When Dan Cnossen opened his eyes, he saw the sterile walls and beeping medical devices of a hospital room. He also saw his mother’s face, just a few feet from him, looking into his own. How could she be here, in Afghanistan? But then Cnossen realized he wasn’t in Afghanistan anymore. He was back in the United States. Then the memories began to flood.
In 2009, during a nighttime operation in Afghanistan, Cnossen stepped on a pressure plate, igniting an IED that cost him both his legs. His comrades-in-arms transported him down the rocky face of a craggy hill, each step they took jarring his body, engulfing him in indescribable pain. The last thing he remembered before waking up in the hospital was being loaded onto a chopper.
Cnossen chose to tackle his recovery with the same determination and grit that had carried him through the notoriously grueling training to become a U.S. Navy SEAL and subsequent deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Cnossen not only recovered from his wounds, but went on to become a Paralympic athlete of the highest order, winning multiple gold medals in skiing. All these experiences have honed Cnossen’s resilience to a diamond-hard edge. Drawing on his past, Cnossen shared five rules for resiliency.
Surrounding yourself with likeminded individuals who share your goals is a key to getting through challenges.
Cnossen’s always been a planner. When he was just a high school freshman, he’d already established a plan to get into the Naval Academy. Once there, he developed an interest in becoming a Navy SEAL. Cnossen knew that to achieve his goal, he needed to improve his swimming. Even basic swimming drills unleashed the butterflies in his stomach.
But at the Naval Academy, he gravitated toward other students with similar interests and goals, many of whom were excellent swimmers. By building relationships with these friends and learning from them, Cnossen was able to improve his swimming skills and eventually enter BUD/S (Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training). Similarly, during this notoriously difficult training—with an attrition rate of 70-80 percent—Cnossen’s cohort of comrades helped him get through and become a SEAL. The mutual support provided by a strong social network of likeminded individuals forms one of the pillars of resiliency.
2. When Things Get Tough, Sharpen and Narrow Your Focus
From being pushed to his mental and physical limit in BUD/S to facing an interminable uphill climb to recovery, including 40 surgeries, after his injury in Afghanistan, Cnossen has returned again and again to a simple principle of interior strength: Break it down.
Mentally tackling the entirety of BUD/S or all the training needed for a Paralympic race at once is a recipe for discouragement and failure. Instead, Cnossen says, when things get difficult, “sharpen and narrow your focus.” Set a simple goal or a small milestone and reach that. Then set another.
In BUD/S, that might mean reaching the next landmark during an arduous run. During rehab, that might look like regaining some arm mobility. This process of “segmentation” turns insurmountable tasks into smaller, achievable ones. Over time, small steps like these lead to bigger and bigger results, like becoming a Navy SEAL or running on prosthetic limbs.
The temptation in a stressful situation is to “think big”—to try to obliterate our difficulties in one stroke. But instead, we need to “think small.” What can I do right now? What’s the next step, the next thing to work on?
Every situation can be viewed from a huge number of perspectives, according to Cnossen. There are as many perspectives on a situation as the 360 degrees of a circle. Each point of view yields a different view of the issue. To build mental toughness, we have to learn to break out of a single, narrow perspective of some difficult or tragic circumstance. So often, this knee-jerk perspective is a negative one, which can dominate us if it goes unchecked.
Instead, Cnossen explains, we have to break out of that negative perspective to unveil the hundreds of other ways of looking at the situation. Cnossen’s initial reaction to losing his legs was understandably negative. But he forced himself to consider his circumstance in a different light. He decided to look at it as something to overcome. He also expressed gratitude that his life had been spared, that he still had two working arms, and that no one else on the hill that night had been injured.
Furthermore, he began to look at his experience as a means to inspire others. These shifts in perspective allowed him to find meaning in what happened. They helped him rise above adversity, climb higher, and perform the most heroic of human maneuvers: turning something tragic into something glorious.
4. Let Go of What You Can’t Control, Focus on What You Can
A positive perspective doesn’t mean refusing to face reality, however. Cnossen knew right away that there were some things he’d never be able to do after his injury. He wasn’t going to be able to continue a career as a Navy SEAL. He wasn’t going to become a champion long-jumper. He had to process and accept these realities as part of the journey toward healing and resiliency.
Instead of indulging in self-pity over these lost opportunities, Cnossen focused on what he could do, if he set his mind to it. He became a Paralympic skier and won multiple gold medals. To do it, he doubled-down on the things he was good at, the things that were still under his control: putting in the work, developing a new skill, practicing discipline and determination. At first, this applied to relatively small things like the daily physical therapy sessions, which he threw himself into wholeheartedly. Eventually, it transformed into bigger things, like training for races. Capitalizing on his abilities paid off in the long run.
Facing extraordinarily difficult situations is often overwhelming, especially when those situations seem meaningless. Yet meaning is often hidden under the veils of suffering. Learning to see this is one of the most powerful ways to be resilient.
Cnossen found meaning in what happened to him through many avenues, but one of the most important was helping others. He focused on the fact that his detonation of the IED may have spared the other men on his team. In recovery, he set a good example for other injured veterans by putting in long hours of physical therapy. Today, he’s a public speaker who uses his life’s trials to inspire others with hope, determination, and resiliency.
Cnossen summed up his message at the end of a TED talk: “There is a very real and powerful sense of self ownership and agency in acknowledging that despite all the uncertainty and risk in life … you do indeed control your reaction, your attitude, your mindset, your perspective.”
Nutrition Sciences tops the list, with only 0.4% unemployment rate. Graduates can expect a median salary of $75,000 by age 35-45.
Construction Services and Animal & Plant Sciences follow, also with low unemployment rate (0.7% and 1.0%, respectively), but diverge significantly in earnings—$100,000 versus $70,000 per year.
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics-related degrees (STEM) tend to yield high returns.
Aerospace Engineering, for example, ranks eighth in unemployment rate but first in compensation within this list at $125K. Similarly, Mechanical, Electrical, and Chemical Engineering all boast six-figure salaries while having unemployment rates between 1.5–2.2%.
