In today’s edition of ‘you can’t hate the MSM enough,’ unemployed propagandist Chuck Todd – no doubt looking for his next paycheck – appeared on Piers Morgan ‘Uncensored’ where he suggested that the Democratic party is responsible for the MSM’s failure to notice that former President Joe ‘autopen’ Biden was completely cooked (and definitely not making major decisions), since apparently their own lying eyes were malfunctioning for four years. 

His excuse for journalists not doing journalism? “At the end of the day, no journalist is as good as their sources.“

“So, this is a party that had a leadership atrophy, and at the same time those that were sort of almost behaving like the old Soviet Union – which is, you know, the leader dies and everybody wants to keep their power and keep their influence,” said Todd.

“So I do think this scandal should be more laser-focused on the Democratic party. I think the press is, again, I always look at the criticism of the press here – through the person that’s making the criticism and I think in some ways, there’s almost an eagerness to blame the press without looking at actually who should be blamed here – and it’s the leadership and frankly the members of the Biden administration and the leadership of the Democratic party – who, they’re the ones that lied.

“At the end of the day, no journalist is as good as their sources. At the end of the day the Democratic party lied to the American people. The leadership of the party lied to the American people, and that’s where this scandal should be centered.” 

Watch (via the Daily Caller’s Jason Cohen):

🚨NEW: Chuck Todd tells @piersmorgan he *REALLY* doesn’t want people to call out media for Biden cover-up — pushes for *ALL* culpability to be on Dems🚨

“I do think this scandal should be more laser-focused on the Democratic Party … in some ways there’s almost an eagerness to… pic.twitter.com/ySM9O2G4Mr

— Jason Cohen 🇺🇸 (@JasonJournoDC) May 30, 2025

This is of course, complete bullshit, as the ratings-challenged MSM bent over backwards (and forwards) to cover up Biden’s very obvious cognitive decline until Biden himself revealed it to the world during the infamous June 2024 debate against Donald Trump. Indeed, it was more than just a stutter.

Here’s Jake Tapper incensed over Joe Biden’s “stutter” and outraged over claims of Biden’s cognitive decline.

Now he’s cashing in on a book about Biden’s cognitive decline and media cover up. There is no bottom for these people.
pic.twitter.com/rdNdqh4YKQ

— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) February 26, 2025

As Jonathan Turley noted in December, even after Special Counsel Robert Hur declined criminal charges against Biden due to his diminished state, Democratic pundits and the press covered for him, claiming that he was sharp and effective. With the debate, the public was able to see what many in the media and the White House had been hiding for years.

After interviewing roughly 50 insiders, the [Wasll Street] Journal found evidence of a knowing effort to hide Biden’s mental state. For many, Biden’s refusal to leave his home for much of the 2020 campaign was evidence of the insecurity of staff about his ability to engage with reporters. It only got worse during the term as staff virtually tackled anyone trying to ask him a question. Biden was routinely shuffled off stage after reading briefly from a teleprompter.

Todd’s comments come amid a coverup of the coverup – as the MSM has chosen to plow forward instead of introspection… Look at them jerking each other off in April;

At White House Correspondents’ Assn dinner, @WHCA President/MSNBC liberal show host @EugeneDaniels2 got long applause for: “We care deeply about accuracy and take seriously the heavy responsibility of being stewards of the public’s trust. What we are not is the opposition. What… pic.twitter.com/KoP6vbgLxm

— Brent Baker 🇺🇲🇺🇦 🇮🇱 (@BrentHBaker) April 27, 2025

Former CNN journalist (also unemployed) Chris Cillizza suggested last month that the media’s failure to cover Biden honestly was not “intentional activism.”

Hey Chris, all one of you have to do is explain how an LA Times Reporter’s question made it onto a notecard prior to her asking the President the same question almost verbatim in the Rose Garden.

We keep waiting for answers to that one, and none of you seem to want to address… pic.twitter.com/zRGdEFf0NX

— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) April 9, 2025

Also CNN:

you didnt simply not push hard enough, you denounced those who did so as partisan liars pic.twitter.com/kqSzH0RHeM

— Michael Malice (@michaelmalice) December 19, 2024

Jamie, pull up the tape of Biden’s ‘stutter’: 

As we said, you don’t hate the MSM enough… 

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

“The modern politics of division have become a banally hectoring faux morality play put on by the theater kids for the other theater kids.”

– El Gato Malo on X

While Jake Tapper leads the Mea Culpa Chorus singing Kumbaya in a minor key, absolutely nobody is fooled that the grotesque psychotic deformities of US politics can be reduced to a few White House factotums lying to the news media about “Joe Biden’s” cognitive abilities. For one thing, the news media was not lied to. The news media (including Jake) lied to the nation, consistently, flagrantly, mendaciously, for years, and most of all they lied about the gigantic racketeering operation that government had become in the age of Anything Goes and Nothing Matters.

