Only the US is capable of pulling this off since Russia lacks influence over Ukraine’s political processes…
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov pledged in early June on Russian Language Day that “Russia will not leave Russians and Russian-speaking people in trouble and will make sure that their legal rights, including the right to speak their native language, are restored in full. We will continue to speak about this pressing problem on international platforms. We will insist on having it resolved as a prerequisite for a lasting peaceful settlement of the Ukraine conflict.”
This aligns with Russia’s denazification goal and was included in the memo for ending the conflict that it handed to Ukraine during the second round of their newly resumed bilateral talks in Istanbul. Objectively speaking, the restoration of full Russian language rights in Ukraine is required for a sustainable peace, but this can only be brought about via legislative changes. Therein lies the problem since the Rada isn’t interested in repealing 2019’s “state language law” that entered into force in early 2022.
For precisely this reason, Russia’s memo also calls for elections to the Rada in parallel with those for the presidency, though there still wouldn’t be any guarantee that Russian-friendly forces (in the context of repealing the aforementioned law) would come to power for implementing that pragmatic demand. That’s why political engineering is ultimately required for restoring full Russian language rights in Ukraine, but Russia lacks influence over its political processes as proven by its inability to effect change.
Therefore, this part of Russia’s denazification goal might not be met unless the US takes on this responsibility, which it’d be wise to do so as to remove the roots of another conflict. After all, so long as Russian language rights aren’t fully restored, the Kremlin will keep championing this cause and possibly even consider covert action of some sort in pursuit of it. The millions of discriminated Russian speakers in Ukraine could provide a fertile recruiting ground for such operations after martial law is lifted.
The Trump Administration thus far doesn’t seem interested in that though as evidenced by the absence of pressure upon Zelensky to comply with Russia’s more important demanded concessions for peace like territorial claims and demilitarization. In fact, Trump suggested during his meeting at the White House with new German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in early June that it might be better for Russia and Ukraine to fight each other for a bit longer, which hints that he’s disinterested in these finer details for peace.
Even if he learned about them and agreed that they’re the best way for sustainably ending the conflict, perhaps under the influence of his pragmatic Special Envoy to Russia Steve Witkoff, questions would then arise about the means for politically engineering the desired outcome. It remains unclear how many Rada members will run for re-election, who’d oppose them, and what their position towards this highly sensitive issue would be in the domestic post-conflict context if they won.
Even if these details were known, secretive funding and media support for preferred candidates can only go so far, let alone for politically engineering an outcome where the Rada votes to repeal the “state language law” and the (new?) president doesn’t veto it or is overridden by a two-thirds majority. The most realistic way of advancing this goal is for the US to make post-conflict military and intelligence aid contingent on it being met, but for that to happen, Trump must rethink his entire envisaged endgame.
UK To Buy US F-35s As Starmer Signals NATO Commitment
The UK will purchase at least 12 U.S.-made F-35A stealth fighter jets, restoring the Royal Air Force’s nuclear strike capability for the first time since 1998, according to Bloomberg.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the move ahead of the NATO summit in The Hague, in a move widely seen as both a gesture to President Donald Trump and a step to reinforce Europe’s defense amid doubts about long-term American security guarantees.
“You have to get relatively close to targets in order to drop it,” said Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow at RUSI, referring to the B61-12 tactical nuclear bomb the F-35A was certified to carry in 2023. “If the RAF is to be given a free-fall nuclear capability as part of the beefed-up deterrent plans, the F-35A is the only choice.”
Defense Secretary John Healey emphasized that this is not a new weapons program, but a reinforcement of NATO’s nuclear mission. “We’re facing increasing threats, we’re facing rising nuclear risks,” he told Sky News. “This is not the UK taking on a new nuclear weapon, it’s playing a part in the established nuclear mission in NATO.”
Under current arrangements, the U.S. would retain control over the nuclear bombs, and any deployment would require joint authorization by the U.S. and NATO’s top commander.
The £3.2 billion ($4.4 billion) purchase will include 27 aircraft by decade’s end, replacing more costly short-takeoff versions and supporting 20,000 UK jobs. “These planes will save money,” said defense procurement minister Maria Eagle, explaining that the UK will host 15% of the supply chain.
Bloomberg writes that the announcement comes as NATO is expected to adopt a bold new defense spending target of 5% of GDP, aimed at appeasing Trump’s long-standing criticism of European underinvestment in defense.
Starmer’s move reflects broader European anxiety over Trump’s wavering commitment to NATO’s Article 5, the alliance’s mutual defense clause. With Russia’s war in Ukraine ongoing and fears growing about President Vladimir Putin’s intentions, the UK is renewing its broader nuclear deterrent. This includes £15 billion ($20.4 billion) in new nuclear warheads and up to 12 nuclear-powered submarines as part of the AUKUS pact with the U.S. and Australia.
While most MPs backed the move, critics—including former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn—warned it undermines nuclear non-proliferation commitments. Eagle dismissed the concerns, saying the UK was “establishing a way to use another state’s nuclear weapons to support an existing mission.”
Starmer’s strategy is to present the UK as a serious NATO contributor while courting a U.S. president known to reward big defense deals. However, Trump has so far offered little in return—ignoring EU calls for stronger sanctions on Russia and launching airstrikes on Iran despite European objections.