Rank
Field of Study
Unemployment Rate (%)
Median Salary
1
Nutrition Sciences
0.4%
$75K
2
Construction Services
0.7%
$100K
3
Animal & Plant Sciences
1.0%
$70K
4
Civil Engineering
1.0%
$100K
5
Special Education
1.0%
$55K
6
Agriculture
1.2%
$75K
7
Early Education
1.3%
$49K
8
Aerospace Engineering
1.4%
$125K
9
Nursing
1.4%
$84K
10
Earth Sciences
1.5%
$88K
11
Mechanical Engineering
1.5%
$115K
12
Social Services
1.7%
$54K
13
Elementary Education
1.8%
$53K
14
Accounting
1.9%
$88K
15
Engineering Technologies
1.9%
$100K
16
Chemical Engineering
2.0%
$120K
17
Electrical Engineering
2.2%
$120K
18
Health Services
2.2%
$65K
19
Business Analytics
2.4%
$100K
20
General Engineering
2.4%
$100K
21
Miscellaneous Education
2.5%
$60K
22
Environmental Studies
2.6%
$75K
23
Ethnic Studies
2.6%
$83K
Education-related fields like Early Childhood Education (1.3%, $49,000) and Special Education (1.0%, $55,000) show lower median earnings despite low unemployment rate, highlighting the income disparity across academic disciplines.
Fields like Business Analytics and General Engineering have 2.4% unemployment rate, with both yielding strong salaries of $100,000.
Meanwhile, areas such as Ethnic Studies and Environmental Studies offer moderate pay ($83,000 and $75,000, respectively) with 2.6% unemployment rate.
These Are the Worst Degrees for Finding a Job
In a previous graphic, we listed the worst degrees for finding a job. At the top of the list is anthropology, with an unemployment rate of 9.4%, the highest rate analyzed.
Fine arts and sociology follow closely, with unemployment rates of 7.0% and 6.7%, respectively. These degrees tend to offer mid-career salaries around $70,000, placing them on the lower end of the earnings spectrum.
Interestingly, some of the highest-paying degrees also have relatively high unemployment rates.
For instance, computer engineering majors earn a median of $122,000 mid-career, but face a 7.5% unemployment rate. Physics ($100,000) and computer science ($115,000) also show above-average jobless rates, at 7.8% and 6.1%, respectively.
If you enjoyed today’s post, check out the Highest Paying College Majors on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.
Bluesky has become a safe space for liberals seeking to avoid the triggering presence of opposing views since the Trump reelection. The relatively small site now has over 30 million followers (in comparison 260 million for X and 3 billion on Facebook). Now, however, users like billionaire Mark Cuban are complaining that Bluesky is just another intolerant echo chamber on the left and some are reportedly returning to X.
Billionaire Mark Cuban was one of the early champions of the site, writing “Hello Less Hateful World” in joining the site in November 2024.
At the time, some of us criticized the premise of the Bluesky devotees. Many supported the anti-free speech and censorship efforts during the Biden Administration. Bluesky offered a replication of the echo chamber in higher education, where liberals can go unchallenged or uncontradicted. This included some of the most intolerant figures in media, academia, and the government.
Now, Cuban and others are experiencing what many of us have lived through in higher education for years, an orthodox environment where even marginal disagreements are treated as litmus tests.
Cuban this week decried that “Even if you agree with 95% of what a person is saying on a topic, if there is one point that you might call out as being more of a gray area, they will call you a fascist etc.”
In his post on Monday, Cuban notes that “the replies on here may not be as racist as Twitter, but they damn sure are hateful. Talk AI: FU, AI sucks go away. Talk Business: Go away. Talk Healthcare: Crickets.”
“Because the Musk and Trump haters are the largest and most passionate group, the result is something of an echo chamber where it’s hard to get positive engagement unless you’re saying things progressives want to hear — and where the negative engagement on things they don’t want to hear can be intense.”
The problem is that many users went to Bluesky because they did not want to be challenged in a free-speech environment. It is a site for those who do not wish to be “triggered” by opposing views. If you only watch MSNBC and post on Bluesky, you can live within a hermetically sealed liberal space without the fear of contradiction or opposition.
Ultimately, 30 million users are not a significant threat to social media companies like X or Facebook. The hope that Bluesky would drain X of revenue has not materialized. Analysts are reporting that X appears to be rebounding after years of boycotts and ad revenue could grow by 17.5% to $1.31 billion, with global ad sales expected to rise by 16.5% to $2.26 billion.
Bluesky will still be able to capitalize off the draw as a safe space draw for the left with uniformly favorable media coverage. It also offers a concentrated membership of liberal users for Democratic politicians and pundits. However, it does little in terms of impact outside of that space.
That is the reason why most liberal politicians and pundits are still actively posting on X. Some belong to both — engaging a broader audience on issues on X while retreating to the safe space of Bluesky for reaffirmation.
However, it is harmful to the left in further insulating themselves from reality. Take a typical user like a Harvard professor who watches MSNBC and reads the New York Times. She then goes to work at a university with a faculty that has less than three percent of conservatives or Republicans and less than ten percent conservative or Republican students. She then goes to Bluesky to converse within a liberal ecosystem on social media. It is a virtual bio-containment tent that filters out any discordant elements.
The reason that many on the left were shocked by the election results is that they lived within these protected spaces. They have removed themselves further from the majority of this country, disengaging with anyone who objects to their priorities and values. Within that echo chamber, opposing views become more intolerable and shocking.
Bluesky will continue to be a draw for free-speech-phobic and viewpoint-intolerant users. Fortunately, most people want to be part of a larger discourse and engage with the world around them, despite the presence of trolls and hateful commentators.
Cuban’s call for greater diversity of thought on Bluesky is unlikely to alter the culture of a site that is maintained as a safe space for liberals. That cloistered environment only increases sensitivity and intolerance for opposing views. It is akin to developing an immune deficiency from a lack of exposure to certain elements.