Cases-in-point, as reported by Alex Krainer, the $93-billion barfed out of the Department of Energy between the November election and January 20 to scores of hastily-formed NGO gangs with no business model or record of competency. . . and the staggering $375 billion spread around similarly out of the EPA from a slush fund run by John Podesta (as Senior Adviser to the President for International Climate Policy and Clean Energy Innovation).

That was pure grift, you understand, and it was how the Democratic Party kept its activist troops of the so-called “marginalized” paid and happy. As it happened, the “marginalized” who dwell on the edge of society — and also just beyond the set of agreements that define reality — are out-numbered by the rest of us, who voted against the tyranny of the margin and their hallucinations. And so now, the country goes through a convulsion attempting to readjust to reality — for instance, the unhappy fact that all that money was unreal, mere bookkeeping entries by dishonest accountants.

One reality we struggle with is the doleful fact that there is no work-around for the nation’s monumental debt. Since it can’t possibly be paid off, there are two stark paths for it: default and ruinous deflation (that is, money vanishes and the nation goes broke); or a futile attempt to inflate it away with more fake money creation (you’ll have money, but it’s increasingly worthless, so you’re effectively broke). Either way, you’re broke. In the meantime, the remorseless interest that has to be paid on $36.2-trillion squeezes out everything else we’re supposed to care for as relates to the common good.

Every broke-ass family or individual person knows how debilitating money-worries can be. And since unpayable debt is the common denominator across all of Western Civ, this perhaps explains the gross, suicidal mental disorder displayed lately by leadership all across Europe, North America and Anglo-Oceania. Europe, especially, exhibits behavior that is completely cuckoo — inciting war with Russia, inviting in murderous hostiles from foreign lands, and sadistically policing their own citizens.

The exception is Mr. Trump, a businessman-outsider to government trying to pull off an escape from the deadly debt quandary. It’s probably impossible, but he is trying nonetheless. It has three main features:

1) to readjust trade relations that, in theory, would restore industrial production across the land — a bootstrapping operation to kick off “growth.”

2) to engineer a severe re-set of the money system that would effectively amount to defaulting on debt but somehow without the feature of disappearing money. At best, this would induce some kind of fall in living standards, but mostly among the small sector of financial buccaneers who thrive on swindles and the Boomers living on investment accounts (figment wealth), who are now dying off anyway — which is to say, Great Depression Lite. And

3) the least understood feature of Trumpism: to decouple the USA from the resource scarcity in the rest of the world, and the consequent strife it’s inducing, and withdraw into a sort of Fortress North America that can somehow carry-on self-sufficiently while everybody else collapses.

As big pictures go, this is a pretty wild one, stupendously ambitious, risky, and perhaps improbable. But what do Mr. Trump’s domestic opponents have to offer? To go back to their asset-stripping operation with its insane sideshow of race-and-sexual hoaxes and hustles? Let’s face it, the Democratic Party has utterly shot its wad. If it tries to start another civil war, it will have its ass handed to it. Despite all the desperate, rear-guard lawfare underway now, the party is already withdrawing into the political thickets to hide while it considers some drastic reorganization of its purpose and personnel. It may skulk there for many years, just as it did between James Buchanan (1857) and Grover Cleveland (1885).

And despite his daunting agenda, Mr. Trump at least presents a sense of confident determination to get the country righted in some fashion, to recover a sense of purpose and enterprise after years of feckless, dissipative drift into the hallucinatory madness of the Left. You must give him a chance. There is no one else right now with no other way.

Earlier this week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called for a three-way summit with Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, despite that at this moment the war is arguably hotter and more dangerous than ever, given aerial strikes between the warring sides have been escalating for many consecutive days. “If Putin is not comfortable with a bilateral meeting, or if everyone wants it to be a trilateral meeting, I don’t mind. I am ready for any format,” Zelensky had said in the middle of the week.

Zelensky said he’s ready for a “Trump-Putin-me” meeting, but simultaneously called for Washington to slap more sanctions on the Kremlin. “We are waiting for sanctions from the United States of America,” the Ukrainian leader said. And Trump’s response?… “If I think I’m close to getting a [peace] deal, I don’t wanna screw it up by doing that,” he told reporters at the White House.

Deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council and former president Dmitry Medvedev has written in a Friday Telegram post that Zelensky is merely clout-chasing in wanting the two more powerful leaders at the table.

