And just like that, the X ticker is available for Elon Musk to purchase and take his social media company public. 

Nippon Steel completed its $14.1 billion acquisition of iconic American peer, US Steel, bringing to a close protracted negotiations which lasted for 18 months amid US political wrangling.

As the Nikkei reported, the Japanese company will acquire 100% of U.S. Steel’s ordinary shares, while handing a “golden share” to the U.S. government under a National Security Agreement both companies signed with Washington. 

“Nippon Steel is excited about opening a new chapter of U. S. Steel’s storied history. Building on our investment, the transfer of our advanced technologies, and the unwavering efforts of management and the employees of both companies, Eiji Hashimoto, Nippon Steel’s CEO said in a press release, announcing the completion of the deal late Wednesday night local time.

The deal consolidates Nippon Steel’s position as the world’s fourth largest steel maker, and comes just a matter of days after U.S. president Donald Trump cancelled the decision by former President Joe Biden to block the Japanese company’s acquisition of its American peer.

A golden share typically hands the holder a right to veto certain changes to the company. The golden share in U.S. Steel “prevents” actions like relocating the American company’s headquarters from Pittsburgh, changing the name of the company, and closing plants “before certain timeframes” according to the U.S. commerce secretary Howard Lutnick.

The NSA agreement signed by the two companies also stipulates approximately $11 billion in new investments by 2028, including in a greenfield project, and commitments related to production in the U.S. and “trade matters,” according to both companies.

Nippon Steel first announced the acquisition back in December 2023 but it quickly became mired in steelworker union opposition and U.S. election-year politics. President Joe Biden issued an order in January this year blocking the purchase, prompting Nippon Steel to respond with a lawsuit against the former leader.

The Japanese company sees the deal as a top priority for its medium- to long-term growth. Steel demand is expected to grow in the U.S. due to factors like the growth of electric vehicles and infrastructure renewal. That contrasts with Japan, where demand is expected to fall due to a shrinking population.

Trump’s 50% tariff on all steel imports, an increase from the previous 25%, has made exporting to the U.S. harder, making the acquisition even more pertinent.

The deal will see Nippon Steel’s crude production rise to 57.82 million tons from 43.64 million tons, taking the Japanese company closer to the third largest producer, Ansteel Group of China, which produced 59.55 million tons in 2024. However, analysts have raised concerns over the financial burden of the takeover, as well as the promised additional investments.

“We expect an increase in investment costs in the near term owing to funding for the U.S. Steel acquisition, additional investments post-acquisition, and investments in electric furnaces in Japan,” said Yuji Matsumoto, analyst at Nomura, in a recent note. “We still think the stock looks undervalued but will lower our target price to reflect the aforementioned financial burden and weak demand in Japan,” he added.

Aside from the investment costs, analysts at Jefferies raised concerns over the Japanese company’s post-merger integration. “We think that Nippon Steel has a limited track record operating a business of this scope,” it said in a note.

Its “success stories” of overseas ventures in the U.S. state of Alabama and in India have “been done with the help of ArcelorMittal,” but its “unassisted acquisition of G/GJ Steel in Thailand almost immediately went loss-making after the deal closed,” the analysts said.

Via VigilantFox.com,

For once, “Screw your freedom” Arnold Schwarzenegger got it exactly right.

It started with a question about the LA riots. But what followed was not the response anyone expected. He demanded RESPECT for America.

And what happened next went beyond politics. He told foreigners point blank: if they want to come to America and use our resources, they need to be on their best behavior and “give something back.”

The hosts were stunned, and the audience erupted in applause. This is a winning moment you have to see to believe.

Arnold Schwarzenegger isn’t exactly a conservative hero these days.

From backing lockdowns during COVID to telling Americans to “screw your freedom,” the former California governor has taken positions that pushed him far from the political base that once celebrated him.

So when he appeared on The View, many expected more of the same—virtue signals, Trump bashing, and applause lines tailored to the studio audience.

But that’s not at all what happened.

Joy Behar opened with a question about immigration enforcement and ICE.

“As an immigrant yourself,” she asked, “did you have a visceral reaction to what they’re doing? What ICE is doing? When you see the videos of it?”

Behar clearly hoped for a condemnation of Trump and Republican immigration policy.

What she got was something far less predictable—and far more patriotic.

“Well, I’ll tell you,” Schwarzenegger replied.

“You said immigrant—I’m so proud and happy that I was embraced by the American people like that.”