Amid a continuing housing shortage for locals, Berlin’s state government has approved the construction of a new container village to house more than 1,000 asylum seekers on Tempelhofer Feld.
The site, once a Nazi labor camp and later an airport, has long been protected by a 2014 law banning new construction, but that law is now being overridden for migrant housing.
According to Senator Cansel Kiziltepe of the left-wing Social Democrats (SPD), the facility will open in the second half of 2028, offering between 1,000 and 1,100 beds. The justification, she says, is that Berlin’s regular shelters for migrants are still overflowing.
Sports and leisure areas are expected to remain intact, though minor amenities like a mini-golf course and barbecue lawn will be relocated. Officials were keen to stress that historically sensitive parts of the former forced labor camp will be left untouched.
Meanwhile, discussions about using Tempelhofer Feld for urgently needed housing for Berliners remain on the back burner. As reported by Junge Freiheit, six proposals for the future of the field are being reviewed, but no decisions will be made until at least September, and a public referendum may be required.
The planned asylum facility will go ahead regardless of what Berliners decide.
This decision follows a pattern of prioritizing asylum seekers over local residents. In 2023, Remix News reported that a new social housing complex in the Spandau district would be reserved exclusively for refugees. The complex, consisting of 128 apartments built by the city-owned WBM housing association, was to house 570 asylum seekers indefinitely, despite the long wait for Berliners seeking social housing.
The financial burden of migration continues to mount for the city. In 2023, Berlin spent at least €2.1 billion on asylum-related costs, accounting for 5 percent of its entire budget.
The state government, facing rising expenses, has turned to emergency borrowing. In March, Economics Senator Franziska Giffey confirmed that Berlin will take on new debt to cover refugee-related spending, taking advantage of relaxed rules under the so-called debt brake introduced by the new Grand Coalition federal government. This allows the city to borrow approximately €670 million annually, totaling €1.3 billion for the 2026 and 2027 budgets.
While money is being poured into housing for migrants, Berliners are facing a severe housing shortage. Germany’s largest cities are short an estimated 800,000 apartments. At the same time, office vacancy rates are at record highs, with enough empty office space to create around 152,000 homes nationwide.
However, the conversion of offices into apartments is being stifled by a raft of 20,000 building regulations, high interest rates, and spiraling construction costs.
In one case, the State Office for Refugees is paying €40 per square meter for a building that was initially offered at €25.80.
Other examples include €165 million for housing 1,500 people in Kreuzberg over 10 years, €143 million for 1,200 people in Lichtenberg, and €118 million for 950 people in Westend.
It is hard even to digest the incredible train of events of the last few days in the Middle East.
Iran had been reduced to an anemic, performance-art missile attack on our base in Qatar—the last Parthian shot from a terrified regime, desperate for an out—and a ceasefire.
Iran would have been better off not launching such a ceremonial but ultimately humiliating proof of impotence.
Even worse for the theocracy, Iran’s temporary reprieve came from the now magnanimous but still hated Donald Trump.
So ends the creepy mystique of the supposedly indomitable terror state of Iran, the bane of the last seven American presidents over half a century.
For Supreme Leader Khamenei, it was hard to swallow that U.S. bombers got their permission to fly into Iranian airspace from the Israeli air force.
A good simile is that Trump put a pot of water on the stove, told Iran to jump in, put the lid over them, then smiled, turned up the heat—and will now let them stew.
As postbellum realities now simmer in Iran, the theocracy is left explaining the inexplicable to its humiliated military and shocked but soon-to-be-furious populace. All the regime’s blood-curdling rhetoric, apocalyptic threats against Israel, goose-stepping thugs, and shiny new missiles ended in less than nothing.
A trillion dollars and five decades’ worth of missiles and centrifuges are now up in smoke. That money might have otherwise saved Iranians from the impoverishment of the last fifty years.
How about the little Satan Israel, to which Iran for nearly 50 years promised extinction?
Israel had destroyed Iran’s expeditionary terrorists, Iran’s defenses, its nuclear viability, and the absurd mythology of Iranian military competence. And worse, Israel showed it could repeat all that destruction when and if it is necessary.
So, the most hated regime in the world crawled into the boiling pot because it looked around in vain for someone to void Trump’s ultimatum for a cease and desist.
But there were no last-minute saviors to rescue them.
The dreaded decades-long Iranian nuclear threat?
It is either gone for now, or if it resurfaces, it will be again far easier to vaporize at will than to rebuild a lost trillion-dollar investment.
Russia? Its former Obama-Kerry re-invitation back into the Middle East lasted only a decade.
It will now cut its losses like it did with the vanished Assad kleptocracy in Syria. Putin exits the Middle East not entirely displeased that his lunatic Iranian client did not get a bomb—but did get its just desserts. A tense Middle East tends to prop up Russian export oil prices.
Did China come to the mullahs’ aid?
No, they were not shy about ordering their Iranian lackey to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, through which 50 percent of Chinese-purchased oil passes.
For President Xi, the Iranians are treated as little more than Uyghurs with oil.
The world decided that it was tired of a half-century of crybully terrorism, empty nuke threats, mindless mobs screaming scripted banalities, cowardly murdering, and medieval theocrats threatening the general peace.
So, the world turned its back on Iran. And with a wink and nod, it let Israel and the U.S. do what they must.
As for Iran’s terrorist appendages, Hezbollah’s commanders are either dead, maimed, or in hiding.