Describing that the reason is “obvious enough” – Medvedev wrote that:

“A three-way conversation means [he] can get a massive legitimacy boost by latching onto the clout of those at the table,” the Russian official claimed. Medvedev also surmised that Zelensky could capitalize on such a meeting domestically, using it as a pretext to put off elections further and to convince Ukrainian elites that “now is not the time to change horses in midstream.”

Indeed Zelensky could be feeling greater pressure on the domestic front, especially given the ongoing deeply unpopular mobilization and recruitment policies, which has involved preventing most able-bodied men from leaving the country, and which has seen brutal efforts to grab potential recruits from off the streets. Russia has called him ‘illegitimate’ for having long ago canceled elections amid martial law.

Naturally, Moscow is not taking kindly to Zelensky simultaneously calling for yet more US sanctions on Russia, even as he calls for a three-way meeting.

“Trump confirmed that if Russia does not stop, sanctions will be imposed,” Zelensky had said in the comments which were published Wednesday. 

“We discussed two main aspects with him – energy and the banking system. Will the U.S. be able to impose sanctions on these two sectors? I would very much like that.”

Trump admin officials have meanwhile been teasing a timetable of weeks, saying the clock is ticking for Moscow to show progress in peace negotiations – the next round which is set for Monday in Istanbul – as the US president himself has warned Putin against “tapping us along”. Trump has said he is two weeks away from having an understanding if Putin is serious about peace.

Authored by Jeffrey A. Tucker via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

At some point in this century, I began to watch movies with grave trepidation. There is a good chance that somewhere in whatever film, the moment would come when the producer would send some strange political message with a barely guarded attack on some fundamental tenet of bourgeois society. They began eschewing art for hectoring.

We watch movies by choice. We pay to see them mostly. Why should we do this if the point of the movie is to sneakily attack core values and preach some strange woke creed? Stung too many times, I’m far more careful to avoid anything that seems coded with a political purpose in mind. Life is too short.

This is why I never bothered to watch the live action version of “Snow White” that came out this year. It was coded left and revisionist even in the promotion. It was met with terrible reviews, and goes down in history as one of the worst film investments ever made by Disney. It could easily have been otherwise.

The mystery to me is why Disney could not have known the result from the beginning. Why would this company spend $250 million on a sure loser? To understand, we need to explore the ways in which ideological fanaticism eats away at rationality.

Fortunately in our times, anyone can hop over to a free movie site that is ad-supported like Tubi (the third most popular service after Netflix and Amazon Prime) and have thousands of great shows and movies immediately available. It’s not all there but there are true treasures awaiting.

I vaguely recall when “On Golden Pond” came out in 1981. It was considered old-fashioned and slightly boring, an attempt to deploy two scions of Hollywood (Henry Fonda and Katharine Hepburn) in their late years toward box office success. The movie then won three Oscars and was a huge triumph. Apparently Fonda and Hepburn had never met before the film but they were just magic together.

The beauty of the film is indescribable. It is set at the classic New England lake of a New Hampshire summer cottage at the height of nature’s beauty, revealing the tender relationship of this aging couple. She is an ebullient lover of nature, games, and life, and he is a crabby retired professor with a crusty outer way but beautiful inner soul. The theme of death looms large throughout. I cannot think of a film that more authentically portrays the struggles of aging.

Their daughter is played by Jane Fonda at her prime. She arrives with a new boyfriend who is a single father of a boy of 13 who is already jaded and cynical. A relationship forms between the old man and the boy, based on various activities of summer like boating, fishing, and swimming.

The father reveals a secret that there is a big trout he calls Walter who has evaded capture for many years. They hunt this fish for weeks, catching many others along the way but not the one they want. As the movie closes, they finally do snag Walter but let him go out of respect for his size, might, and long life.

All of which recalls the huge drama of another great book made into several films: “Moby Dick” by Herman Melville. It’s one of the great American novels, oddly dreaded more than thoroughly read. Written in 1851, its tremendous fame is due to its detailed accounting of the whaling industry and culture in a time when whale oil was the resource most in demand for lighting before electricity came along.

Captain Ahab puts together a whaling expedition but with a fanatical desire to get the biggest whale of all, the one that caused him to lose a leg. The purpose of the trip is not profits but revenge, which the sailors on the boat knew but had underestimated the power of their captain’s obsession. The journey takes them as far as the South China Sea and ends with a grave lesson about the problem of single-minded obsessions untempered by concern for others and the larger context.

The reader or viewer is a fan of the Captain and his genius for as long as possible, truly hoping that he gets his wish. The lesson of the story only comes with the ending of doom, and only in reverse is it obvious that he allowed his obsession to cloud all his judgment.

The search for the fish in “On Golden Pond” is rational and sporting by comparison. Both stories are set in New England and surely the parallels here are not accidental. One shows destructive fanaticism and the other shows a tempered and loving ambition.