He reflected on his journey to the U.S. with nothing but hope and a dream.

“Imagine—I came over here at the age of 21, with absolutely nothing. And then to create a career like that. I mean, in no other country in the world could you do that.”

Every part of his success, he said, was thanks to the opportunities America gave him.

“Every single thing—if it’s my bodybuilding career, if it’s my acting career, becoming governor, the beautiful family that I’ve created—all of this is because of America.”

“This is why I’m so, so happy to see firsthand that this is the greatest country in the world. This is the land of opportunity.”

It was heartfelt. And it was just the beginning.

Arnold Schwarzenegger isn’t exactly a conservative hero these days.

From backing lockdowns during COVID to telling Americans to “screw your freedom,” the former California governor has taken positions that pushed him far from the political base that once celebrated him.

So when… pic.twitter.com/XZm0xzM3mn

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) June 17, 2025

That’s when Schwarzenegger dropped the script—and shattered the immigration narrative the hosts were trying to build.

Without hesitation, he turned his focus to the violent riots erupting in Los Angeles.

He spoke as someone who had done things the right way—legally, deliberately, and with gratitude.

“The key thing at the same time,” he said, “we got to do things legal. That is the most important thing.”

“You got to do things legal, and those people that are doing illegal things in America and they’re the foreigners, they are not smart, because, when you come to America, you’re a guest and you have to behave like a guest.”

There was no ambiguity. Schwarzenegger compared illegal entry to disrespecting a host’s home.

“Like when I go to someone’s house and I’m a guest, then I will do everything I can to keep things clean and to make my bed and to do everything that is the right thing to do—rather than committing a crime or being abusive or something like that. That doesn’t really work in this country.”

Sunny Hostin visibly panicked. She tried to cut in, even placed a hand on his arm to stop him.

But Arnold kept going, undeterred.

“When you become an immigrant,” he said, “you think about—okay, I go to America because I’m going to use America for the great opportunities America has. In education. In jobs. Creating a family. All of those kinds of things.”

“Then you have to think about—okay, if I get all of those things from America, then I have to give something back.”

And that was the heart of his message: responsibility.

“You have a responsibility as an immigrant to give back to America. To pay back to America. And go and do something for your community—for no money whatsoever.”

“Give something back to after-school programs. Special Olympics. Or whatever it is—make this country a better place.”

The audience erupted in applause. But on stage, there was silence. The hosts had no idea how to respond.

For once, Schwarzenegger wasn’t echoing the left’s talking points—he was challenging them.

And you could feel their discomfort through the screen.

That’s when Schwarzenegger dropped the script—and shattered the immigration narrative the hosts were trying to build.

Without hesitation, he turned his focus to the violent riots erupting in Los Angeles.

He spoke as someone who had done things the right way—legally,… pic.twitter.com/ofU3pHMzdi

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) June 17, 2025

What followed was a despicable display of narrative spinning, attempting to whitewash Arnold’s so called “True Lies”.

Whoopi jumped in to steer the conversation back to safer territory: “Don’t forget, 90% of the people who come here are trying to do the right thing.”

Sunny quickly added: “They’re less likely to commit crimes.”

Whoopi continued: “A lot of what’s happening right now is people are getting snatched who shouldn’t be snatched—people who have visas, people who have all those things. So we want all the right people. We don’t want people who are doing bad stuff.”

Again, Sunny repeated her point:

“Immigrants are much less likely to commit crimes than actually American-born citizens.”

Schwarzenegger didn’t engage. He let them yap.

He sipped from his mug and stayed quiet.

What followed was a despicable display of narrative spinning, attempting to whitewash Arnold’s so called “True Lies”.

Whoopi jumped in to steer the conversation back to safer territory: “Don’t forget, 90% of the people who come here are trying to do the right thing.”

Sunny… pic.twitter.com/FKCRJRhC5A

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) June 17, 2025

But the cleanup continued. They were scrambling at this point.

Sunny tried to defend California Governor Gavin Newsom, claiming he never asked the federal government for National Guard assistance.

“There are 9,000 local law enforcement officers in California,” she said.

“Did he really—everybody has to send them?”

She seemed to forget that Arnold had once been governor himself.

He answered with a calm reminder: “Remember, the National Guard is under the governor’s supervision.”

Hostin jumped in: “That’s right!”

But Schwarzenegger had more to say.