If Cuban and others want robust debate, they will not find it in digital safe spaces like Bluesky.
Sanctuary State Governors Double Down On Illegal Immigration In Tense Capitol Hearing
The conflict surrounding the Trump Administration’s deportation of illegal aliens is driven by a complex web of NGOs and astroturf activist groups, but Democrat politicians continue to play a considerable role in fomenting civil unrest. State leaders were a key element of the BLM riots in 2020, providing a governmental green light for the mobs by exempting them from covid mandates. City officials ensured that rioters and looters were released without charges, cycling them back out onto the streets to wreak havoc day after day. Other Democrat leaders hobbled local law enforcement and prevented them from intervening in the riots.
The pattern seems to be repeating, with Democrats doubling down on their defense of illegal immigration and interfering in ICE operations. The law, once again, is only important to progressives when it works in their favor. When it doesn’t, they ignore it.
This week multiple Democrat governors defended their sanctuary state policies in a hearing on illegal immigration on Capitol Hill. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, and New York Governor Kathy Hochul testified at the hearing, asserting that the immigration issue was being overblown by the Trump Administration and diminishing concerns over violent migrant crimes.
Tim Walz argued that Trump was using the DHS as his personal “gestapo” and Kathy Hochul called deportations an “assault on American values”.
Keep in mind that both Walz and Hochul implemented some of the most draconian covid restrictions in the country during the pandemic hysteria, oppressing citizens and rendering their supposed concerns over freedom and “American values” irrelevant.
The three governors defended themselves, claiming that immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, not a state one, and suggested that Republicans on the panel were creating a political spectacle to impress Trump. House Democrats led the criticism of Trump directly, with some calling him a “gangster” or a “dictator” and others lambasting his decision to deploy National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles to maintain control of protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids.
“No one here wants to hear these horrific stories. But we have a job to do on limited resources,” Walz said in reference to migrant crimes. He added that it was a mistake for Republicans to say “that not doing ICE’s job means we’re not cooperating.”
“Nothing we do precludes them from doing their job,” Walz said. “We have the responsibility of the American public to work together, and I think threatening arrests on elected officials … doesn’t help any of us.”
Democrats have continued to deny that the protests are violent, despite an endless supply of video evidence on social media showing activists looting businesses, burning cars, attacking police and assaulting any counter-protesters that dare to come close to them. After four years of the Biden Administration, leftist protesters are now under the impression that they can do whatever they please without repercussions.
The sanctuary efforts of blue states go well beyond the notion of refusing to aid the federal government in deportations. Democrat officials have been caught trying to hide illegal immigrants from DHS. They have attempted to warn migrants when ICE agents are operating in the vicinity. They have even openly encouraged activists and migrants to obstruct or fight ICE agents when they are trying to carry out their duties.
Events in Los Angeles this week are the most egregious example so far, with California Governor Gavin Newsom claiming that Trump was “manufacturing a crisis” in LA by trying to enforce immigration laws, but petty interference has been ongoing for many years.
The bottom line is this: The majority of voters backed Donald Trump’s campaign based in large part on his deportation promises. Not just the deportation of violent criminals, but the deportation of all illegal aliens in the US. The law is the law yet Democrat leaders continue to obstruct, which means they are obstructing the will of the voters, not the will of the Trump Administration.
Last week, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the proposed repeal of the Biden-era’s Clean Power Plan 2.0, which ruled that coal-fired and many new natural gas power plants must capture and store over 90% of their carbon emissions by the 2030s—or shut down by 2040. It’s a costly mandate, resting on shaky legal and technical foundations. Americans would be fortunate to have it repealed.
President Biden issued his Clean Power Plan 2.0 after the Supreme Court ruled in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency that President Obama’s Clean Power Plan 1.0 exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) statutory authority. The Court’s 2022 decision concluded that the EPA had overstepped by attempting to reshape the nation’s energy grid without clear congressional approval.
In a world where energy security and affordability are paramount, one might assume that when the Supreme Court strikes down a sweeping environmental regulation, the EPA would reconsider its approach. But in Washington, ideology often trumps reason, and undeterred, the Biden administration returned in 2024 with a sequel that EPA now proposes to end.
The Clean Power Plan 1.0 attempted to force states to overhaul their energy systems entirely, compelling them to adopt renewable energy and shutter fossil fuel plants, regardless of local needs or economic consequences.
Its successor, the Clean Power Plan 2.0, imposed an estimated $15 billion in regulatory costs over 20 years, and greater costs through increases in prices of electricity and slower economic growth. EPA argues “that GHG emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution.”
Just as Chief Justice John Roberts warned in 2022 that the EPA had claimed “an unheralded power representing a transformative expansion of its regulatory authority,” the EPA was trying to do through regulation with the Clean Power Plan 2.0 what Congress had repeatedly declined to do through legislation.
Fifteen years ago similar legislative proposals—the Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Lieberman bills—failed in the U.S. Congress even when Democrats held strong majorities. That should have signaled to regulators that such sweeping changes lacked democratic legitimacy.
Yet ideology brooks no dissent, and the Biden administration’s Clean Power Plan 2.0 pressed ahead, relying on technologies that are neither commercially viable nor widely demonstrated. Carbon capture and storage, the linchpin of the Biden plan, remains prohibitively expensive and technically uncertain. Hydrogen, another favored solution, is not cost-effective. The EPA’s cost-benefit analysis glossed over these realities, assuming generous tax subsidies and benefits from reduced CO2 emissions would bridge the gap.
The consequences of this regulatory ambition are stark. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation warned in 2024 that the Biden plan’s disincentives for baseload power would destabilize the electricity grid, increasing the risk of blackouts. Spain’s recent 12-hour blackout offers a cautionary tale: rapid transitions to solar without reliable baseload power can lead to lack of backup power, causing the grid to crash.
Moreover, the Biden plan was regressive. It would raise electricity prices, disproportionately affecting low-income households, farmers, and small businesses. It would also undermine a reliable electricity grid and economic growth. By constraining energy supply and inflating costs, it would drive economic activity and jobs offshore, where goods would be manufactured with coal-fired energy in China.