Both films are what my mentor Murray Rothbard called “movie movies,” meaning that they are deep, exciting, emotionally rich, wonderful and evocative to watch, and barren of hidden and manipulative attempts to browbeat or manipulate the politics of the viewer. Young people today who don’t watch older movies probably do not know the meaning of such things.

Murray did not review “On Golden Pond,” so far as I know, but I feel sure that he would have adored the film. Truly, I was taken aback by the innocence of the plot and the comfort that comes with realizing that at no point in the movie would the other shoe drop and we would be presented a lecture on the evils of normal society.

That’s true for most movies made in the 20th century before ideology came along to ruin them. We can think of identitarian politics as the equivalent of Captain Ahab’s whale, something the left has pursued with fanatical vigor even to the point of its own self-destruction. I see this operating at the New York Times, in large corporations, and in sectors of government where a single idea has swamped all rationality and even concern for the metrics of profitability.

The role of Moby Dick in this case is occupied by a malevolent vision of “white” Christian society—and the values that undergird it—as irredeemably corrupt and worthy only of being destroyed. In the past 10 years, it got so out of hand that a small but powerful coterie of writers tried to change the date of the founding of America and wage a wild war on the president who they believed to represent everything they hated.

There is truth to the observation that “Trump Derangement Syndrome” has ruined vast amounts of art, journalism, commentary, and culture. There is plenty with which to disagree in Trump’s first and second term, and nothing wrong at all making that clear. The problem comes with the single-minded obsession that pursues the whale at the expense of everything else.

The right approach is the one taken by Henry Fonda toward “Walter” the trout. There is adventure in the hunt. Politics as a normal sport is a great thing. It sharpens skills at observation, argumentation, and rhetoric. Unlike Henry who lets the fish go once it is caught, Trump’s enemies have raised the stakes to the highest-possible level, attempting to jail him and worse.

We live in changing times when woke ideology is on the ropes, banned in many sectors of society and defunded according to policy. That said, the apparatus of understanding behind the ideology will long endure in culture, deeply institutionalized in academia, professional societies, and media. It’s true for films too.

Good movies might make a comeback—and perhaps that is happening now—but if you are like me, I wait until the reviews are out and eschew anything coded left simply because I don’t want to pay to be insulted. For now, I take recourse in the beauty and luxury of the older movies without the fanaticism that has compromised so much elite culture.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Goldman energy analysts, led by Adam Wijaya, are closely tracking wildfires in Alberta, where over half a million barrels per day of crude production are at risk. 

“Good morning and happy Friday! Coming in this morning to see Brent at $64/b and WTI at $61/b… quiet on the macro front this morning for the most part, with most of the focus on (a) monitoring progression of Alberta Wildfires (number is now above 50… 28 considered out of control from 24 prior, with 19 under control),” Wijaya told clients. 

The latest data from Bloomberg shows that 29 out-of-control fires are raging 12 miles from massive oil sands well sites that produce 459,000 barrels of oil daily. 

The fires are now spreading dangerously close to major oil sands operations:

• MEG Energy’s Christina Lake site (93,000 bpd) is just 4 km from the flames; production continues, but non-essential staff have been evacuated.
• Canadian Natural Resources’ Jackfish site, with 38,000 bpd within 3 km and 83,000 bpd within 10 km of fire zones, is also at risk.

Important context: Canada is the largest foreign oil supplier to the U.S., accounting for approximately 60% of total crude imports, with the vast majority of that coming from Alberta’s oil sands.

According to a person familiar with prices, Canadian heavy crude’s discount to WTI has narrowed to $8.70/bbl, reflecting supply concerns. The discount on Thursday was $9.70/bbl. 

Fire danger remains extreme in most of Alberta but may ease in the next few days with expected cooler weather and rain. Meanwhile, high winds in Saskatchewan and Manitoba are expected to worsen fire conditions. 

Smoke is drifting into the U.S. Upper Midwest…

Lots of smoke on satellite this evening in Canada as dozens of wildfires burn out of control, particularly in Alberta where pyrocumulus clouds can be seen. Around 17,000 people are under evacuations in Manitoba and a 30 day provincial emergency has been declared in Saskatchewan. pic.twitter.com/YGAPCkKUS4

— Collin Gross (@CollinGrossWx) May 30, 2025

Any severe disruption in Alberta’s oil production will tighten North American supply, raise prices, and could force U.S. refiners to source costlier supplies elsewhere. Something to certaintly keep an eye on, as per what Goldman’s Wijaya noted, mainly because the summer driving season has kicked off. 

Authroed by Lika Kobeshavidze via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Across college campuses, on TikTok feeds, and in everyday conversations, a familiar narrative is gaining steam: capitalism is broken.

