‘temporary’ road closures in place only in recent years under the questionable guise of security are set to become a permanent fixture. One clue lies on Somerset Road, the residential border of the existing site, where a public highway has been paved over by the AELTC almost as it if it is claiming its right of passage. A more transparent admission was made by the Club’s planning consultant at a GLA hearing last autumn when he admitted that public access to the new site would be heavily limited for most of the year. I made use of the final access before this year’s closure to drive past over the weekend only to see the AELTC is already making expansionist use of the parkland with new corporate hospitality suites, car parking facilities and family breakout areas.

As a child growing up within the shadow of St Mary’s Church whose spire still graces the sundown closing titles of the BBC television coverage, I found proximity to the club, and the international circus it brought to town, thrilling. We all did. It was then quite common to see famous players enjoying a celebratory drink in a local bar, and more recently I spotted Roger Federer in black tie heading off to celebrate his first Wimbledon title. But like so much of sport, today’s AELTC has developed into a different beast. No longer a glamorous but approachable neighbour rooted in its local history, it has moved on; professionalising, commercialising, corporatising and now set on colonising its neighbouring green space. Whether we attended the championships or not it had felt like ‘our’ championships; now it feels like ‘theirs’, despite, or perhaps because of, this global behemoth’s CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) efforts.

So how is the Goliath in this dispute looking to subdue the David on its green flank? By firing up its gold-plated community affairs operation. I still have family and friends living on the boundaries of the club. It is these immediate locals who in good spirits accommodate the traffic, the noise, the parking restrictions, even the requirement to prove their residency to lanyard-toting security youths just to gain access to their own homes for the duration of the championships.

It wouldn’t take a PR genius to consider that the offer of tickets to these beleaguered locals might be an obvious place to start in winning them over. But instead neighbours learn from the latest championship newsletter that the focus for outreach appears to prioritise the global south over south-west 19. Whereas free ‘family events’ are offered to the qualifying competition, it is one thousand refugee guests and their support teams that are offered complimentary tickets to the event proper.

Could this be a generous way to encourage newcomers to embrace the best of British? This would be a worthy endeavour, especially as the local demographic has changed dramatically in recent years so that it is as usual to see women who are completely covered as it is to see women in tennis gear. Cynicism aside – if the AELTC is extending ‘Love all’ with unapologetic pride in its history and the culture it represents it should earn the applause of Centre Court. If on the other hand, if this is a transparent play for the favour of local politicians and Sadiq Khan while a billion-pound development scheme remains in question, the utterly unaccountable behemoth that inhabits a beautiful site in South-West London will seem even less a well-intentioned neighbour than yet another entitled, globalised corporation with scant regard for its immediate impact.

A group of inspectors from the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog has finally and formally departed Iran after the country decided to halt its cooperation with the agency, following last month’s surprise bombing raids by Israel and the United States.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed in statement shared on X on Friday that its personnel are returning to the agency’s headquarters in Vienna, Austria. 

Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar, reporting from Tehran, clarified that it’s as yet unclear just how many IAEA inspectors left the country in this ‘final’ wave of departures.

“The language used doesn’t clarify whether all or only some of the staff departed, but it appears that a number of them are still in Iran,” he said.

IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi has urged Iran to resume monitoring and verification efforts as soon as possible, saying it is of “crucial importance” that direct dialogue with Tehran continues.

“The inspectors have been housed in Tehran unable to visit Iran’s nuclear sites since Israel attacked the country on June 13,” The Wall Street Journal details. “They were housed at a hotel in the capital but may have later moved to a U.N. location, according to one of the people.”

All of this comes after the Trump White House has threatened the potential for more military action should Iran resume enrichment of uranium, which it has promised to do undeterred. According to more from WSJ:

Their departure makes the prospect of any significant international access to Iran’s nuclear sites extremely unlikely, allowing it to carry out nuclear work unchecked. Iran’s activities are, however, being watched closely by Western and Israeli intelligence agencies, and the IAEA has access to satellite imagery of its sites. It also raises the prospect of a standoff over Iran’s participation in the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which bans it from nuclear weapons and requires regular inspections of its atomic program. 