“For instance, when the National Guard was sent to Iraq during the Iraqi war, I was not the one that said, ‘Oh yeah, go to Iraq.’ The Bush administration came and said, ‘We need those people. We need the resources. We need the equipment. We need the weapons. We need the vehicles to ship to Iraq.’”

It was a subtle nod to federal authority—and possibly a quiet defense of Trump’s right to use similar powers under certain conditions.

He ended the segment with a clear message: “It is very important that we work together. It doesn’t matter who is asking whom. The bottom line is, we work together in order to solve the problem.”

He wasn’t loud. He wasn’t combative. But he said what few are willing to say on daytime television—and the studio didn’t quite know how to handle it.

This wasn’t the version of Arnold Schwarzenegger anyone expected.

But for a few minutes on The View, the truth took center stage—and no amount of spin could make it disappear.

But the cleanup continued. They were scrambling at this point.

Sunny tried to defend California Governor Gavin Newsom, claiming he never asked the federal government for National Guard assistance.

“There are 9,000 local law enforcement officers in California,” she said.

“Did… pic.twitter.com/LlvGt1OnpH

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) June 17, 2025

JPMorgan’s forecast of triple-digit Brent crude prices could soon be a reality as conflict risk in and around the Strait of Hormuz intensifies. The waterway, which handles roughly 20% of global oil trade, remains one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints. Any disruption, particularly amid growing military escalation between Iran and Israel, could impact energy flows worldwide and send prices soaring. 

The most concerning sign of potential maritime disruption in the Strait of Hormuz emerged in the overnight hours via a statement on X by former Iranian Economy Minister Ehsan Khandouzi. While unofficial, the timing and seniority of the comment may reflect broader regime sentiment—or serve as a warning of what’s to come.

“Starting tomorrow, for 100 days, no oil tankers or LNG cargoes will be able to pass through the strait without Iran’s approval,” Khandouzi said. 

He stated, “This policy is decisive if it is implemented “in a timely manner.” Any delay in its implementation means enduring more war inside the country. Trump’s battle must be ended with a combination of economy and security.” 

Such messaging, especially when paired with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) naval activity in the region, raises the increasing probability of IRGC actions targeting commercial shipping lanes in the strait. This escalation could serve as the catalyst that turns JPMorgan’s $120–$130 per barrel Brent crude forecast from a scenario into a market reality.

Some more excerpts from the full JPM note: 

A blockade of the Strait of Hormuz—the world’s busiest oil-shipping channel—would shut down the region’s oil trade, supercharging oil prices.

The skinny waterway—at its narrowest point it is only 21 miles (33 km) wide— separating the UAE, Oman and Iran, connects the Persian Gulf with the Indian Ocean, and facilitates the movement of some 30% of the world’s seaborne oil trade and 20% of the world’s LNG supply (Table 1).

Widespread GPS jamming has been reported across the strait for the last several days:

• Chokepoint Watch: GPS Jamming Impacts Tankers Across Strait Of Hormuz

Which unfolded into a maritime disaster early Tuesday when crude oil tanker Front Eagle slammed into the port quarter of the tanker Adalynn, sparking a massive fire on Adalynn, and concerns about a potential ecological disaster have surged. 

• First View: Oil Tanker Erupts In Flames After Collision Near Strait Of Hormuz

⚠️ Harrowing images of dark fleet tanker ADALYNN (IMO #9231767) post collision. pic.twitter.com/Y1FUBNNtis

— Ed Finley–Richardson (@ed_fin) June 17, 2025

All in all, the world’s most critical maritime chokepoint appears to be in the crosshairs of the Iranian regime. On Tuesday, President Trump met with his national security team for over an hour to discuss the Middle East and later held a call with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The key question now is whether the U.S. will enter the conflict. If it does, a shipping disruption in the Strait of Hormuz is almost guaranteed—setting the stage for global energy markets to be thrown into turmoil.

As unrest once again disrupts parts of Los Angeles, many small business owners are asking a painful question: should we leave California?

For some, the answer is yes. But for a growing number, the real problem is they can’t.

According to a February 2024 survey of 80,000 small business owners by PublicSquare and RedBalloon, only 13% of California small businesses say they’re happy with their current location — nearly 40% lower than the national average. Nationally, almost half (47.7%) of business owners report being satisfied and having no plans to relocate.

In California, however, 67% say they are either planning a move (10%), considering one (30%), or feel stuck — wanting to move but unable to afford it (27%).