Rising rents and stagnant wages fuel the claim among some young people that free markets have failed an entire generation. According to a 2024 poll by the Institute of Economic Affairs, more than 60 percent of young Britons now view socialism favorably. In the United States, the trend is similar, with Generation Z increasingly skeptical of capitalism’s promises.

But much of this idealism is rooted in distance—many of the young people romanticizing socialism have never lived through the economic dysfunction or political repression it often brings. For those who experienced Soviet shortages, Venezuelan collapse, or East Germany’s surveillance, the word socialism doesn’t suggest fairness or opportunity—it suggests fear, failure, and control. There’s a reason so many fled those systems to come to freer countries. What sounds utopian in theory has too often turned dystopian in practice.

But blaming capitalism misses the mark. The real culprit is cronyism, the unholy alliance between big government and big business that twists markets, blocks competition, and rewards political connections over genuine innovation.

The Myth of Market Failure

Capitalism, in its true form, is based on voluntary exchange. It rewards businesses that meet people’s needs and wants, with consumers deciding what succeeds and what fails. Competition drives improvement, innovation, and lower prices. No one is forced to buy or sell anything; choice reigns.

Cronyism is a different beast altogether. In a crony system, businesses succeed not by serving customers but by lobbying politicians. Profits come through subsidies, bailouts, and regulations designed to crush competition.

The 2008 financial crisis, often cited as proof of capitalism’s failures, actually showcased what happens when markets are rigged. Reckless banks, instead of collapsing as they deserved, were bailed out with taxpayer money. Ordinary people lost jobs and homes, while the politically connected survived and thrived.

This wasn’t free enterprise. It was cronyism.

The COVID-19 pandemic provided a grim sequel. Small businesses were forced to shut their doors under government mandates. Meanwhile, corporate giants like Amazon, able to operate under looser restrictions or pivot online, soared to record profits. Policies, written in the name of public health, often privileged the biggest players while leaving Main Street devastated.

Cronyism on Both Sides of the Atlantic

Cronyism is not limited to one country or one political party. Across the United States and Europe, the symptoms are the same.

In the U.S., Canada, and the UK, the dream of homeownership slips further away for young people. Sky-high housing prices are blamed on “market failure,” but the real cause lies in layers of government-imposed barriers: restrictive zoning laws, burdensome permitting requirements, and endless bureaucratic delays. Big developers who can afford to navigate or influence the system survive. Everyone else gets locked out.

In Europe, the pattern repeats. France’s labor laws, designed to protect workers, instead stifle opportunity. Hiring becomes risky and expensive, especially for young people. Large corporations, with the resources to manage compliance costs, consolidate their dominance. Small firms and startups never get off the ground.

There’s also a persistent myth that big business fears government intervention. In reality, the largest corporations often embrace it, because it keeps them on top. Tech giants like Facebook and Google now lobby for more regulation, knowing that complex new rules will strangle smaller competitors who can’t afford fleets of compliance officers. Green energy subsidies, meant to combat climate change, often end up showering billions on well-connected firms while locking out emerging innovators.

Cronyism doesn’t reward the best ideas. It rewards the best lobbyists.

Why Gen Z’s Frustration Is Justified

Gen Z values fairness, creativity, and freedom. The very principles cronyism undermines. When political influence matters more than merit, and when success depends on government favoritism instead of consumer satisfaction, opportunity shrinks and innovation slows. But they are wrong when they think “socialism” would be a better option, not least because of the rampant cronyism that has existed in every socialist state.

The temptation to seek salvation through government power is not new. The Soviet Union began with a promise of equality and delivered oppression and scarcity (except for the party elites). Venezuela promised 21st-century socialism and delivered hunger, economic collapse, and political repression. Meanwhile, countries that embraced market freedom—even imperfectly—created unparalleled prosperity. Free markets have lifted billions out of poverty, and unleashed innovation that reshaped the modern world.

Markets aren’t flawless. But they leave the door open for anyone to succeed, not just those born into privilege or connected to power.

Aim Your Anger at the Right Target

Gen Z’s frustration is real, and it deserves an outlet. But the answer is not to tear down capitalism; it’s to tear down cronyism. A freer, fairer future depends on separating business from political power, not binding them closer together. It means ending corporate welfare, simplifying the rules of the game, and making sure that competition, not connections, decides who wins.

The fight for fairness is worth waging. But it must be aimed in the right direction. If we rage against cronyism, not capitalism, we can build a future where innovation thrives, opportunity is real, and every member of Generation Z has a genuine chance to rise.

From the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

A rare mass emergence of cicadas is underway across the eastern United States as Brood XIV—one of the largest 17-year periodical cicada broods—surfaces for the first time since 2008.