For decades, Iran has been subject to rigorous inspections of its core nuclear sites. Inspectors would visit its enrichment sites and check its stockpile of enriched uranium every couple of days, ensuring that Iran wasn’t diverting fissile material for a nuclear weapon. 

An IAEA team of inspectors today safely departed from Iran to return to the Agency headquarters in Vienna, after staying in Tehran throughout the recent military conflict. pic.twitter.com/65YQcDL7Ik

— IAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency ⚛️ (@iaeaorg) July 4, 2025

Iran has meanwhile said that while it doesn’t plan to retaliate further against the United States, it will carry on peaceful nuclear energy activities as a matter of national sovereignty. “As long as there is no act of aggression being perpetrated by the United States against us, we will not respond again,“ Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi told NBC News on Thursday.

“Our policy has not changed on enrichment,” Takht-Ravanchi crucially added. “Iran has every right to do enrichment within its territory. The only thing that we have to observe is not to go for militarization.”

Via Remix news,

When reality does not mesh with the “narrative,” the left’s standard tactic is to turn to censorship, and the French left is no different. The French Greens and other left-wing parties now want to make sure that news stories are not used for ideological purposes by the “far right,” claiming that certain media outlets are causing a “moral panic” around immigration due to migrant murders.

According to a parliamentary amendment tabled on June 25, 2025, by a group of Green and left-wing MPs in the National Assembly, news stories of actual events that have happened, and actual lives lost, are being improperly used by the right.

Amendement de l’écologiste Taillé-Polian sur le texte audiovisuel public : il “mène une réflexion éditoriale sur la place qu’occupent les faits divers dans la couverture de l’actualité.” Et oui, l’exposé sommaire parle bien des meurtres de Lola et de Thomas. pic.twitter.com/Q4b9YGQFMA

— David Delorme-Ⓜ️onsarrat (@David_Del_Mon) July 1, 2025

Another post from the French Observatory for Journalism ,wrote: “BREAKING NEWS | Green and left-wing deputies submit an amendment to REDUCE the coverage of crime stories in PUBLIC media. The authors believe these stories are used for ‘political exploitation;’ the text cites the murders of Lola and Thomas.”

🚨ALERTE INFO | Des députés écologiste et de gauche déposent un amendement pour RÉDUIRE la couverture des faits divers dans les médias PUBLICS.

Les auteurs considèrent que ces faits sont utilisés pour “récupération politique” ; le texte cite les meurtres de Lola et de Thomas. pic.twitter.com/KL5ohIXTt4

— Observatoire du journalisme (Ojim) (@ojim_france) July 2, 2025

The amendment calls for public media outlets to “conduct an editorial review of the role of news stories in news coverage.”

French National Rally parliamentary leader, Marine Le Pen, wrote in response to the new amendment.

“Political control and the concealment of information are hallmarks of totalitarian ideologies. The Greens, who have been drifting toward the far left for years, are taking a new and alarming step in this tendency to curb freedom of expression, a cornerstone of democratic societies. The French must be aware that their right to know is now clearly threatened by these fundamentally anti-liberty measures,’ she wrote on X.

Le contrôle politique et la dissimulation de l’information sont des marqueurs des idéologies totalitaires. Les verts qui dérivent depuis des années vers l’extrême gauche franchissent un nouveau pas inquiétant dans cette propension à brider la liberté d’expression, fondement des… https://t.co/JOzbq2oJlz

— Marine Le Pen (@MLP_officiel) July 2, 2025

The text put forward by the left cites the case of 13-year-old Lola, who was raped and murdered in Paris by an Algerian female migrant with a deportation order in 2022, as well as Thomas, who was murdered by a gang of migrants in Crépol in 2023.

The authors of the amendment claim that these news stories were then rehashed with “racialist semantics” by politician and leader of the Reconquête party in France, Éric Zemmour, and other allegedly radical right-wing figures.