Hamas has fled into a subterranean labyrinth.
The last Assad thug fled to Russia.
The crazy Houthis? They are reconsidering the idea of launching their last missile at the cost of their last port or power grid.
The anti-Trump Democrats and loony left?
Their talk of impeaching Trump for the supposedly “illegal” 35-minute, one-off strike will fade.
The Trump mission equaled less than one day of Obama’s predator drone strikes, targeted killings, or his five-year chaotic bombing in Libya.
Is the incoherent left furious that there is no more Iranian nuclear threat?
Mad that no Americans were killed last Saturday night?
Furious America likely killed few if any Iranians.
Or is it raging because Trump ignored Iran’s last-gasp attack and instead orchestrated a cease-fire?
Of course, in the Middle East, there is never a real end to anything.
We may see freelancing terrorists try to fill the vacuum of Iran’s decline. Or Iran itself may try to let loose a terrorist cell. It may later boast it has hidden away some enriched uranium.
But no matter.
The dimensions of this new Middle East will persist.
The new reality is that either Israel or the U.S.—if they keep their earned confidence within proper limits—can now ensure a non-nuclear Iran by easily blowing up its costly nuclear program as often as it is rebuilt.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
Chinese Influence In Climate Change Lawsuits Threatens To Derail U.S. Energy Industry
A new op-ed from oil services CEO Dan Eberhart in Forbes makes the case that climate change litigation is a growing threat to U.S. energy – and that the U.S. could fall behind China as a result.
He notes that Senator Ted Cruz has repeatedly voiced concern that American energy security is under threat—not from foreign armies or economic collapse, but from a coordinated legal campaign masquerading as environmental activism. This week, Cruz’s Judiciary oversight subcommittee is convening a hearing to dig into what he believes is a coordinated effort between China and the U.S. climate litigation movement aimed at undercutting U.S. energy dominance.
According to Eberhart’s piece in Forbes, the wave of climate lawsuits, particularly those brought by firms like Sher Edling, are supported by a network of well-funded foundations and advocacy organizations. These entities, he argues, may be unintentionally serving the strategic goals of America’s geopolitical adversaries—especially China—by hampering domestic fossil fuel production and increasing reliance on foreign-controlled clean energy supply chains.
Eberhart points out that China already dominates global markets for critical materials like lithium and cobalt, as well as solar and battery manufacturing. So, any U.S. policy that accelerates a transition away from fossil fuels without securing domestic alternatives, he warns, risks handing Beijing the upper hand in both energy and manufacturing.
The national security implications are becoming harder to ignore. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission has raised alarms that the Chinese Communist Party is working to influence U.S. state and local policy to advance its global agenda. A report from the nonprofit State Armor further claims that China has infiltrated segments of the American environmental movement to steer energy policy in a way that aligns with Chinese interests.
One organization receiving particular scrutiny is the Energy Foundation China (EFC). Though it’s officially based in San Francisco, most of its staff are located in Beijing, and its activities reportedly align closely with CCP goals. Eberhart notes that EFC has funneled millions into U.S. anti-fossil fuel groups, including the Rocky Mountain Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)—the latter of which faced a 2018 congressional inquiry over potential foreign agent registration.
Concerns about Chinese influence don’t stop with advocacy groups. The House Energy and Commerce Committee has previously warned that Beijing is exploiting social and political divisions in America to steer energy policy in its favor. Several major U.S. philanthropic institutions—including the Rockefeller, Hewlett, and MacArthur foundations—have funded environmental litigation efforts that Eberhart believes would never have gained traction without their financial support. However, these donors have largely ignored the risks of foreign manipulation embedded in the groups they help fund.
The influence campaign, Eberhart claims, also extends into academia. Chinese government-affiliated institutions like the National Natural Science Foundation of China have published research in U.S. journals criticizing fossil fuels and painting American companies as deceptive. Notably, one of EFC’s top communications staffers once worked at this same Chinese foundation.
Meanwhile, what Eberhart calls a “revolving door” between activist nonprofits and federal agencies raises further ethical concerns. For instance, Ann Carlson, now serving in the Biden administration, previously consulted for Sher Edling while also sitting on the board of the Environmental Law Institute—a group that has partnered with Chinese organizations on legal education initiatives tied to climate litigation.
Eberhart argues that the Senate subcommittee led by Sen. Cruz is uniquely positioned to investigate the network of foreign and domestic actors behind the legal assault on American energy. Transparency, he writes, is crucial. Americans deserve to know who is funding these lawsuits and why. Otherwise, he warns, efforts to revive the “energy dominance” doctrine promoted during the Trump administration may not be enough to overcome what he sees as an opaque and potentially dangerous campaign.
While the U.S. debates and litigates its energy future, Eberhart cautions, China is rapidly building coal plants, securing fossil fuel deals, and tightening its grip on clean energy supply chains. If current trends continue, Beijing may find itself in a commanding position—while the U.S. energy sector is entangled in regulation, litigation, and foreign dependency.
It’s almost as if all of this progressive “activism” really was put in place to set us in motion backwards…
Joe Tippens never planned to discover a potential remedy that he credits with saving his life and thrust him into the spotlight among notable cancer survivors. The 67-year-old businessman told The Epoch Times he just wanted to beat a type of cancer with an extremely low survival rate.