“Nearly a third of small businesses feel they’re stuck in Hotel California, where they can check out anytime they like, but they can never leave,” said RedBalloon CEO Andrew Crapuchettes. “California used to be the engine of small businesses in America, but those still California dreaming are finding it’s become a nightmare – 67% want to escape.”

The reasons behind this discontent are no mystery. Among California business owners, 86.4% cite high taxes as a driving factor, while 84.9% blame anti-business government policies. Nationally, these same issues rank high, but not nearly to the same extent — 64.5% and 59.4%, respectively.

Still, as businesses clean up broken glass and rebuild yet again, relocation is often a luxury. Many can’t sell their property at a decent price, relocate employees, or find affordable alternatives elsewhere. For the 27% who say they feel “trapped,” economic and logistical realities outweigh the dream of a more business-friendly home.

And so, many stay — not because they want to, but because they have to.

The weather may still be nice, but for California’s small business owners, the climate is anything but.

Authored by Michael Kern via OilPrice.com,

• The International Energy Agency forecasts global oil demand to peak and plateau by the end of this decade, with China’s demand peaking earlier than previously anticipated.

• While oil supply is expected to outpace demand growth, geopolitical risks and trade tensions introduce significant uncertainties to the oil market.

• There is a notable divergence in viewpoints between the IEA and OPEC regarding future oil demand, with OPEC predicting continued growth beyond the current decade.

A peak in global oil demand is still on the horizon, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on Tuesday, doubling down on its forecast that demand will plateau by the end of the decade. 

China’s oil demand, which increased by a cumulative 6 million barrels per day (bpd) in the decade to 2024, is set to peak earlier than previously expected, the agency said in its annual Oil 2025 report for the medium term. 

While China – the world’s top crude oil importer – accounted for 60% of the global increase in oil consumption in 2015-2024, “the picture to 2030 looks very different,” the IEA said.   

China’s demand is on track to peak in 2027 – two years earlier than previously thought – amid “an extraordinary surge in EV sales, the continued deployment of trucks running on liquefied natural gas (LNG), as well as strong growth in the country’s high-speed rail network, along with structural shifts in its economy.” 

Global oil demand is forecast to rise by 2.5 million bpd from 2024 to 2030, reaching a plateau around 105.5 million bpd by the end of the decade, per the agency’s latest estimates.   

Annual global growth will slow from about 700,000 bpd in 2025 and 2026 “to just a trickle over the next several years, with a small decline expected in 2030, based on today’s policy settings and market trends,” the IEA said. 

The agency expects below-trend economic growth, weighed down by global trade tensions and fiscal imbalances, and accelerating substitution away from oil in the transport and power generation sectors.  

At the same time, the increase in global oil supply is “set to far outpace demand growth in coming years,” according to the agency. 

“Based on the fundamentals, oil markets look set to be well-supplied in the years ahead – but recent events sharply highlight the significant geopolitical risks to oil supply security,” IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said.  

If no major supply disruptions occur, the oil market will be comfortably supplied through 2030, the agency reckons, but warned that “significant uncertainties remain, especially given rising geopolitical risks and heightened trade tensions.” 

The IEA’s “peak demand on the horizon” narrative once again clashes with OPEC’s view of growing oil demand at least into the 2040s. 

Just last week, OPEC Secretary General, Haitham Al Ghais, said that oil demand would continue growing over the coming decades as the world’s population increases. 

“Simply put, there is no ‘peak in oil demand’ on the horizon,” Al Ghais said at The Global Energy Show Canada in Calgary, Canada.  

UBS analysts published a note earlier today that lays out a fascinating timeline straight out of sci-fi: the rise of humanoid robots. Powered by artificial intelligence, falling hardware costs, an aging global workforce, and labor shortages, humanoids are projected to reach 2 million units globally by 2035 and surge past 300 million by 2050, unlocking a $1.7 trillion market. The analysts pinpoint a major inflection point—the so-called ‘EV Moment’—when these robots begin marching into homes.

“Aging populations, labour shortages and low productivity gains in service sectors all support the use case for robots. Having human form offers the added benefit of adaptability into everyday life. Early types of humanoids are already working in manufacturing and warehouses, but currently the majority are general models built for R&D and training,” UBS analysts, led by Phyllis Wang, wrote in a note. 