The amendment denounces the creation of concepts such as “Francocide” and “savagery” in relation to these crimes. It also specifically cites the influence of French news outlets like CNews, Valeurs actuelles, and what it claims is the “fascism sphere” of news reporting.

The politicians who launched the amendment denounce that these factual news stories were used for “political gain,” to the detriment of neutral reporting.

More than 6,000 people turned out for a march through the French town of Romans-sur-Isère on Wednesday in memory of Thomas, a 16-year-old boy stabbed to death on Sunday by a group of youths who gatecrashed the winter ball in nearby Crépol and shouted how they “wanted to kill… pic.twitter.com/JhaIGBXHuy

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) November 22, 2023

They denounce the structuring of a media space close to the far right, accused of exploiting news stories to advance a vision of security and identity.

A number of social media users reacted negatively to the tabled amendment.

“Move along, there’s nothing to see. They don’t want the French to know what’s happening all over the country, that’s for sure counterproductive for them. Promoting diversity and ethno-cultural replacement when we know the consequences,” wrote one user.

Citing the image of drowned Syrian boy Alan Kurdi, which many credit with sparking the 2016 migrant wave after it was editorially weaponized to justify open borders, one user wrote:

Bien évidemment ça ne concernera pas les faits divers de gauche. pic.twitter.com/Mw4jsCGm25

— John 🗺️🧬 (@Johndoephth) July 2, 2025

Notably, the cases of Lola and Thomas are just two of thousands of such cases involving crime and immigration in France in recent years. In France, 69 percent of all cases involving violence and sexual crimes on public transport involve foreigners. French President Emmanuel Macron is on record himself saying that half of all crimes in Paris are committed by foreigners. In other cities, such as Marseille, 55 percent of all crimes are committed by foreigners, a rate even higher than Paris, illustrating that it is a countrywide issue. In Paris, foreigners committed 70 percent of all violent robberies, according to official data.

🇫🇷 Marseilles. France

The French port city is now a major narcotics hub for Europe.

Last year, a 15-year-old was stabbed 50 times and burned alive in the drug violence as murders hit record highs.

This is the “New France.” pic.twitter.com/2ueIZ5BKH4

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) April 4, 2025

In France, the statistics are greatly misleading, as many of the French citizens committing violent and serious crimes are the children of immigrants or the grandchildren of immigrants.

Zemmour has faced prosecutions for alluding to this fact, saying that many of the suspects are French citizens with a migration background.

“The entire French society doesn’t resort to savagery. Then, what is it? We know who the savagery comes from,” he said. “We all know who commits these assaults. We all know who ran over the police officer Melanie. We all know who killed the bus driver in Bayonne. We know who breaks everything at amusement parks. We know who spoils the beaches of Marseille. We know who is forbidden in a swimming pool in Switzerland. We know all that. We know who it is: 99.9 percent are the children of North African and African immigrants,” said Zemmour, according to the RAIR Foundation, which translated his remarks on the Face à l’Info program.

Zemmour, an Algerian-born French Jew who previously worked for Le Figaro, was referencing crimes against French people by migrants or citizens of migrant descent, including Philippe Monguillot, a bus driver who was beaten to death by a group of young migrants after he asked them to wear their masks when they got on his bus without tickets.

In addition, he mentioned the case of officer Mélanie Lemée, who was deliberately hit and killed by an African male on a motorbike who was trying to escape a police checkpoint. In perhaps one of the most high-profile murders this summer, 23-year-old Axelle Dorier was killed in a brutal hit-and-run by Youcef T., who dragged her with his vehicle for nearly a kilometer and then left her to die.

In other words, the cases of Thomas and Lola are just two cases in a sea of such cases. They only became symbols of a wider societal problem that is rocking France to its core.

France’s issues with insecurity, including a 91 percent increase in murders since 2000, highlight the fact that it is not “right-wing propaganda” driving the public to the right, but instead a serious and statistical reality that the French face on a daily basis.

The war against news outlets like CNews is far from simply an effort from the left, with ongoing efforts from the Macron government to remove the news station’s broadcast license, as Remix News has reported in the past.