Found only in eastern North America, periodical cicadas are known for their long underground life cycles, synchronized mass emergences, and piercing mating calls, according to researchers at the University of Connecticut.

As Chase Smith reports for The Epoch Times, Brood XIV is considered a keystone brood because of its size and central role in cicada evolution.

Researchers say it may have given rise to nearly all other 17-year broods through rare timing shifts known as “four-year jumps.”

This year’s emergence spans a wide area, including parts of Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York state. Disjunct populations also exist in places like Cape Cod and Long Island, though scientists say those groups may be in decline.

University of Connecticut researchers are urging caution when interpreting sightings this year due to the presence of “stragglers,” cicadas that emerge early or late compared to their expected brood. These misaligned appearances, along with a phenomenon called “shadow brooding,” may confuse mapping efforts and lead to mistaken conclusions about the size or expansion of Brood XIV.

Accurate data is critical, researchers said, because Brood XIV plays a key role in understanding the distribution of other broods. Its interactions with adjacent broods, like Brood VI, X, and I, are still being studied, particularly in areas such as southwestern Ohio, northeastern Tennessee, and northern Kentucky.

The cicadas began appearing in April in Southern states and are expected to continue emerging through June in Northern regions as soil temperatures 7 to 8 inches below ground reach about 64 degrees Fahrenheit. Their emergence is typically triggered by warming weather. Once above ground, the insects climb nearby trees, molt into adults, mate, and die within several weeks.

Eggs hatch six to 10 weeks later, and the tiny nymphs fall to the ground to begin another 17-year cycle.

Periodical cicadas are not harmful. They do not bite, sting, or carry disease. While they may damage young saplings during egg-laying, they are not considered pests and do not require pesticide treatment. Most adults feed briefly on woody plants before dying.

Cicada densities can vary extraordinarily, the researchers stated. In some areas, estimates suggest up to one million insects per acre. This overwhelming presence is believed to protect the population from predators through a process called “predator satiation,” where animals eat their fill without impacting the entire population.

So far, citizen scientists using the iNaturalist platform have reported the most sightings in Townsend, Tennessee; across North Carolina; and in Clermont County and Miamiville, Ohio. According to project data, Townsend alone has logged 174 confirmed reports.

Scientists encourage residents in affected states to document sightings using platforms such as iNaturalist or the Cicada Safari app to aid researchers in real-time mapping. Since Brood XIV emerges only once every 17 years, this season offers a rare chance to witness one of nature’s most distinctive phenomena.

Authored by Gerry Bowler via The Epoch Times,

A single line in a royal financial account leads us into the fascinating history of Scotch whisky. On June 1, 1495, a secretary penned the following: “To Friar John Cor, by order of the King, to make aqua vitae, VIII bolls of malt.” This is the earliest mention we have of the manufacture of distilled spirits in Scotland—eight barrels of malt to make aqua vitae, “the water of life” (“usquebaugh” in Gaelic.)

The use of intoxicating beverages is as old as civilization itself; humans have been drinking beer and wine for thousands of years. These drinks were safer than local water supplies and provided valuable nutrients to men, women, and children on a daily basis. The average Englishman of the Middle Ages drank anywhere from 250 to 400 gallons of beer a year.

However, taking advantage of the powers of distillation to increase alcohol content and purify the liquor is much more recent. It seems to have developed, perhaps surprisingly, in medieval monasteries where monks who were the chemists and physicians of the day used their knowledge of herbs, fermentation, and alchemy to make useful medicines. Friar John Cor seems to have belonged to the Dominican Order. By the 15th century, these monks had mastered a complicated process of several steps to produce Scotch whisky.

First, barley—a hardy grain able to be grown in northern climates—is malted, that is steeped in water, allowed to germinate. and then dried. The grain is mashed in water, and yeast is added which ferments the sugars into ethanol.

Then, the liquid is poured into a still where it is heated. The alcohol evaporates before the water, and this vapour rises and condenses again into a liquid. It undergoes a second distillation which separates the “heart” (clean, desirable alcohol) from less desirable elements. Each distillation increases the percentage of alcohol to a very high level. The liquid is now diluted, poured into oak casks, and allowed to age for a number of years, taking on the flavour of the wood, changing colour, and becoming a more complex beverage.

The Protestant Reformation in Scotland and England destroyed the monastic system, leaving alcohol innovation and production in the hands of private individuals. Hundreds of stills were set up, serving a growing public taste for Scotch. But a complication arose when first the Scottish and then (after the Union of 1707 joined the Scots and English) the British government sought to tax the production of whisky. This created a steady demand for the product of illegal, unlicensed (and thus cheaper) distilleries that operated relatively free from official harassment, hidden in glens and sheltered by fog, remoteness, and tolerant locals in the Highlands.