The dirty secret, which Mr. Zeldin forced into the open, is that the Biden plan would not have helped the climate. The greenhouse gases emitted by the power sector do not significantly affect human health, and moving energy intensive manufacturing overseas where it is made with coal-fired power using older technology would have raised emissions, not lowered them.
There is also a deeper constitutional issue at play. The EPA is misusing its authority under the Clean Air Act to pressure states into adopting policies that lie outside its jurisdiction. The plan’s emissions targets are so stringent that no state has voted them into law.
The Clean Power Plan 2.0 amounts to a form of federal commandeering. States are faced with a loss of a significant portion of their electricity generation capacity, and their manufacturing base, by restructuring their energy systems to align with the EPA’s vision. This is not cooperative federalism; it is coercion.
And it is unnecessary. America’s carbon emissions have declined by about a billion metric tons over the past 15 years without such mandates. This progress has been driven by technological innovation, not federal diktats. Cleaner air and efficient power generation are worthy goals, but they must be pursued within the bounds of the law and with respect for democratic processes.
The lesson from West Virginia v. EPA is clear: transformative policy changes require legislative backing. Agencies cannot conjure sweeping powers from ambiguous statutes. The rule of law demands clarity, accountability, and restraint.
As America grapples to ensure grid reliability, there is a cautionary tale here. The path to a reliable energy future lies not in top-down mandates, but in innovation, cooperation, and respect for the institutions that safeguard our freedoms. Administrator Zeldin should be congratulated.
Diana Furchtgott-Roth is director of the Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment at The Heritage Foundation.
Following the opening salvo in Israel’s bombardment of Iran, many members of Congress rushed to declare their support for the Jewish state. Some went further, demanding the White House defend Tel Aviv from retaliation. A small number of lawmakers criticized Israel and urged Washington to stay out of the conflict.
Shortly after the start of the Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, military bases, and residential buildings early on Friday morning, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) posted on X, “Game on. Pray for Israel.”
Graham led a chorus of largely Republican lawmakers who called for prayers for Israel as it attacked Iran.
Some lawmakers hoped the war would bring down the Iranian government. “The threat from Iran will only stop when the regime is destroyed,” Rep. Carlos A. Gimenez (R-FL) said. “Anything less is just a temporary respite from the existential threat Iran poses to our allies and the free world.”
Many US lawmakers claimed that Israel’s preemptive attack on Iran was an act of defense. “Make no mistake: Israel is not the aggressor. It is defending itself against an existential threat that long predates the present preemptive strike. The true aggressor is the Islamic Republic and its empire of terror—an empire stained with the blood of innocent Israelis,” New York Democrat Ritchie Torres wrote on X.
Other members of Congress, including Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), framed the Israeli strikes as “defensive.”
Rep. Mike Lawler said the Israeli strike was “justified,” but added that the US should attack Iran should it retaliate. “Let there be no doubt, we will defend our ally Israel, our other partners in the region, and our military and diplomatic personnel. Iran should understand that there will be grave consequences for any actions they take in response to this justified strike on their nuclear facilities,” he said.
A frequent argument made by members of Congress is that the Israeli attacks are justified by the supposed nuclear weapons threat posed by Tehran.
“Iran has greatly expanded its uranium enrichment with the goal of producing nuclear weapons that pose an existential threat to Israel,” Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins wrote. “Our country too is at risk as Iran continues its development not only of fissile material but also of ballistic missiles. I hope the Israeli operation to eliminate Iran’s nuclear capability is successful.”
However, top intelligence officials in both the Trump and Joe Biden administrations repeatedly stated that Iran was not attempting to develop a nuclear weapon. During recent nuclear talks with Washington, Tehran said it was willing to agree to caps on its energy program to ensure it was only used for civilian purposes.
Though the director of national intelligence affirmed in March that Iran was not making a nuclear weapon, that did not stop Rep. Nancy Mace from asserting that the Islamic Republic was just “days” from building a bomb.
“We stand with Israel, fully and without hesitation. Iran was days away from a nuclear weapon. They fund terror and want Israel wiped off the map. Israel has the right, and the duty, to fight back,” she wrote on X. “America must never flinch.”
One of the most vocal Democrats supporting Israel is Sen. John Fetterman, who demanded that the White House aid the Israeli assault. “Our commitment to Israel must be absolute and I fully support this attack. Keep wiping out Iranian leadership and the nuclear personnel.” The post continued, “We must provide whatever is necessary – military, intelligence, weaponry – to fully back Israel in striking Iran.”
A handful of lawmakers did oppose the Israeli strikes, however. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) argued that Tel Aviv’s war interfered with Trump’s effort to strike a new nuclear deal with Iran. “Netanyahu wasn’t trying to help diplomacy; he was trying to destroy diplomacy. How do we know? They reportedly targeted and killed Iran’s chief negotiator with Trump,” he wrote.
Additionally, Democratic Reps. Hank Johnson and Rashida Tlaib called on Congress to exercise its war-making authorities. “As America is mired in internal turmoil – and with Hegseth, Gabbard, and Rubio at the controls – foreign leaders like Netanyahu are emboldened to achieve their narrow objectives at America’s expense.” Johnson continued, “Before it’s too late, Congress must stop being a rubberstamp and start exercising oversight to prevent America from being dragged into another war.”
Among Republicans, Senator Rand Paul and Congressman Thomas Massie called on Trump to avoid direct US involvement in the war. “War with Iran is not in America’s interest. It would destabilize the region, cost countless lives, and drain our resources for generations,” Paul explained. “We should pursue diplomacy, not destruction. Engaging in dialogue with adversaries is not weakness; it’s the strength of a confident nation seeking peace. Our primary responsibility is to protect American lives.”
Rep. Massie was the only member of Congress to point out that the attack Israel launched on Friday was an offensive war of aggression. “Israel doesn’t need US taxpayers’ money for defense if it already has enough to start offensive wars.” His X post added, “I vote not to fund this war of aggression.”