In August 2016, Tippens was diagnosed with small cell lung cancer with a fist-sized tumor. After undergoing chemotherapy and radiation five times a week in Houston, the large tumor in his left lung was eliminated. However, Tippens said the treatments came closer to killing him than curing him.
When he returned home to Oklahoma after the New Year, he received devastating news. His oncologist told him he had zero chance of surviving for more than a few months.
“In January of 2017, my PET scan lit up like a Christmas tree and I had wide metastasis everywhere, including in my neck, bones, pancreas, and liver,” Tippens said.
Finding a Lifeline
Facing a prognosis of three months to live, Tippens heard an intriguing story from a veterinarian he knew: A scientist with terminal cancer reportedly cured her lab mice and then herself using fenbendazole, an antiparasitic drug.
The story was the beginning of what eventually became the “Joe Tippens Protocol.”
Fenbendazole, used for 30 years to treat intestinal parasites in animals, has not received U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for human use, meaning doctors cannot prescribe it for people. However, with a terminal diagnosis and nothing to lose, Tippens decided to try it alongside his conventional treatments.
Tippens found that Panacur, a trade name for fenbendazole, was sold over the counter at outlets that carry veterinary medications.
Starting in the third week of January 2017, Tippens began taking the canine medication, Panacur, 1 gram per day for three consecutive days per week. After four days without the medication, which contains about 222 milligrams of fenbendazole per gram, he would repeat his three-day routine. Three months later, Tippens was cancer-free.
His protocol also included Theracurmin, a form of the active compound in turmeric, and CBD, an extract of cannabis which does not cause intoxication.
Scientific Support and Mechanisms
Dr. William Makis, an oncologist and cancer researcher based in Edmonton, Canada, has studied Tippens’s approach and treats cancer patients worldwide, primarily through telehealth.
“I’ve had several patients declared cancer-free after doing the protocol for a number of months,” Makis told The Epoch Times. “What made [Tippens’] situation so powerful is that he cured himself of a cancer that is very aggressive—small cell lung cancer—and he had a terminal diagnosis.”
According to Makis, the family of anti-parasitic drugs that includes fenbendazole, mebendazole, and albendazole works well—scientists have found at least 12 ways the medications can fight cancer.
The effectiveness of the drugs stems from key similarities between parasite and cancer cells: both have the capacity for autonomous survival and proliferation, resistance to cell-death pathways, and the ability to circumvent the host immune system.
Anti-parasitic drugs appear to fight cancer through multiple mechanisms:
Boosting protein called p53: P53 is a tumor suppressor protein that helps kill cancer cells.
Blocking glucose uptake: Cancer cells depend on sugar for energy and growth.
Disrupting microtubules: These cellular structures are crucial for cell division of cancer cells.
Affecting mitochondrial function: Depletes cellular energy, increases oxidative stress, and blocks a critical pathway that regulates cell growth of cancer cells.
Researchers at the Stanford University Medical Center have reported several case reports, using fenbendazole to cure Stage 4 cancer cases, Makis said. The series of case reports was published in 2021 in SciTechnol, an online, London-based publisher of scientific journal articles.
A thought-provoking review citing animal studies published in 2024 in Anticancer Research Journal concluded that fenbendazole affects energy metabolism—mainly by increasing the levels of p53 and affecting pathways that control sugar uptake. It ultimately starves cancer cells and causes them to die with minimal harm to normal cells. The researchers concluded that fenbendazole’s effects on energy metabolism “could lead to significant advances in cancer treatment.”
Some preliminary research also suggested potential anti-cancer mechanisms for fenbendazole. A study published in Scientific Reports in 2018 by researchers in India found that fenbendazole “may be evaluated as a potential therapeutic agent because of its effect on multiple cellular pathways leading to effective elimination of cancer cells.” Specifically, fenbendazole interferes with microtubules involved in cell division.
A 2016 study published in Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications found that ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug approved for human use, shows promise against glioblastoma, an aggressive brain cancer known for treatment resistance. The drug kills glioblastoma cells and inhibits blood vessel development. In laboratory and mouse studies, ivermectin triggers cancer cell death and significantly reduces tumor growth.
Recent research has shown that a combination of fenbendazole and diisopropylamino dichloroacetate, a compound used to treat hepatitis, has shown some anticancer properties in cell cultures and animal studies. Combined, the drugs kill lung cancer cells more effectively than either drug alone.
Makis has found that combining fenbendazole with ivermectin can increase the protocol’s effectiveness.
“When you combine them, you go from attacking cancer in a dozen ways to attacking cancer in two dozen ways,” Makis said. “I have found it very reasonable to include both of them in protocols if there is pre-clinical research that each of them has an effect [on] that particular type of cancer. Whenever you have a specific cancer, I want to look at the body of research to see if there is a proven effect of either ivermectin or fenbendazole for that type of cancer. If there is, then I share that research with my patients.”
Makis has treated patients with various cancers—from common types like breast, prostate, colon, and lung cancer to rarer forms such as cholangiocarcinoma (bile duct cancer) and sarcomas (soft tissue cancers). “I’ve had several patients declared cancer-free after doing the protocol for a number of months,” Makis said.
Although Makis has been recommending ivermectin and fenbendazole for cancer treatment, he acknowledges that many doctors refrain from this practice.
Doctors are very hesitant to help cancer patients with repurposed drugs because of repercussions from the medical boards, Makis said.