Read more here…

Authored by Andy Thaxton via RealClearWire,

Over a decade ago, when I was working on force protection issues for Navy air logistics missions, the threat of drone attacks was just beginning to be seriously discussed. We kicked around contingencies and “what ifs,” but those discussions were largely in the background of mission planning. Over the course of the past ten years however, that threat has exploded to the forefront of the military operational planning world and has presented something altogether new in modern warfare.

In the early hours of June 1, 2025, Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) executed Operation Spiderweb, an audacious drone assault on Russian airfields that destroyed or damaged a number of Russia’s most prized aircraft, including possibly two A-50 early-warning planes and as many as a dozen strategic bombers. Drones, smuggled into Russia over 18 months and concealed in remote-controlled containers, were launched from within Russian territory, catching Moscow’s defenses off guard.

Just days later, on June 13, 2025, Israel’s Mossad orchestrated a similarly bold strike, dubbed Rising Lion, targeting Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Mossad agents, operating covertly within Iran, established drone bases near Tehran and smuggled precision weapons to dismantle air defenses and eliminate key figures, including Revolutionary Guards commanders and at least one senior nuclear scientist. Allow me to emphasize, the drone attacks came from within Russia and from within Iran.

These operations quite possibly signal a new era of warfare: patient, subversive infiltration by committed adversaries willing to play the long game.

The United States—due to years of lax borders and insufficient oversight of foreign land purchases—is alarmingly vulnerable to such tactics, especially from a strategic rival like China, whose land acquisitions near U.S. military bases pose a clear risk.

Asymmetric Warfare Redefined?

Even for those who pay little attention to such things, it is hard to miss that Ukraine’s Operation Spiderweb and Israel’s Rising Lion represent a paradigm shift in modern conflict. Rather than relying on conventional military power, both operations leveraged covert infiltration, advanced—though not restricted—technology, and strategic patience to strike deep within enemy territory. Ukraine’s drones, assembled and concealed over months, targeted a multi-billion-dollar air fleet with low-cost, commercially adapted unmanned systems. The SBU’s operation—smuggling drones across borders and hiding them in plain sight—demonstrated how irregular tactics can cripple a nation’s strategic power.

Similarly, Mossad spent (likely) years infiltrating Iran to set up drone bases and move munitions into position, striking at the heart of Tehran’s nuclear program and eliminating critical personnel. These operations reveal the growing effectiveness of a new asymmetric warfare, where smaller actors, with a little creativity, can exploit the vulnerabilities of larger adversaries, potentially for dimes on the dollar. Drones costing mere thousands, or even less, can now challenge systems worth billions. To complicate things further, drones can be deployed en masse. Online videos of Chinese drone light shows are something to see—single controllers managing 10,000 or more small drones in remarkable displays of precision and agility. It’s not hard to imagine what creative military planners could come up with using such systems.

Besides drones being employed in the two operations, there was a common thread of time. Both Ukraine and Israel invested significant time in planning, exploiting weak internal security, and insider access. Ukraine’s drones were smuggled incrementally and hidden in trucks and shipping crates. Mossad’s operatives reportedly worked under the nose of Iranian intelligence, using civilian vehicles to transport weapons and establish covert launch sites. These examples reveal a chilling truth: a patient adversary embedded on a target’s soil can strike with devastating precision.

Is the US Vulnerable?

The United States, with its liberal immigration policies of recent years, and permissive foreign investment rules is ripe for similar subversion. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) oversees foreign land purchases, but its mandate is limited and often fails to detect national security risks posed by strategic acquisitions.

A 2021 case involving the Chinese Fufeng Group’s purchase of 300 acres near Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota sparked congressional concern. The base plays a key role in U.S. drone operations and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions—making it an ideal target for espionage or sabotage. Chinese firms have also purchased or attempted to purchase land near other sensitive sites, including Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada and Fort Bragg in North Carolina. Only within the past few years has this activity started to gain the attention of lawmakers.