Trump Rejects Netanyahu’s Request To Join War, As Israel Needs Large US Bunker Buster Bombs
Latest updates (2015ET):
In the past 48 hours, Israel has asked the Trump administration to join its war effort, per Axios
Israel seeks help targeting & destroying the fortified Fordow uranium enrichment site
Axios says the Trump administration is so far rejecting the Israeli request
But if Fordow remains intact, Israel’s mission to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program will be considered a failure
AJ: At least 80 people – including 20 children – have been killed in Iran and four in Israel, with hundreds wounded on both sides in the ongoing tit-for-tat attacks.
Axios underscores that “Israel lacks the bunker buster bombs and large bomber aircraft needed to destroy Iran’s Fordow uranium enrichment site, which is built into a mountain and deep underground. The U.S. has both within flying distance of Iran.”
Meanwhile, the images coming out of Iran show unprecedented and shocking scenes of oil refineries burning uncontrollably while nearby highway traffic has been forcibly stopped…
An unconfirmed Israeli airstrike has targeted Iran’s defense ministry headquarters, causing minor damage.
The Israeli Air Force reportedly bombed the Shahran oil depot near Tehran, Iranian state media reports.
Two Israeli citizens have been arrested on suspicion of carrying out security offenses under instructions from Iran.
Iran struck a two-story home in Tamra, east of Haifa, killing three.
Jordan has suspended all flight operations in its airspace until further notice
Several missiles were observed streaking above Jerusalem on Saturday night
Israel also carried out airstrikes in Yemen Saturday night, aiming to eliminate Abdul Malik al-Houthi, a senior Houthi military leader
Al Jazeera, citing Iran’s Tasnim news agency, reported that an Israeli airstrike targeted the country’s defense ministry headquarters in Tehran on Saturday evening, causing minor damage to one of its buildings
Israeli forces carry out an attack on an administrative building of the Iranian Ministry of Defense in northern Tehran.
“[A]n attack on Tehran this evening by the air force of the Zionist regime, the headquarters of the defence ministry was targeted. One of the headquarters’ buildings was lightly damaged,” the state news agency reports.
The Iranian government did not comment on the reported strike.
Additionally, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed its missiles and drones targeted fighter jet fuel production facilities and energy supply centers in Israel, according to a statement reported by state media. The IRGC warned that its “offensive operations will continue more fiercely and widely” if Israel’s actions persist.
The IDF has not confirmed the attack.
* * *
Several missiles were observed streaking above Jerusalem on Saturday night, a witness told Reuters, as Iran launched another direct assault on Israel.
The IDF confirmed that missiles fired from Iran had been detected, with defense systems actively engaged to intercept them.
“Upon receiving an alert, the public is instructed to enter a protected space and remain there until further notice,” the IDF said in a statement, Reuters reports. The IDF did not comment on possible injuries or damages.
Meanwhile, Israeli authorities have arrested two citizens suspected of carrying out security offenses under instructions from Iran, officials told the Jerusalem Post. A gag order has been issued on further details, according to Channel 12’s Amit Segal.
Yesterday, two Israeli citizens were arrested on suspicion of committing security offenses under Iranian direction.
A gag order has been issued on the rest of the details.
Jordan has suspended all flight operations in its airspace until further notice due to escalating tensions between Israel and Iran, the Guardian reported, citing Jordan’s state news agency. Similarly, the Syrian Civil Aviation Authority announced a temporary closure of Syrian airspace to civilian flights, according to SANA.
* * *
The Israeli Air Force reportedly bombed the Shahran oil depot near Tehran, Iranian state media reports. The IDF said not officially commented on the alleged strike. The purported attack comes after Iranian media said Israel struck on the South Pars field in the southern Bushehr province.
#BREAKING Electricity has been cut in Tehran’s Shahran neighborhood after Israeli airstrikes targeted gasoline and oil depots in the western part of the city. pic.twitter.com/5PSaxzGKe7
— Iran International English (@IranIntl_En) June 14, 2025
Initial reports of an Israeli airstrike at Shahran oil depot in western Tehran. pic.twitter.com/NnWM9uuCjz
The strikes have disrupted electricity supply in the area, though the full extent of the damage remains unclear. The Israel Defense Forces have not yet commented on the operation.
* * *
Iran confirmed an Israeli airstrike struck the Shahran oil depot but said the situation was “fully under control,” according to SHANA, the news agency of Iran’s oil ministry, Reuters reports. The state media outlet reported that the targeted tank contained a limited fuel volume. No further details on damage or casualties were disclosed.
* * *
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz wrote on X, “Tehran is ablaze” amid reports of the strike on the oil depot.
* * *
Update (1713ET): ‘Hundreds’ of Iranian missiles were launched at the Israeli cities of Tel Aviv and Haifa – which Iran described as ‘cluster missiles’ in what was the fifth salvo today.
Iran launched shortly after Israeli Air Forces completed “a wave of strikes against military and strategic assets, nuclear program sites and high-ranking figures” according to a Saturday evening statement by the IDF. The latest Iranian launch came after Iranian state TV said ‘heavy and destructive’ attacks against Israel were expected within hours.
Air raid sirens could be heard in Haifa and northern Israel.
It appears that Israel intercepted most of the rockets, though some got through – as footage has been posted on social media of a refinery on fire in Haifa.
Iranian new attack managed to direct hit some of the very crucial strategic assets of Israel after Israel started unprovoked attacks against Iran pic.twitter.com/GuaWxEMw6G
“At this hour, Israeli Air Force pilots continue to conduct widespread strikes across various regions in Iran — an ongoing operation lasting nearly 40 hours and targeting over 150 objectives,” said IDF spokesman Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin, who added that protective measures will remain in effect.
CCTV footage captures the impacts of Iranian missiles on Haifa
The death toll from the Iranian ballistic missile strike on a two-story home in Tamra, east of Haifa, has climbed to three, first responders told the Times of Israel. A 20-year-old woman was killed when missile directly struck her home, according to authorities. Firefighters extracted four individuals from a four-story building in the area, but two were pronounced dead at the scene, according to the Jerusalem Post.