“On the other hand, you have doctors who are willing to help patients with repurposed drugs but no experience with oncology,” he said.
When asked whether he recommends that cancer patients consult with an integrative physician who approves of those treatments, Makis said it is good for a patient to have a relationship with a doctor who has experience with oncology.
“It depends on the physician’s background,” Makis said. “Some doctors have extensive experience, after seeing cancer patients for many years.”
Patient Success Stories
Donna Leland, 64, a show host on the national Moody Radio Network, was diagnosed with Stage 3 cervical and endometrial cancer in April 2023. She underwent a hysterectomy but declined the recommended chemotherapy and radiation.
“I had seen the outcome for other people who had gone that route,” Leland told The Epoch Times. “Some had gotten all cleared, but then the cancer came back. I know it diminishes your own immune system’s ability to fight off disease.”
Leland told the doctor she did not want those treatments and asked for another option. But she was offered nothing else.
“I knew there had to be a better way than to fry everything. I just said, ‘I’d rather die than fry.’”
Leland began taking fenbendazole and ivermectin. She also found support from Terry Harmon, a chiropractor and functional medicine physician in Kentucky.
Harmon says more than 100 of his patients have reported positive health benefits from using fenbendazole or ivermectin.
“The reason so many people are finding success is twofold,” Harmon told The Epoch Times. “It is addressing infections. It helps the body heal and get stronger. There is research showing this combination helps the body’s ability genetically to kill cancer and prevent cancer from growing and spreading.”
Leland said she had confirmation of the effectiveness of these alternative treatments from studies on ivermectin, fenbendazole, and other anti-parasitic drugs. Mebendazole is another anti-parasitic drug that both Makis and Harmon recommended as an effective cancer treatment.
One year after her hysterectomy, Leland said she is healthier than she has ever been, partly because of her continuing use of anti-parasitic drugs for preventive purposes.
“After being checked every three months for evidence of cancer, my oncologist continues to declare me cancer-free.”
“I feel like I’m 20 years younger,” Leland said. “God has been faithful to lead me on this journey.”
Global Impact
The Tippens Protocol has achieved significant international reach, particularly in China, where a translated blog has garnered more than 20 million views. This has led to an estimated 70,000 followers of what’s affectionately called the “Uncle Joey Protocol.”
Despite opportunities to monetize his discovery, Tippens has refused all financial gain.
“I have had search engine experts who have told me I could monetize this blog to the tune of $25,000 to $30,000 per month,” he said. “I can’t do that for a simple reason: I have hundreds of people who have told me the reason they believe me and trust me is because I am doing all this and not monetizing it. The second I monetized it, I would be just another guy out there hawking product out on the Internet, trying to make money.”
Tippens warns about fraudulent Facebook pages that falsely use his name to sell substandard drugs.
Regulatory and Medical Challenges
The FDA confirmed that it has not approved “drug products containing fenbendazole for use in humans,” said Lauren-Jei McCarthy, FDA press officer, in a statement to The Epoch Times. It has not gone through the rigorous testing and clinical trials required for drugs intended for human use. Fenbendazole is approved by the FDA as an antiparasitic drug for use in animals. It is commonly used to deworm dogs, cats, horses, and cattle.
Ivermectin, while FDA-approved for human use against parasitic worms, is not approved for cancer treatment. Health care providers may prescribe ivermectin to fight cancer as a repurposed medication. Both medications are available without prescriptions and are routinely purchased for veterinary use.
Makis, who has been at the cutting edge of advocating for holistic treatments that include the repurposed drugs, said he believes we are in a revolutionary era of effective cancer treatments.
“This is the first time in several generations there is a strong movement for true medical freedom, to allow for exploration of treatments that don’t benefit any big company,” he said.
Serious side effects from fenbendazole and ivermectin are rare, Makis said.
“I have seen moderate side effects, which include unpleasant visual symptoms, some dizziness, and fatigue,” Makis said.
Tippens is encouraged by ongoing research into other FDA-approved drugs that might be repurposed for cancer treatment.
“Because of my story, I think there are other efforts in research in the anti-parasitic category,“ Tippen said. ”There are seven sister drugs to fenbendazole. One medical group has used mebendazole in their protocol. I think I’ve started at least opening people’s brains to something.”
Confusion As Trump Says Deal With China “Signed” Yet Both Sides Violate Terms Of Ceasefire
There was a burst of confusion late in the day when Donald Trump said that the US and China had signed a trade deal two weeks after saying they had reached an understanding in London about how to implement a ceasefire in the countries’ dispute.
“We just signed with China yesterday,” the president said at the White House on Thursday, without providing any details.
The reality turned out to be far less exciting than what Trump represented.
Shortly after, a White House official said the US and China had “agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement”, in a reference to the trade talks that the nations held in May, when they first negotiated a truce, which was really just an agreement to continue negotiating. And since there was still leftover confusion, Trump’s Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, said that the US and China sign a “finalized a trade understanding” reached last month in Geneva adding that the White House has imminent plans to reach agreements with a set of 10 major trading partners.
The China deal, which Lutnick said had been signed two days ago, codified the terms laid out in trade talks between Beijing and Washington, including a commitment from China to deliver rare earths used in everything from wind turbines to jet planes.
In other words, the “deal” that was just signed was merely another reaffirmation that the two sides continue to talk about eventually sitting down to negotiate.