Separate from land purchases, as early as 2019, public warnings of Chinese container ships potentially docking in U.S. ports with concealed drone launchers onboard have been raised. Such covert systems could be used to target military installations and sensitive infrastructure. Tom Shugart, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), emphasized this risk recently stating, “We routinely allow ships owned and operated by DoD-designated Chinese military companies to sit in our ports with thousands of containers onboard and under their control.”

China Is a Patient Adversary

China’s strategy mirrors the patience and subversion seen in Ukraine and Israel’s operations. Through the Belt and Road Initiative and a sweeping global investment program, Beijing demonstrates a long-term approach to gaining strategic leverage. The FBI has highlighted the use of shell companies to obscure Chinese ownership behind purchases, which could complicate oversight by CFIUS and state governments. These acquisitions, if unchecked, could provide ground for passive intelligence gathering and even launching attacks.

The threat is not merely theoretical. Security analysts are increasingly concerned about the possibility of PLA-aligned actors using assets on U.S. soil to disrupt logistics during a potential Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Drones launched from rural properties could target airfields, fuel depots, or command centers—just as Ukraine’s SBU did to Russia.

Closing the Gap

The United States must act decisively to counter this emerging threat. First, Congress should expand CFIUS authority to review all foreign land purchases in proximity to U.S. military bases. Second, the Department of Homeland Security must enhance port security and increase inspections of Chinese-flagged vessels for hidden weapons systems, as urged by CNAS. Third, the U.S. must elevate counterintelligence operations focused on subversive foreign networks—taking cues from Israel’s proven intelligence tradecraft. Finally, individual states must continue to pass legislation restricting foreign ownership of sensitive land.

Ukraine and Israel have demonstrated that patient, subversive infiltration can paralyze powerful militaries. China, through strategic land acquisitions and global ambitions, is already positioned to exploit America’s vulnerabilities. The question is no longer what if—but when.

Car theft is a widespread issue, driven by factors like demand for parts and organized criminal activity.

In 2024, over 850,000 vehicles were stolen across the U.S., averaging one every 37 seconds.

To see which cars are being targeted the most, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu visualized the most stolen car model in every state.

Data & Discussion

The data for this visualization comes from FinanceBuzz, which reviewed 2024 auto-theft insurance claims filed with the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB).

Hyundai and Kia’s Missing Security Feature

The most common model in this dataset is the Hyundai Elantra, which was the most stolen car in 20 different states. The Hyundai Sonata (Kentucky) and Kia Soul (Hawaii) also made an appearance.

A major reason for this trend is that many Hyundai and Kia models produced between 2011 and 2021 lack electronic engine immobilizers—basic anti-theft tech now standard in most vehicles.

This omission made it easier for thieves to exploit vulnerabilities, especially after viral social media videos demonstrated how to steal these cars using simple tools.

Pickup Popularity in the Heartland

Full-size pickups remain prime targets in rural and border states.

The Chevrolet Silverado 1500 leads theft tallies in Texas, California, and seven additional states, while Ford’s F-150 heads the list in six others. Both models are some of the most popular vehicles sold in the country, so it makes sense they’re also frequently stolen.

High resale demand for parts, coupled with interchangeable components across model years, keeps older trucks attractive to thieves—even as new anti-theft tech rolls out.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out How Tariffs Will Impact U.S. Car Prices on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

Every July 4, Americans have less independence to celebrate…

Although the country’s founding ideals enshrined individual sovereignty, those principles have become little more than ancient history in practice today.

As Independence Day rolls around, it’s worth asking a serious question:

What does real independence look like – and how can you actually achieve it?

Let’s start by defining what it doesn’t look like:

• A pile of taxes on every corner: income tax, sales tax, property tax, capital gains tax, estate tax—the list goes on.

• Speech increasingly policed by “hate speech” laws and vague restrictions.

• Mass surveillance through corporate-government partnerships, like Palantir’s work with federal agencies.

• Travel restrictions, both international and domestic.

• Legal tender laws, which force people to use rapidly debasing government confetti as money

• The looming threat of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which can be programmed and controlled.

• Endless foreign wars with no clear objective or benefit to the average citizen.