Wang continued, “Our interactive model places industrial sectors as the adoption leaders, followed by service sectors and households. By 2030E, 63% of use cases should still be industrials, with more than half of models still non-bipedal. For humanoids’ full potential to be realised, we believe they eventually need to become a household consumer product and human-form humanoids (upper bodies with dual arms, dexterous hands and bi-pedal lower bodies) to become mainstream.”

Humanoids will evolve from industrial environments to the services sector to households from this year through 2035. 

Here’s how the analysts laid out the deployment process:

• Industrial pilot adoption (2025–2030)

• Service sector generalization (2030–2035)

• Household penetration and consumer-scale adoption (post-2035)

More color on the deployment timelines and phasing into various industries:

• 2025–2028: Early commercial deployment, largely in automotive plants and logistics centers. Tesla to deploy 5,000 Optimus units in Fremont.

• 2028–2035: Expansion into generalist industrial use. Cost per unit falls sharply due to scale and supply chain maturation. First household use cases appear (e.g., cleaning, caregiving).

• 2035+: Mass consumer-grade adoption. First fully automated factories using humanoids projected by 2035E. Brain-computer interfaces explored by 2040E.

The trajectory suggests that a total installed base of humanoid robots by 2035 will be around two million, with hypergrowth expected through 2050 that will take that total up to 300 million. 

• 2035E: >2M units deployed

• 2050E: >300M cumulative units; 86M units sold annually

• 2050E TAM: $1.4–1.7 trillion

UBS warns the humanoid revolution won’t hit its ‘EV Moment’—defined as a rapid production surge following the resolution of key bottlenecks—until the end of the decade. Once the AI brains, data pipelines, and regulatory red tape are resolved, that’s the moment when the floodgates open and humanoid robots begin marching into homes. 

More from the analysts on the ‘EV Moment’… 

‘EV moment’ may not happen within five years: We define the ‘EV moment’ as when the EV technology bottleneck was resolved and volumes increased from 1m units to 10m over a five-year period. As futurologist Roy Amara has stated, people tend to overestimate the short-term impact of new technologies while underestimating their long-term effects. We identify a few hurdles that need to be overcome before humanoids scale up, namely AI, dataset collection and regulations. We foresee significant demand potential in household scenarios in the long term as humanoids could provide value-added services with AI empowerment. However, we expect commercialisation to start in industrial (eg, object carrying in specific areas) and service scenarios because household scenarios have higher—technological, cost, implementation, safety and acceptance—requirements than other downstream applications. Considering the tech (mainly AI models and data collection) and regulatory barriers, we believe humanoids’ ‘EV moment’ may start after 2030. Our view is supported by our study of use cases and comparisons with AD.

Most important graphics from the 142-page report:

Sizing the humanoid market 

Timelines 

Sliding cost of production

Chatbot companies and robotics firms partner up 

What tasks can humanoids do? 

UBS’ global demand forecast through 2050 

Various pathways

Characteristics of a bot

How to profit from the humanoid wave?

UBS’ take: 

“It is difficult at this point to predict clear leaders among robot OEMs, a dynamic similar to EVs at their early stage. Based on current progress, Tesla, though not Buy rated, is well positioned to participate in the humanoid robot industry.” 

Bicentennial Man… 

Pro Subs can view the full 142-page report here. 

Authored by Randall Bock via The Brownstone Institute,

Five years on, SARS–CoV–2 is a ghost.

It’s not the beast it was (or was purported to be); yet (as of this last “flu season”) young medical students were still required to get the “jab.”

This reads more as LOYALTY– rather than Covid–testing.

The current iteration of coronavirus, Omicron, LP.8.1–feels like a cold now, nothing more – moreover, its epitope is not even included in the “bivalent” Covid vaccine handed out, 2025. 

Prior to 2003’s SARS, coronaviruses were just that: colds, the kind you shook off with soup and sleep.

No one demanded shots. No one cared. So why are we still doing this? The numbers, the past, the plain truth say it’s hollow—a rule for the sake of rules.

Back in 2020, the virus (or the overreaction to it) hit like a storm.

Hospitals were packed. People died–350,000 in the US, mostly old, mostly sick – either “from” or “with” coronavirus.

Kids? They were fine.

The American Academy of Pediatrics counted 112 deaths under 18 by December—0.005% of cases; however, those children had problems: diabetes, obesity, and bad lungs. Healthy ones sneezed and moved on. Medical students, in their 20s, were close behind. The CDC pegged that age group’s mortality rate at 0.02%–1,200 out of 6 million cases. Two percent landed in hospitals; near zero needed ICUs. There was no real danger for them, 2020 – and beyond.