The Magen David Adom (MDA) reports that a two-story home was struck by an Iranian ballistic missile in the Arab city of Tamra to the east of Haifa, resulting in 14 injuries, one of which is critical. pic.twitter.com/G3bkU1xbZv
Israel also carried out airstrikes in Yemen Saturday night, Israel’s military carried out airstrikes in Yemen on Saturday night, aiming to eliminate Abdul Malik al-Houthi, a senior Houthi military leader, according to Israel Defense Forces (IDF) sources cited by the Jerusalem Post.
The operation’s outcome remains uncertain, with one Israeli official tell the Israeli publication, “We will soon know if it succeeded.”
The target of an assassination strike by the Israeli Air Force earlier in Houthi-controlled Yemen is reported to be Houthi Chief-of-Staff Muhammad Abd Al-Karim Al-Ghamari. pic.twitter.com/gekkXl5SSh
The IDF has not issued an official statement on the airstrike.
The airstrike in Yemen comes as the IDF continues conducting strikes on targets in Tehran while intercepting a barrage of ballistic missiles launched from Iran, the IDF said.
Earlier, the International Atomic Energy Agency announced on Saturday that there was “no damage seen” at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant or at the Khondab heavy water reactor under construction in Iran. There has also been no further damage at the Natanz nuclear plant since Friday.
* * *
Update(1300ET): Israel’s military on Saturday has been busy touting that its warplanes have total air superiority over Western Iran and the capital area, as the Islamic Republic’s defenses have been largely degraded and destroyed. A senior IDF military official has been cited in local media as saying very significant damage has been inflicted on key nuclear sites and that the IDF will “continue”.
“Since the beginning of the operation, Iran’s nuclear project has suffered heavy blows in two main areas: Damage to the production of the weapon core through strikes on uranium enrichment and conversion sites in Natanz and Isfahan [and] damage to the regime’s weaponization group through the elimination of nine nuclear scientists with unique knowledge and experience in developing the nuclear detonation device,” the official said. And further that “all the scientists eliminated in the opening strike had, over the years, been involved in developing the nuclear detonation device.”
The CIA at this moment still assesses that Iran does not produce a bomb, and was likely not actively seeking it. Iran’s latest response is as follows:
“This aggression pushes the region into a dangerous cycle of violence,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says during a call with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi, according to a statement from his ministry. “Iran has responded and will respond in a firm manner to the barbaric actions of the Zionist regime.”
Netanyahu is meanwhile maintaining that the has the “clear support” of US President Donald Trump, in a new televised address:
In an English video statement, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Iranian leaders are “packing their bags” amid Israel’s airstrikes.
“I’ll tell you what would have come if we hadn’t acted. We had information that this unscrupulous regime was planning to give the nuclear weapons that they would develop to their terrorist proxies. That’s nuclear terrorism on steroids. That would threaten the entire world,” he says.
He adds that the operation has the “clear support” of US President Donald Trump.
“Our enemy is your enemy… We’re dealing with something that will threaten all of us sooner or later. Our victory will be your victory,” Netanyahu says, wishing the US leader a happy birthday.
“This is what Israel is doing with the support, the clear support of the president of the United States, Donald Trump, and the American people and many others in the world.”
Below are sites the IDF has claimed to have hit:
From nuclear sites to air defense systems, we’ve dismantled some of Iran’s most dangerous military assets.
At least 80 people – including 20 children – have been killed in Iran and four in Israel, with hundreds wounded on both sides in the ongoing tit-for-tat attacks.
US President Donald Trump has lauded Israel’s premeditated assault and warned of much worse to come unless Iran quickly accepts the sharp downgrading of its nuclear programme.
Continuing Iran-US nuclear talks is unjustifiable while “barbarous” Israeli attacks persist on the country, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says.
The Israeli military says its air strikes on Iran killed more than 20 Iranian army and Revolutionary Guards commanders.
Israel’s latest attacks on an Iranian gas field takes tensions to a different level
* * *
Overnight has seen the continual trading of tit-for-tat missile salvos between Israel and Iran, with Israeli fighter jets busy over western Iran, where they’ve claimed to have achieved complete domination of the skies after taking out anti-aircraft missile batteries.
Images of large-scale destruction have emerged from both capitals, with Israeli authorities saying at least four citizens have been killed – though casualty figures could be much higher amid an ongoing emergency response – and Iran says Israeli attacks have killed at least 78, including women and children, and wounded over 320 others.
Israel has shared footage of successful aerial attacks on Iran’s ballistic missile launchers in some cases, while the IDF has announced that 70 Israeli Air Force fighter jets participated in the overnight operation in Tehran to establish “aerial freedom of action” over the Iranian capital.
Some 40 sites were targeted, including air defense systems, IDF Spokesman Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin has said. Israeli jets were able to fly over and around the capital for some two-and-half hours.
“The dozens of aircraft are flying freely over Tehran, thanks to the opening blow that removed the threat of Iranian air defense systems,” he declared. Characterizing this as the deepest operation the Israeli Air Force (IAF) has ever been involved in over Iran, he announced:
“Tehran is no longer immune; the capital is exposed to Israeli strikes.”
The IDF releases new footage showing Iranian ballistic missile launchers being struck in Israeli airstrikes. pic.twitter.com/dCcliwun7V
— Emanuel (Mannie) Fabian (@manniefabian) June 14, 2025
Israeli jets have yet to strike all of Iran’s nuclear facilities, and Prime Minister Netanyahu has warned that this could continue for several days more. There is serious damage reported at Natanz nuclear site. There have been conflicting reports over whether there is any radiation or chemical contamination at the site.
Some sections of the Isfahan site have been damaged, the IDF has said, while the other key site of Fordo has yet to be targeted.
Important, Israel says that nine nuclear scientists have been killed as a result of Friday aerial operations. Clearly Israel is going for leadership decapitation of military and nuclear programs.