• Systematic erosion of the Bill of Rights.

• An ever-growing web of mandates, regulations, and bureaucratic red tape.

• A politicized justice system that applies the law selectively.

• An out-of-control federal debt burden and exploding interest expense, now consuming a massive share of tax revenue.

• Persistent inflation and ongoing currency debasement, steadily eroding the value of your savings and income.

And that’s just a partial list.

Here’s the bottom line:

It doesn’t matter which party is in power. They are all headed in the same direction, albeit at different speeds.

The state will continue to squeeze your finances and tighten its grip over your choices. More taxes, more surveillance, more rules, fewer rights. That’s the trendline.

So what can you do?

You protect yourself with “Freedom Insurance.”

Most people have medical, life, fire, and car insurance.

Of course, you hope you never have to use these policies, but you have them anyway. They give you peace of mind and protect you if and when the worst does happen.

Think of international diversification as the ultimate insurance policy against an out-of-control government. I call it Freedom Insurance.

International diversification is a time-tested route to true freedom.

For centuries, wealthy families have used international strategies to protect their money and freedom. Now, thanks to modern technology, you can do the same—without needing to be a billionaire or even leave home.

You can start by:

• Buying physical gold and silver – timeless, global assets that no central bank can print into oblivion.

• Opening foreign bank accounts – spreading risk and gaining access to sounder financial institutions.

• Acquiring foreign real estate – a tangible asset outside your home government’s jurisdiction.

• Getting a second passport – your ultimate exit strategy if things take a turn for the worse.

• Diversifying your income streams internationally – earn from clients, investments, or ventures in multiple countries. Better still, route this income through offshore structures in favorable jurisdictions.

• Moving your digital footprint abroad – host your email, websites, and cloud data in privacy-respecting countries.

None of this is particularly difficult. It just takes some foresight and initiative.

These are all necessary steps to ensure your personal and financial freedom to the maximum extent in the coming chaos.

That’s how you declare your own personal independence.

When you’re no longer fully dependent on any single country for your money, rights, or future, it becomes very difficult for any one government to control you.

And when you reach that point, you’ll finally understand what real independence feels like.

So, how do you go about doing it?

If you’re serious about minimizing the state’s ability to coerce you—and you understand that “hope” is not a strategy—then it’s time to take the next step toward actionable independence.

Securing a second passport is one of the smartest moves you can make. It’s your ultimate Plan B—your legal escape hatch in an increasingly unstable world.

To help you navigate this process, we’re offering a free, in-depth guide: How to Get a Second Passport… the Easiest Option for You. This report breaks down the most accessible options, explains the costs involved, and highlights which paths are most popular and why. If you’re even thinking about international diversification, you need to read this first.

The world is heading toward crisis. Your ability to move freely—and protect yourself financially—may soon depend on the actions you take today. Click here to download the free report now.

A Silicon Valley hiring scandal has erupted around an Indian software engineer accused of secretly working for as many as five technology companies simultaneously, exposing vulnerabilities in startup recruitment practices and reigniting debates over remote work accountability.

Soham Parekh, based in India, faces mounting allegations from multiple Y Combinator-backed startup founders who claim he misrepresented his employment history while juggling concurrent positions.

Suhail Doshi, founder of artificial intelligence startup Playground AI, first exposed the alleged scheme in a series of posts detailing how his company discovered Parekh’s simultaneous employment at three to four other firms. Playground AI terminated Parekh within a week of hiring him in 2024, Doshi said.

PSA: there’s a guy named Soham Parekh (in India) who works at 3-4 startups at the same time. He’s been preying on YC companies and more. Beware.

I fired this guy in his first week and told him to stop lying / scamming people. He hasn’t stopped a year later. No more excuses.

— Suhail (@Suhail) July 2, 2025

Probably 90% fake and most links are gone. pic.twitter.com/h9bnLc8Cwj

— Suhail (@Suhail) July 2, 2025

“His resumé was 90% fake,” Doshi wrote, sharing documentation that listed previous positions at prominent AI companies including Dynamo AI, Union AI, and Synthesia. The founder also published what he claimed was a private message from Parekh expressing remorse: “Have I completely sabotaged my career? What can I do to improve my situation? I am also happy to come clean.”