Lutnick told Bloomberg Television that President Donald Trump was also prepared to finalize a slate of trade deals in the coming two weeks in connection with the president’s July 9 deadline to reinstate higher tariffs he paused in April.
“We’re going to do top 10 deals, put them in the right category, and then these other countries will fit behind,” he said. Lutnick did not specify which nations would be part of that first wave of trade pacts, though earlier Thursday Trump suggested the US was nearing an agreement with India.
As a reminder, the “China accord” Lutnick described is far from a comprehensive trade deal that addresses thorny questions about fentanyl trafficking and American exporters’ access to Chinese markets.
After an initial round of negotiations in Geneva resulted in a reduction in tariffs imposed by both countries, the US and China accused each other of violating their agreement. After subsequent talks in London this month, negotiators from the US and China announced they had arrived at an understanding, pending approval from Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Lutnick said that under the agreement inked two days ago, US “countermeasures” imposed ahead of the London talks would be lifted, but only once rare earth materials start flowing from China.
Which is a problem: as discussed previously, China’s biggest point of leverage in the trade war negotiations is its control of rare earth exports to the US; it’s also why the ceasefire deal announced in early June was mostly meant to restart exports of Chinese rare earths to the US.
That never happened. As the WSJ reported overnight, two weeks after China promised the U.S. it would ease the exports of rare-earth magnets, Chinese authorities have been dragging out approval of Western companies’ requests for the critical components, a situation that is bound to reignite trade tensions between Washington and Beijing.
Western companies say they are receiving barely enough magnets for their factories and have little visibility of future supplies. Firms are waiting weeks as Chinese authorities scrutinize their applications, only to be rejected in some cases. And applications for raw rare earths, which are used to make magnets, are rarely granted.
As a result, Western companies are concerned that the shortages could soon affect manufacturing. Companies are so desperate for magnets that they are opting for expensive airfreight whenever licenses are granted to prevent costly production shutdowns. Some manufacturers are experimenting with workarounds that would allow them to make their products without the most powerful magnets.
“It’s hand to mouth—the normal supply-chain scrambling that you have to do,” said Lisa Drake, a vice president overseeing Ford’s industrial planning for batteries and electric vehicles, earlier this week. Although she said the situation had improved, the scarcity of the rare-earth magnets is forcing Ford to “move things around” to avoid factory shutdowns, she said.
As a result, contrary to White House assertions that the flow of the critical components would return to normal, manufacturers have taken the continuing challenges as a sign that new Chinese rare-earth export restrictions, introduced in April after President Trump raised tariffs on China, are here to stay.
“Yes, the export restrictions have been paused on paper. However, ground reality is completely different,” said Neha Mukherjee, a rare-earths analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. The licensing process is plagued by “bureaucratic drag.”
On Thursday, China’s Ministry of Commerce issued a token statement that it has been accelerating the review of rare-earth export license applications and has approved “a certain number.”
The restrictions illustrate the power Beijing holds through its formidable supply chains and how it can use them to inflict pain on Western businesses and exact concessions from the US. China makes 90% of the world’s most powerful rare-earth magnets, a key component in everything from cars to jet fighters. In April, after Trump heaped stiff tariffs on Chinese products, Beijing established an export-control system for rare earths. While it said the license system was set up to regulate the export of materials for military use, the regime has in effect allowed China to clamp down on rare-earths supplies as it wishes.
After April, the supply of magnets to Western businesses slowed to a trickle, causing shock waves for global car, defense and electronics makers. Exports of rare-earth magnets to the U.S. declined 93% in May from a year earlier. Ford stopped production of its Explorer SUV at its Chicago plant for a week in May.
The U.S. accused China of slow-walking the approval of export licenses, which China denied. The shortage drove both sides back to the bargaining table earlier this month, where China agreed to free up the flow of rare earths in exchange for the U.S. easing its own restrictions on certain U.S. exports to China.
Following the deal, Trump wrote that “full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied up front by China.”
However, China put only a six-month limit on any new licenses, we later learned as Beijing seeks to keep DC on a tight leash. Now, in the applications for export licenses, Chinese authorities are asking Western companies for sensitive details such as contact information of those buying their magnets and even designs of how their magnets are integrated into components like motors.
Beijing also appears to be trying to prevent stockpiling by Western businesses. One Chinese magnet maker has warned clients seeking to import more magnets than usual that they may have to explain to government officials the “business drivers” behind such large orders, according to an advisory note the magnet maker shared with clients.
Fearful of shortages, many Western businesses are complying with the information requests—but are still facing long delays. The success of their application also depends on their supplier. Big state-connected magnet companies are getting export licenses faster than smaller private ones, according to many in the industry.
“The export policy for magnet[s] is still very strict,” said a representative for one Chinese magnet maker. Now, some Western businesses say they are resigned to the fact that the restrictions may remain in place indefinitely.
And while China is clearly dominating the rare earth supply chain (for now, as it is only a matter of time before the Trump admin subsidizes domestic producers such as MP Materials to ramp up production as an alternative to China), the US is doing the same with ethane (a relationship we described in “China’s Need For US Chemicals Greater Than US Need For Rare Earths“.)
China imported more than 565,000 barrels per day of petrochemical feedstocks from the US in 2024 according to the Energy Information Administration, with a value of over $4.7 billion. That dwarfed the $170 million of rare earths the US imported last year, about 70% of which came from China, according to the US Geological Survey.