Now it’s 2025. The virus hasn’t vanished, but it’s weak. Immunity—from shots, or from previously having contracted one or another of the Covid variant strains–covers essentially everyone.

The current Omicron virus is no monster.

It’s a nuisance– moreover, it’s likely conflated with background “common cold” coronavirus.

Omicron showed up in 2021, spread like crazy, but didn’t hit hard. My 2022 piece “Is it Time to Accept That Omicron is not COVID-19?” noted it was not even genomically and offspring of Covid-19—just another coronavirus, like the ones that give you a runny nose.

The current version is much weaker.

So what’s the reason for medical students’ “booster” mandates’ continuation?

The shots aren’t harmless.

Myocarditis hits young guys–1–10 per 100,000 mRNA doses, says a 2022 JAMA study. Medical schools, in particular, should know better. They should move away from anachronistic, lockstep, doctrinaire mandates.

In February 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order prohibiting federal funding for educational institutions that mandate Covid–19 vaccines for in–person attendance. Medical schools reliant on federal funds may reconsider these pointless mandates, paeans to outdated orthodoxy.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

The German city of Bargteheide has scrapped plans to demolish a senior citizens’ residential complex on Nelkenweg after vacating all residents, opting instead to house asylum seekers in the building.

Former residents had been told the building was uninhabitable and were forced to relocate. However, following an inspection, just five units will undergo renovation, while the remainder will be used as-is by the new arrivals.

As reported by Abendblatt, Mayor Gabriele Hettwer defended the decision, saying all cost-related issues had been resolved and that a full renovation was unnecessary. “The costs for the removal of mold and other renovation measures are manageable,” she said, noting that a preliminary building application would determine whether the entire complex could eventually be used.

The move, however, has drawn sharp criticism from members of the SPD parliamentary group, who had supported the original eviction of elderly residents on the grounds that the buildings were unfit for habitation. “I have seen for myself what a bad condition the buildings are in,” said SPD council member Andreas Bäuerle. His colleague Jörg Rehder added, “The decision has an unpleasant taste.”

🇩🇪 Senior citizens living in an apartment complex in the German town of Bargteheide were told to leave their homes because the building was to be demolished.

Now, after they’ve all moved out, it transpires the building won’t be demolished after all.

Instead, asylum seekers are… pic.twitter.com/thodsQiWpt

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) June 15, 2025

He pointed out that while the city directly financed the relocations of elderly tenants, it now appeared eager to move refugees into the same housing it had deemed unsuitable.

CDU council member Sven Meding dismissed the SPD’s concerns as political posturing. “I sometimes wonder if it’s election campaign again. Should we accommodate the refugees in tents?” he asked. “The apartments on Nelkenweg are well habitable.”

It would appear that no one on the municipal council had an issue with the fact that the elderly residents were not welcomed to return to their homes following the building’s inspection, and it would now hold asylum seekers.

Many former residents had expressed their desire to remain in their homes.

“I feel very comfortable here and have lived here for 20 years,” senior citizen Frieda Miller told SHZ previously. “I’m good here, here I have my home, my flowers, a nice apartment that I can pay for.”

“The apartment is really well designed, everything can be reached from here, and there is also a lot of nature. I would like to stay here,” added fellow resident Dagmar Pardubitzki.

Mayor Hettwer stated that the use of the complex is temporary but refused to give a timeframe. She added that the city was deliberately creating more refugee housing than currently needed, to prepare for potential increases in migration. “The developments are currently declining because the regulations at the borders are stricter,” she said. “But it is like looking into a crystal ball to estimate the flows of the day after tomorrow.”

Although only 40 additional places were technically required, the Nelkenweg complex provides 104. According to the mayor, this allows the city to better absorb any unexpected influxes.

Supporters of the plan also point to challenges with other housing providers, who resist open-ended rental agreements and frequently let leases expire to retain flexibility over their properties. In contrast, the Nelkenweg site offers immediate and potential long-term availability.

The city council ultimately voted in favor of the measure, with support from the CDU, Greens, and WfB. The SPD cast the only three votes against.

Relocation or eviction of elderly tenants to make room for migrants is not new across Germany. In 2023, Remix News reported how a Berlin nursing home had closed its doors to its residents after signing a new contract to accommodate refugees.