The allegations quickly snowballed as other tech executives came forward with similar experiences. Fleet AI CEO Nicolai Ouporov claimed that Parekh had worked for his company and suggested the behavior was systematic.

This Soham guy is devious! Proud so say we only worked with him for 1 week. I have friends who employed him for years. https://t.co/hY0o7iGX5w pic.twitter.com/zo8dOMaLor

— Nicolai Ouporov (@nicolas_ouporov) July 2, 2025

Matthew Parkhurst, CEO of cloud cost optimization startup Antimetal, described firing Parekh after discovering his multiple concurrent positions. Despite calling the engineer “really smart and likeable,” Parkhurst quipped that “hiring Soham is a new rite of passage” in the startup community.

Funnily enough, Soham was our first engineering hire in 2022

Really smart and likable; enjoyed working with him

We realized pretty quickly that he was working at multiple companies and let him go

I can’t imagine the amount of equity he’s left on the table https://t.co/vXGlHxF1QH

— Matt (@mprkhrst) July 2, 2025

Yet, the controversy surrounding Parekh shouldn’t take anyone by surprise.

In 2024, research from SideHustles.com found that one-third of remote workers maintain multiple jobs, compared to 20% of in-person workers and 17% of hybrid workers. 25% of employees hold multiple positions, averaging 50 hours per week across their roles.

“Remote workers are increasingly working multiple jobs due to the rising cost of living in recent years,” Kevin Thompson, finance expert and CEO of 9i Capital Group, told Newsweek.

“Additionally, many remote roles are relatively easy to manage, allowing workers to take on additional jobs without a noticeable drop in productivity.”

The controversy has even attracted opportunistic job offers, with Cluley CEO Roy Lee, whose AI tool helps users “cheat on everything” from job interviews to sales calls, reaching out to Parekh with a job offer.

will report back soon pic.twitter.com/jjsTZCCzXH

— Roy (@im_roy_lee) July 3, 2025

Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Homeschooling families in California are rallying against a bill they say would cut funding for critical enrichment programs and force their charter schools to close down.

Introduced by Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, AB 84 seeks to increase oversight and accountability for charter schools, particularly non-classroom-based (NCB) programs.

The bill would “strengthen accountability and oversight to crack down on documented fraud and improper use of taxpayer dollars allocated for public education,” Muratsuchi, a Democrat from Los Angeles, said during an Assembly Standing Committee on Education hearing in April. Muratsuchi cited the A3 charter school scandal in San Diego, where in 2019, over $400 million in taxpayer funds was defrauded.

“Some charter schools provide vouchers to families using taxpayer dollars intended for public education.  These vouchers have been spent on family trips to Disneyland, ski resorts, and baseball games,” Muratsuchi told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement on July 2. “AB 84 seeks to ensure that public education funds are properly spent on legitimate educational activities.”

But parents and educators who provide extra curricular activities to students enrolled in charter schools, called vendors, say the bill would hurt students by cutting out significant funding for those classes.

AB 84 would reduce per-student funding for non-classroom based charter schools by up to 30 percent and restrict the use of public funds for enrichment activities unless providers hold traditional teaching credentials, limiting partnerships with specialists and professionals in the community.

For some vendors, that means they’ll have to close their business entirely.

“It would give me a pretty big dent,” Derek Davis, a private boxing coach in Temecula and Menifee, told The Epoch Times on June 27. “I would honestly most likely have to close shop and just go get a different job. So much of my clientele is all through the charter schools.”

Davis provides private boxing lessons at the homes of his students, mostly boys between five and 15 years old. He also offers group coaching lessons, providing an opportunity for children to socialize, similar to a traditional physical education class in public schools.

Davis said the bill would cut his business by about 50 to 75 percent.

“It took me years, a lot of work into going through the system and getting registered through all the charter schools, building the relationships with all the parents, and then meeting the kids,” Davis said. “This bill is going to really affect me negatively.”