The figures show the dependence the US and China have developed on each other by ever tightening trade links over the past few decades. While China has a tight grip on refining many metals crucial for industry, it also takes in niche chemicals from the US that are difficult to buy elsewhere.
China leans on naphtha to produce most base chemicals, which are processed further to end up in everyday items like electronics and clothing. However, some plants can switch to cheaper propane when the economics make sense, which they do regularly. Propane dehydrogenation plants however can’t process alternatives like naphtha. The US accounted for over half of all China’s propane imports in 2024.
And so, with China refusing to comply with the terms of the recent ceasefire and unlock rare earth exports to the US, Washington is doing the same, and as Reuters reported yesterday, the US sent letters to Enterprise Products and Energy Transfer on Wednesday informing the companies they could load ethane on vessels destined for China but could not unload the ethane in China without authorization.
The letters from the U.S. Department of Commerce follow a licensing requirement imposed several weeks ago on the companies’ exports of ethane to China, which halted shipments and led to vessels anchoring in or hovering around the US Gulf Coast
A copy of the letter seen by Reuters and later released by Enterprise Products said, “This letter authorizes Enterprise Products to load vessels with ethane, transport and anchor in foreign ports, even if… to a party located in China,” the letter said. “However, Enterprise Products may not complete such export… to a party that is located in China,” without further authorization.
The letters, Reuters muses, may signal the US preparing to lift restrictions imposed on exports to China in late May and early June, as the U.S.-China trade war shifted from retaliatory tariffs, to curbs on each others supply chains. With China granting rare earth export licenses to some firms and saying it would speed up the approval process, the U.S. now appears close to permitting ethane exports to China.
However, the decision to limit unloading of ethane is more likely another form of negotiation, one which signals that the cargo will not be released unless China complies with its own terms, and resumes shipments of rare earths.
About half of all US ethane exports go to China, where it is used by the petrochemical industry. China’s ethane cracking capacity is dwarfed by its capacity to process naphtha and propane, but almost all of its ethane imports come from the US. The restrictions will have a significant impact on the Lianyungang and Tianjin plants, owned by Satellite Chemical, Sinopec and INEOS. SP Chemicals, a Singapore-based producer, sources most of its feedstock from Enterprise Products Partners.
The ability to load and begin transporting ethane could relieve congestion at ports along the U.S. Gulf coast, where vessels have been stalled, although that now appears to be dependent on China complying with the terms of the London ceasefire.
Since May 23, the U.S. imposed new restrictions on exports to China of everything from ethane and chip design software to jet engines and nuclear plant parts.
As the trade war continues, it appears commodities are now leading the confrontation, with players on both sides set to feel the pain.
On Sunday, a massive suicide bomb attack tore through the important Greek Orthodox church Mar Elias in Damascus, killing 27 and wounding dozens more. The huge attack just added to the spate of sectarian violence across Syria, which undercuts the Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) government’s claim to be protecting religious minorities.
The HTS was quick to blame ISIS for the Mar Elias bombing, and on Monday announced the arrest of a number of ISIS associates who they claimed were involved, vowing to bring them to justice. Now that whole narrative seems in doubt.
ISIS never took credit for the Mar Elias bombing, which, since it was the biggest attack in Damascus in a very long time, would be an unusual oversight. Now, another group, Saraya Ansar al-Sunnah (SAAS), issued its own statement claiming credit for the attack.
SAAS, which was said to be formed in February, went on to say that the government’s claims of arresting people involved with the attack were “untrue, fabricated.” The group is being presented as an ISIS splinter group by some reports, but the reality is substantially different.
While HTS has undergone a massive reformation in its presentation in the media, the group was a renamed al-Qaeda affiliate that retains its deeply Salafist ideologies.
After a brutal, religiously motivated terrorist attack on Christians in Syria, the EU remains silent. Brussels usually reacts within minutes when it comes to other parts of the world, like Ukraine. This double standard is outrageous, and the lack of condemnation is unacceptable. pic.twitter.com/ApcahCj1BY
While playing nice with religious minorities in Syria on paper, they’ve tended to turn a blind eye to attacks on them, notably the massacre of the Alawites, where well over 1,300 Alawites were killed in March, many by security forces. Those killings continue to this day, and the promised investigation never seemed to go anywhere.
Speaking of Alawites, SAAS played a part in these massacres as well. The group regularly brags of carrying out attacks on Alawites and Druze Syrians, including what they called the “Harvest of Ramadan,” where they listed attacks and vandalism done during the holiday on the Alawite town of Qardaha.
That they would be behind the Mar Elias attack is not out of keeping with the way the group has operated in its brief existence. It provides a messaging problem for the HTS though, since the government has not done much about the SAAS at all since it came into existence.
The Orthodox Christian leader in Syria has called out the Jolani regime:
My respect for His Beatitude Patriarch John X Yazigi has grown tenfold after his historic speech from Damascus openly criticizing the Julani regime.
Make no mistake: the regime will try to harm him.
When you see the incitement—calling him an “Assad regime remnant” or accusing… pic.twitter.com/nHxDqLPZe9
Syrian Christian leader Patriarch John X. Yazigi issued a statement after the attack criticizing the government for its inability to protect religious minorities, saying“condolences are not enough for us” and that the government has a fundamental duty to protect all its citizens. For now, though, that has begun and ended with blaming ISIS to justify ongoing operations against ISIS in the east.