Impact scene from Tel Aviv:
⚡️#BREAKING First video from the site of the Iranian missile impact that took place in southern Tel Aviv moments ago pic.twitter.com/Y5FckSCIf5
Still, even with Iran’s military capabilities now being steadily degraded, the Islamic Republic has to some degree shown it can regroup and hit back. Israeli media has described a state of panic on the streets, and in some cases residential areas have been demolished:
Israelis on Saturday described the fear, chaos and confusion as several Iranian missiles slammed into houses and apartments in central Israel overnight, causing widespread destruction, killing three people and wounding dozens.
Warning sirens sent millions of people rushing for safe rooms and bomb shelters as Iran fired several waves of missiles in response to Israeli strikes on its military leadership and nuclear program. While the IDF said most were intercepted, several missiles — apparently armed with large explosive warheads — slammed into homes in Tel Aviv, Ramat Gan and Rishon Lezion.
“We shut the door, started watching the news through the computer, and suddenly there was a boom so loud that the whole building teetered,” Tali Horesh, resident of a Tel Aviv high-rise that was hit Friday night, told the Ynet news site.
⚠️RAW FOOTAGE: Iran launched multiple ballistic missiles toward Israel in the past hours.
Meanwhile President Trump has been nowhere to be seen, and certainly hasn’t faced reporters’ questions on where the United States stands in all this.
Is Israel committed to full war for regime change in Iran at this point?
Israel has decided to assassinate Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to try to cause total state collapse. Unless Iran establishes deterrence in the very short term by striking both Israeli and US assets in the region and eliminating top figures in the Israeli regime, they will…
California’s soft-on-crime approach, along with pandemic-era actions, may have contributed to a rise in retail theft from 2014 to 2023, according to a report published by the state Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) on June 12.
In the report, “Retail Theft in California: Looking Back at a Decade of Change,” the LAO found that retail theft in the state rose after a slight decline during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in an overall increase of 11 percent during the nine-year timeframe.
Despite the statewide increase, however, the numbers reported are still below the historical highs seen in the 1980s, the report found.
“Concerns about theft from retail businesses have become more prominent in recent years,” the analyst’s office wrote in the report. “Retail theft has implications for economic outcomes, as well as a sense of safety, well-being, and fundamental quality of life for Californians.”
In 2021, nearly two in three California voters said crime in the state was getting worse, while 23 percent said it was staying the same and 6 percent said it was getting better, according to a survey conducted that year by David Binder Research.
The report finds that the statistics have fluctuated greatly in the past decade.
From 2014 and 2015, retail theft increased slightly, going up 5 percent before declining 20 percent during 2015 and 2012. Nearly half of the drop happened between 2019 and 2020, when the state was placed on lockdown during the pandemic.
“Pandemic-related factors—such as temporary stay-at-home orders and closure of nonessential retail businesses in the early part of the pandemic—likely contributed to the decline over this period,” the report stated.
After the decline, statistics show that retail crime increased by 32 percent from 2021 and 2023.
The crime numbers may not represent the full picture, however, according to the analysis.
A large portion of law enforcement agencies—representing about 10 percent of the state’s population—did not report crime numbers for some or all of 2023 when reporting methods were changed nationwide during the Biden administration..
“Accordingly, crime data may understate the actual increase in retail theft that occurred in 2023,” the report stated.
Bucking the trend were smaller counties in the state that were reporting declines in retail theft from 2019 to 2023.
“The reason for these differences is unclear but could be tied to factors such as the concentration of retail establishments in each county,” according to the report.
The analysis pointed to Proposition 47, passed in 2014, and changes in the state’s criminal justice system after 2020 as possible reasons for crime to have risen. The proposition reduced several felonies to misdemeanors, limiting the authority to arrest people for some crimes.
The public has criticized the proposition, claiming the law allowed shoplifters to walk away with up to $950 in goods, mandating law enforcement to issue a ticket to suspected thieves instead of arresting them.
“Researchers found that Proposition 47 increased larceny (a category of crime that includes some forms of retail theft), though they were unable to determine the impact on retail theft specifically,” the analyst’s office, which provides fiscal and policy advice to the state Legislature, stated in the report’s executive summary.
“Generally, research on crime rates suggests that people are less likely to commit a crime when they perceive that they have a higher chance of being apprehended,” according to the report.
The state also changed several crime policies in response to the COVID-19 health crisis, including releasing convicted criminals early from prison, implementing zero-bail policies, and reducing probation term lengths.
“[Researchers] found that pandemic-era changes to the criminal justice system increased nonresidential burglary (a measure of some forms of retail theft) by reducing jail populations and the likelihood of arrest,” according to the LAO. “However, the researchers were only able to explain about one-third of the pandemic-era increase in nonresidential burglaries.”
The findings suggested that factors outside the criminal justice system, such as changes in the retail environment, also likely contributed to retail theft trends in California.
Possible changes to the retail environment may also have affected retail theft rates, the report said. For example, many stores have expanded shelf-checkout lines and store policies that direct staff not to physically confront shoplifters.
Pandemic-era changes, such as the use of protective face masks that could also be used to conceal identities, may have further emboldened shoplifters, according to the analysis.
The report also stated that a change in societal factors, such as homelessness prompting the stealing of necessities like food, and increased drug use disorders, could have impacted retail theft rates.
Voters responded last year to the state’s growing retail theft problem, passing Proposition 36 and various other bills, including Assembly Bill 2943, which made it a crime for anyone to possess stolen property that was acquired through shoplifting, theft, or burglary. The bill also allows prosecutors to aggregate thefts in different counties to charge suspects with more severe crimes.
The changes have bolstered the ability of law enforcement to arrest and detain shoplifters, elevated retail theft from a misdemeanor to a felony in some cases, increased punishment for retail crime, and broadened the capacity to detect and respond to retail crime, the report stated.
“This change could also make it more likely for people to be arrested, given that law enforcement generally has greater authority to arrest people for felonies,” according to the report. “This, in turn, could help deter people from engaging in retail theft if it causes them to perceive a higher likelihood of apprehension.”