Davis said most of his students get a one-hour lesson once or twice a week. Without the funding families currently receive for enrichment, however, most wouldn’t be able to afford his lessons, which cost about $50 to $60 per hour.

But the real people losing out are the students, Davis said.

California has the most homeschooled students in the country, with 547,561 children between five and 17 as of 2024, according to a survey by the U.S. Census Bureau. The state saw a 78 percent increase in homeschool students between 2017 and 2022, with the number doubling during COVID.

Currently, California is classified as a low-regulation state for homeschooling by the Home School Legal Defense Association, due to its minimal curriculum control, notification, and testing requirements.

The state’s low regulations and robust charter school options make it an appealing option for families seeking an alternative to public or private school for their children.

Opposition to AB 84 has been organized by a group called Freedom Angels, who argue the bill would cut funding for children’s enrichment programs, threatening the personalized learning models parents have tailored for their children’s unique interests, talents, and learning styles.

“All of that is an ecosystem together, and when you attack one critical part of it, it weakens and damages the entire ecosystem,” Freedom Angels organizer Tara Thornton told The Epoch Times on June 27. “So this is going to affect and impact so many children, their choices, and opportunities.”

Thornton and Denise Aguilar of Freedom Angels are behind the rallies being held at the 30 local district offices of Democratic state senators. The next rally is scheduled for July 14.

At the local level, homeschooling mom of two Stephanie Dawson has organized groups in Riverside County to rally against the bill. She leads a co-op and is also a school board member at Mission Vista Academy, a non in-person charter school that serves parts of Riverside, Orange, San Diego, and San Bernardino Counties.

Dawson’s 8-year-old son Nicholas takes horseback riding lessons, and drama and zoology classes as part of his homeschool curriculum. Out of pocket, the three enrichment programs through Mission Vista Academy would cost her family approximately $2,000 per school year.

“This (bill) actually would impact most of the children in our co-op, as well,” Dawson told The Epoch Times. “So it’s a big thing in our community.”

AB 84 threatens to shut down most charter schools, including Mission Vista Academy.

“A lot of the aspects of this bill would make it so that these charter schools can’t function,” she said. “Our children can receive services and enrichment programs from non-credentialed vendors with this bill that will no longer be allowed so enrichment programs, such as horseback riding lessons, music lessons, STEM programs would be taken away.”

Many vendors for enrichment programs are small businesses owned by people who are specialists in their field, and don’t necessarily hold traditional teaching credentials, such as the ranches that offer horseback riding lessons and music professionals.

Currently, vendors must be pre-approved by the charter school. If they want to participate, they must apply. Parents select the vendors they want to use and vendors invoice the charter school after services are rendered.

The bill would also prohibit schools sharing staff.

“One of our students in our co-op is going into high school soon,” she said. “So, for example, if he’s enrolled in a charter that gets impacted by this bill, the amount of classes that he’s able to take from the charter school, non in-person, would be reduced because currently, the charters are able to share their staff, including their teachers that teach classes online, for example. If they can’t do that, it reduces how many teachers they have per charter school.”

Like most families in Dawson’s co-op, she says that even without the funding for enrichment programs, she would choose to continue to homeschool her son, who has never been to a brick-and-mortar school.

Dawson has shaped his education around his personalized learning style, his skills, talents, and his interests.

“And that makes his education so much more rich than I’d be able to do if he was going to a traditional school,” she said.

The mother of two touts the benefits of alternative education models. Her daughter Celeste, who is now an adult, went through the public school system until her senior year, which coincided with COVID. She enrolled in Mission Vista, part of their first graduating class, where she thrived after being able to select hand-picked enrichment classes that fed her talents and interests.

“When we’re able to focus on those things, it makes their education so much more enriching. So, for the parents and the families who would like to go that route, who would like to step out of the traditional learning style, because their child would thrive elsewhere. It’s important for us to have those options.”

AB 84 passed the Assembly on June 5 43-25 and is currently in the State Senate, referred to the Committee on Rules for assignment.