Drag Queen Weather Hour On NBC’s News Center Maine Ends With 404 Error
Months before President Trump officially began his second term, the cultural tide shifted.
The era of toxic wokeism and DEI propaganda—pushed by rogue, taxpayer-funded NGOs, bloated government bureaucracies lined with leftist activists, and globalist corporations—was collapsing under its own weight. Yet, in a glaring defiance and display of utter disconnect of where precisely the Overton Window stands today, a local television station in Maine greeted families turning into the weather on their television sets with a drag queen named “Chartreuse Money.”
Dressed in what resembled a figure skating outfit, Chartreuse Money, featured on NBC’s News Center Maine, told viewers earlier this week, “All it took was a pride parade to bring the sunshine out, honey.”
Fast forward a few days—likely after massive backlash—and X user Libs of TikTok reports that the local media outlet “deleted the drag queen weather forecast after backlash.”
DEI ends in a 404—diversity not found, inclusion failed, equity error….
Public records analysis reveals that News Center Maine is the joint TV news brand of WCSH-6 in Portland and WLBZ-2 in Bangor, owned by Tegna Inc.
Upstream ownership of Tegna has no surprises whatsoever…
What X users are saying:
HOW and WHY aren’t they bankrupt yet?
No way you survive and stay in business this long doing everything possible to hurt and destroy your business daily… there’s just NO WAY… seriously, HOW do you piss off and push away viewers/customers and continue to do it the next day?
The study, conducted in laboratory rats over 12 weeks, revealed that inorganic phosphates may contribute to hypertension by stimulating the release of a chemical called fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23).
How Food Preservatives Raise Blood Pressure
Researchers discovered that high-phosphate diets cause a specific protein called FGF23 to accumulate in the blood and then cross into critical brain regions that control blood pressure, including the brain stem.
The findings suggest this effect occurs because high levels of phosphate cause the body to release FGF23, which crosses into the brain and stimulates certain receptors that raise sympathetic nerve activity, ultimately causing hypertension.
Further experiments indicate this involves activation of a protein called calcineurin, which is known to influence nerve activity and heart function.
Natural versus Inorganic Phosphates
Not all phosphates are created equal, the research suggests. The findings relate mainly to inorganic phosphate, said Dr. Wanpen Vongpatanasin, one of the study authors and a hypertension expert at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.
While vegetables naturally contain high amounts of phosphate, it exists in an organic form that the body absorbs poorly—only 40 percent to 60 percent is absorbed in the intestines.
By contrast, inorganic phosphates added during food processing have an absorption rate exceeding 90 percent, making them far more likely to reach problematic levels in the bloodstream.
Phosphate additives, commonly used as preservatives and flavor enhancers in processed foods and cola drinks, are highly absorbable, she noted.
“Vegetables also contain high amounts of phosphate, but it is in the form of organic phosphate, which is not easily absorbed in the gut. Therefore, they do not have the same side effect profile,” Vongpatanasin said.
Excess Phosphate Linked to Other Health Issues
The phosphate problem extends beyond cardiovascular concerns, according to registered dietitian nutritionist Holly Huhlein, who was not involved in the study.
“This is one of the reasons why overconsumption of highly processed foods, such as bakery products, processed dairy products, and highly processed snacks, is not recommended,” said Huhlein.
She noted that while phosphates in highly processed foods help preserve them and blend ingredients together, consuming too much phosphate has the potential to cause weak bone structure, damage to the kidneys, and increased risk for heart issues due to the imbalance of the ratio of calcium to phosphorus in the body.
“We tend to store phosphate alongside calcium in the body in our bones, and our bodies naturally do a great job of managing our phosphate levels through balancing hormones and other minerals,” she said.
High levels of phosphate can cause the body to pull calcium out from bones.
However, Huhlein said that phosphates are also an essential mineral in the body and important for many bodily functions, including the creation of DNA, cellular structure, bone mineralization, and utilizing energy in the body.
Who Should Be Most Concerned
For the general healthy population, Huhlein said, phosphate is not a concern when eating a well-balanced diet consisting of lean protein sources (animal and plant proteins), whole grains, fruits, and vegetables.
Rather, she added, concern can come from a diet higher in highly processed foods that, besides tending to have more additives like phosphates, also contain higher amounts of saturated fats and added sugars that people are encouraged to limit.
“For this reason,” Huhlein said, “if you are focusing on consuming a majority of nutrients from whole food sources while occasionally consuming shelf-stable or highly processed foods, phosphate consumption is not of concern.”
However, certain populations that have special dietary needs, such as those with kidney issues or osteoporosis, should be more cautious, she added. “Osteoporosis is caused by our bones breaking down faster than they can be rebuilt, and maintaining a proper calcium-to-phosphate ratio can play a role in keeping the condition from escalating,” Huhlein said. “As for our kidneys, they are one of the ways we monitor and manage phosphate levels by excreting them through urine.”
Vongpatanasin cautioned that because the research was conducted in animals, it remains unconfirmed whether the same effects would occur in humans.
According to Vongpatanasin, the findings also suggest that the brain’s FGF receptor 4 pathway could be a promising target for new treatments for high blood pressure linked to diet.