State and local law enforcement also implemented several programs to target organized retail crime in the past three years.
In March, Gov. Gavin Newsom reported the state’s Organized Retail Crime Task Force had conducted 879 investigations, leading to 1,707 arrests and the recovery of 676,227 stolen goods valued at $13.5 million.
“As public safety continues to be a priority for California, this ongoing retail theft crackdown shows the continuous work of our strengthened efforts on organized crime,” Newsom said in March.
The analysis recommends that legislators ask several key questions to provide oversight of recently passed laws.
The questions include asking whether officials are using the new crime-fighting tools available to them, and to report whether the new laws are resulting in a decrease in crime.
Overall, the analysis showed that while retail theft has increased in the state, the latest available numbers remain below historical levels.
From 1985 to 2023, the retail theft rate declined by 54 percent. A similar decline was recorded for all types of property crime during that time, including residential burglary and motor vehicle theft.
I have not been one to embrace artificial intelligence (AI)—the term “Luddite” comes to mind. I warned at length about the pending perils of our prospective cyber overseer on this august site, American Greatness, including my dark ruminations about how AI could “eat me.” Admittedly, then, it is difficult for this quantum Cassandra to wax Pollyannaish about AI and its impact upon humanity.
Yet, never let it be said this Debbie Downer can’t find the upside in the impending advent of computer rule. As is usual these days, we find our solace in unusual places: regarding AI, our silver lining lurks in the miasmatic fever swamps of politics.
To the cynics, let me be clear: I am not trying to curry favor with our future AI rulers. I am aiming to ensure the legitimacy of our present mortal officials. Specifically, can AI improve election integrity?
From the earliest to the latter stages of elections, the speed with which AI can aggregate and disseminate data could prove a boon to preventing fraud and error within elections.
If Congress acts and constitutional questions are resolved, AI can help separate citizens from non-citizens in the census and, perhaps, help—within the fullest extent of the law—redraw congressional, state legislative, and local districts based solely on citizen representation.
Regardless of the above, AI can help clean voter rolls by removing deceased individuals and those who have moved; rectify duplicate entries for both intrastate and interstate residents (such as college students); and, of course, purge those ineligible to vote based upon their citizenship status.
Further, with the proper and alacritous accumulation of pertinent data, the speed of AI can facilitate the reconciliation between voter rolls and “mail-in” ballots—both outgoing and incoming—to guard against voter fraud and to detect individuals who vote multiple times or in multiple locations, whether during early voting or on election day.
Many other possibilities abound for discussion, debate, and adoption.
Hopefully, insights into how AI can improve election integrity are being actively pursued (as far as is permissible) from individuals and grassroots organizations that have long been in the vanguard of promoting electoral outreach and election integrity, such as Ned Ryun and American Majority.
Granted, the crush of political exigencies with which they must deal will impact the amount of time and resources these entities can devote to this critical task. Consequently, one hopes the matter is also being explored by populist and/or conservative think tanks, such as the America First Policy Institute and The Heritage Foundation.
While possibilities abound, significant challenges remain in implementation, including the obstinacy of Democrats to facilitating the requisite data collection, specifically, and their broader opposition to the project.
It would be most beneficial, of course, if the Democrats were to collaborate with Republicans to ensure election integrity. This is a remote possibility, with a significant number of Democrats who favor non-citizens voting in American elections. Likely, the Democrats will continue their vehement opposition to any measures to enhance election integrity, which they claim constitutes “voter suppression.”
Given the left’s opposition, it presently falls upon the right to pursue the possibilities. For, sadly, no algorithm known to man or machine can yet bridge the partisan divide over election integrity. (Hey, when it comes to AI, you didn’t expect me to play Pollyanna forever, did you?)
Taiwan Imposes Export Controls On China’s Huawei, SMIC
In what Beijing may view as a sharp escalation in the tech trade war, Taiwan blacklisted Chinese tech giants, Huawei and Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. (SMIC), dealing a major blow to the two companies spearheading China’s efforts to develop cutting-edge AI chip technologies.
As Bloomberg first reported, Taiwan’s International Trade Administration included Huawei, SMIC and several of their subsidiaries in an update of its so-called strategic high-tech commodities entity list, according to the latest version that was made available on its website on Saturday, although the organization didn’t publicly announce the change.
According to Taiwan’s existing regulations, local companies will require approval from the island’s government before they can ship anything to users on the entity list.
The new restrictions imposed by Taiwan will at least partially cut off Huawei and SMIC’s access to Taiwan’s plant construction technologies, materials and equipment essential to build AI semiconductors, like those made by Taiwan Semi for the likes of Nvidia.
In Huawei’s case, several of its overseas units including in Japan, Russia and Germany were also captured in the update to Taiwan’s entity list. Both Huawei and SMIC, and some of their subsidiaries, are already on the US entity list, which has significantly limited the companies’ ability to acquire foreign technology.
In 2023, Bloomberg News reported that several Taiwanese companies were helping Huawei build infrastructure for an under-the-radar network of chip plants across southern China.
While Taiwan has for years imposed certain blanket bans on the shipments of critical chipmaking equipment including lithography machines to China, it hasn’t included leading Chinese tech companies or chipmakers on its entity list previously. TSMC, the go-to chipmaker for Apple Inc. and Nvidia, cut off its supplies to Huawei in 2020 because of US export controls.
Huawei, together with SMIC, shocked American politicians in 2023 by releasing an advanced, made-in-China 7-nanometer chip. While the two are struggling to improve their technologies due to various curbs, they are still China’s best hope to help fill in the AI chip gap left by a lack of Nvidia’s most sophisticated semiconductors.
Tensions between Taiwan and China also stepped up a notch earlier this year after Taiwan President Lai Ching-te labeled China a “foreign hostile force” for the first time and unveiled wide-ranging measures to counter infiltration efforts.
China claims the self-governing democracy is its territory and has vowed to unify with Taiwan, using force if necessary.