Similarly, in Lörrach, the city’s municipal housing association evicted dozens of long-term residents , many of them senior citizens, to accommodate migrants.

When the public protested against the decision, the city’s council published a statement claiming that demonstrations were led by right-wing extremists and called for a “fight against the right.”

Read more here…

General He Weidong, once the second-highest-ranking officer in China’s military and a close ally of President Xi Jinping, has been purged—three months after vanishing from public view.

His removal is now clear, following his absence from a high-profile funeral and other political signals, according to Nikkei.

He was vice chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC), the top body overseeing the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), and a Politburo member. His sudden downfall marks the first time a sitting CMC vice chairman has been purged since the Cultural Revolution in the 1960s.

Nikkei writes that the clearest sign of He’s fall came during the funeral of former CMC vice chairman Xu Qiliang. Footage from the event showed floral tributes from top leaders—but none from He. His absence, unedited by state media, underscored his political erasure.

This continues a broader purge within the PLA under Xi. Since the early 2010s, multiple high-ranking generals—including Guo Boxiong, Xu Caihou, and Fang Fenghui—have been arrested, imprisoned, or died under investigation. Another, Zhang Yang, committed suicide in 2017 while facing charges.

While such purges have become more common, He’s case is notable because he was an active member of Xi’s inner circle. He was promoted under Xi, seen as trusted, and attended the final session of China’s parliament just in March—his last public appearance.

The PLA has seen significant internal turmoil, especially since the Communist Party’s 20th Congress in late 2022. Several top military figures—including Defense Ministers Li Shangfu and Wei Fenghe, and CMC Political Work Department head Miao Hua—have also disappeared or been removed.

These purges have left the CMC in disarray. Its membership has dropped from seven to just four, including Xi himself. Nearly half of the leadership selected in 2022 is now gone, signaling instability at the military’s highest levels, the article details. 

In China, the military is controlled by the Communist Party, not the state, and survival at the top depends on absolute loyalty. He Weidong’s fall suggests that even the most senior and trusted officers are not safe in today’s political climate.

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has sparked a political debate after publicly suggesting that Slovakia might benefit from adopting a neutral stance in foreign policy — an idea that would mean withdrawal from the NATO alliance.

Speaking during a visit to the Ministry of Economy, Fico asked, “Wouldn’t Slovakia’s neutrality be good in this crazy period? I put this question very officially, very clearly.”

Though he admitted the decision was not in his hands, he added, “What are we all dragged into? What kind of war are you talking about? Who on earth wants to fight with whom? I still don’t know.”

As reported by Denník Postoj, the Slovak premier also denounced plans by the European Union to increase defense spending, criticizing what he called the “senseless times of armaments” and comparing weapons manufacturers to pharmaceutical firms profiting during the COVID-19 pandemic. “How do you want to spend the €800 billion that the Union is talking about? That’s impossible,” he said.

His remarks sparked outrage among his political opposition.

Michal Šimečka, leader of Progressive Slovakia (PS), described Fico’s remarks as “absolutely scandalous,” saying, “He is questioning our entire foreign policy anchorage, breaking our relations with key partners and throwing us to Putin.”

Karol Galek of the center-right Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) party, pointed to Ukraine’s experience as a warning, noting that its neutrality was supposedly guaranteed by Russia — until it was invaded. “If there is a war in our country, there is only a threat from Russia,” Galek said, adding that neutrality would place the full financial burden of national defense on Slovakia.

“The Baltics and Poland are already at 5 percent [in defense spending] because they are aware that the threat is already behind their gates. The threat is Russia,” added Milan Majerský of the Christian Democratic Movement (KDH), who warned neutrality would result in an overwhelming and unsustainable hike in Slovakia’s defense budget.

Slovak President Peter Pellegrini also responded to Fico’s remarks. “I respect his opinion. Maybe he really thinks that Slovakia should be a neutral country, but in this way, a general discussion can be provoked, which can again result in some kind of petition action,” he said.

“A statesman can never question the security of the state. Neutrality does not mean that you are friends with everyone around you and no one can hurt you, but that you have to guarantee everything yourself,” he warned.

The Slovak president did, however, acknowledge the political nature of Fico’s comments, which he suggested have been made to spark a political discussion.

“I consider it a provocative idea, for which the prime minister is an expert – to overwhelm the public space with a topic that we will all discuss, but nothing will come of it anyway,” Pellegrini said. “At the moment, it is unnecessary and risky.”

Read more here…