Triple cask single malt Scotch whisky aged for 16 years from the Balvenie distillery in Dufftown, Scotland. Adilson Sochodolak/Shutterstock

The legal trade emerged triumphant, however, in the 19th century after the tragic Highland Clearances when lairds started evicting their tenants to make way for more profitable sheep farming. Coupled with easier government regulation of the trade, new techniques that produced a smoother whisky, and disastrous vine diseases on the Continent that cut back on the availability of wines, a class of prosperous Scottish distilleries emerged, many of which still exist today. By the late 1800s, whisky was rivalling brandy as the preferred drink of the wealthier classes around the globe.

In the 21st century, Scotch whisky is a carefully defined product that ensures high standards and distinguishes it from imitations and foreign rivals. Methods of production, ingredients, alcohol content (at least 80 proof), and aging (at least three years) are strictly controlled, and wise consumers can tell by the labelling just what they are buying.

Single malt Scotch is made from 100 percent malted barley in old-fashioned pot stills at a single distillery. This is the most expensive and prestigious variety, some costing many thousands of dollars a bottle. Single grain Scotch is made at one distillery but contains barley and other grains. Blended Scotch is a mixture of malts and other grains made from the product of different distilleries. This is the sort that is the most commonly encountered. Blended malt Scotch consists of malts from different distilleries (appealing to those who want the malty experience but don’t want to pay high-end prices), while blended grain Scotch is a mixture of grains from different distilleries.

Whisky connoisseurs have their own terminology and can rival wine snobs in their alleged ability to distinguish regional variations and describe tastes. Be prepared to hear talk of “smoky,” “peaty,” briny,” or “complex,” and listen to arguments over the virtues of Scotch from Islay, the Islands, or the Highlands.

Slàinte Mhath!

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

The first ever ASEAN-China-GCC trilateral summit earlier this week in Malaysia is even more than a cross-regional, South-South breakthrough.

The 17 nations united on the same table in Kuala Lumpur graphically demonstrated, as evoked by Malaysian Prime Minister and current ASEAN chair Anwar Ibrahim, how “from the ancient Silk Road to the vibrant maritime networks of Southeast Asia to modern trade corridors, our peoples have long connected through commerce, culture, and the sharing of ideas.”

Call it the 21st century New Silk Road spirit. And it’s no wonder China is right at its heart, via interlocked Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects – from infrastructure to trade development. China, Southeast Asia and a large part of West Asia do conform a Golden Triangle of natural resources, manufacturing and a large consumer base.

The final declaration of the Malaysia summit of course had to celebrate these “enduring and deep historical and civilizational ties”, as well as geoeconomics, in a drive to “promote economic development in the wider Asia-Pacific [note the correct terminology] and Middle East [old terminology: the correct one is ‘West Asia’].”

So it’s natural that China proposed the possibility of including the West Asian Arab nations of the GCC in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the vast 15-member trade pact that includes China and ASEAN (but not self-excluded India).

Free trade was the key theme in Kuala Lumpur – from the recently completed China-ASEAN Free Trade Area 3.0 upgrade to the upcoming China-GCC Free Trade Agreement negotiations. In contrast to Trump 2.0, the trilateral committed to “strengthen the resilience of industrial chains and supply chains”, everything geared towards long-term, tariff and sanction-free sustainable trade.

Last year, ASEAN’s total trade with China and GCC surpassed $900 billion, almost twice the $453 billion in trade with the US. And yes, trade de-dollarization is the way to go all across Asia. Right before the summit, China and Indonesia jointly announced that from now on, trade between both powerhouses is only in yuan and rupiah.

The final declaration was explicit on exploring “local currency and cross-border payment cooperation” – in tandem with promoting “high-quality BRI cooperation and seamless connectivity, including the development of logistics corridors and digital platforms”, and advancing “sustainable infrastructure construction.” The trilateral is engaged in building a web of pan-Asia connectivity corridors – the prime geoeconomic theme of the 21st century.

The trilateral had to refer to Gaza – although not as forcefully as it should. At best, the final declaration “endorses the advisory opinion rendered by the International Court of Justice on 19 July 2024, including its finding that the United Nations, in particular the General Assembly and the Security Council, which requested the advisory opinion, should consider specific modalities and further actions to bring an end to the illegal presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory as soon as possible”; and to “achieve the two-State solution based on the 1967 borders in accordance with international law.”

How East, Southeast and West Asia Connect to BRICS

East Asia, historically, is most of all a mosaic of transnational regions linked by maritime corridors. The first globalization happened – where else – in Asia, from the opening of the trans-Pacific route linking the “New World” to the Philippines in 1511 to the takeover of Malacca – the great Southeast Asian emporium – by the Portuguese in 1571.

But even before the Vasco da Gama era, East and Southeast Asia formed a relatively integrated economic zone, with ports from Malacca to Nagasaki shining as trade centers crammed with Arab, Chinese, Indian and Japanese merchants. Malacca boomed thanks to excellent infrastructure, moderate port tariffs and a sound fiscal regime: a much better deal compared to the subsequent predatory Portuguese and Dutch colonial set up, all the way to admiral Alfred Mahan conceptualizing the principles of sea power to the benefit of the thalassocratic US.

Former Singapore Foreign Minister George Yeo has clearly explained how China and South East Asia have been relieving – with spectacular success – their historic, culture and trade connections. This summit taking place in Malaysia, home of the historically crucial crossroads Malacca, is a touch of poetic justice.

Add to it Indonesia President Prabowo – a former Suharto general, and his son-in-law – effusively praising China’s firm anti-imperialist stance since 1949 and during the Cold War, right in front of Chinese Prime Minister Li Qiang. A 21stcentury parallel can be made with the legendary Spirit of Bandung in 1955, when Indonesia’s Sukarno – a leader of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) – was side by side with Zhou EnLai.

The ASEAN-China-GCC summit may be able to advance moves that the inestimable Prof. Michael Hudson deem absolutely necessary for BRICS members – and quite a few in Kuala Lumpur will be at the table at the BRICS summit in Rio in early July.

Prof. Hudson has conclusively demonstrated how landlord classes, monopolies and residues of European colonialism will have to go for BRICS nations to “achieve the same kind of take off that made England, Germany, US industrial leaders of the world.” That means to drastically “cut back payments to foreign investors concentrated on raw material rent” and to subdue “the rentier class.”

Prof. Hudson argues that when it comes to “how to free their economies – rent, creditor payments – this is what China did. China had a revolution. After the revolution it did not have a financial class. China made money creation a public utility – an arm of the Treasury; it created money to finance tangible investments in capital formation, factories, housing – a little too much – huge public infrastructure, urban transportation, high-speed rail.”

What I previously defined as “The BRICS Lab” – all those models being constantly tested, starting last year in Russia before the Kazan summit – is indeed trying to answer questions posed by Prof. Hudson in several ways: “We need to create our money. Elites should not keep benefitting from regressive taxation. How to industrialize? No more economic rent.”

The Chinese, predictably, are already at the next level of the integration business. This is their “magic weapon” to “defeat the enemy”: “The construction of the ‘dual circulation’ of the domestic and foreign markets, uniting as many living forces as possible to form a united front to deal with unilateralism. Most of the southern countries are natural allies. The feasibility of close linkage between ‘South-South cooperation’ and ‘dual circulation’ is increasing day by day.”

Jeffrey Sachs, in Kuala Lumpur, ahead of the ASEAN-China-GCC summit, succinctly nailed the New Silk Road spirit: “If you put together Japanese skill, Korean skill, Chinese skill, ASEAN skill, oh my God: no one could possibly compete (…) Diplomacy requires a table and two chairs. The military requires $1 trillion a year. Which do you think is the better deal?”

Earlier this year, the U.S. experienced one of its deadliest air mishaps in two decades.

An American Airlines passenger plane collided with a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter sending both into the Potomac River.

ℹ️ For reference: American Airlines has one of the worst track-records when it comes to crashes.

In the immediate aftermath, officials mentioned that short-staffed air traffic control towers may have played a role. This was later deemed not the cause, but air traffic control staffing shortages are plaguing 44% of all FAA regulated towers, latest data shows.

Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao maps out every single tower that is below the 2024-guideline staffing threshold (85%) per the latest available data current to September 2023, published by the FAA.

Ranked: All Short-Staffed Air Traffic Control Towers

128 of the 290 FAA-operated air traffic control towers across the country are short-staffed.

Rochester Tower, located in Minnesota has less than half the required controllers per 2024 requirements.

The table below lists all facilities by the percentage of staff filled.

Of particular interest are the short-staffed TRACONs (Terminal Radar Approach Control); these are bigger facilities that assist with landing and departure for larger areas.

In fact, these numbers are a more optimistic view of the staffing shortage. They include fully-certified controllers, those that have transferred from a different facility and getting familiar with a new environment, and those just out of academy who are picking up on-the-job skills.

If looking at just the fully certified controllers, these rates drop even further.

For reference, it takes roughly 2–3 years for an academy graduate to become fully certified.

Why is There an ATC Staffing Shortage?

There are a few interlinked reasons.

As a mentioned earlier, it’s a difficult (and long) training process, which takes a minimum of 2-3 years. The COVID-19 pandemic interrupted or paused training and now the system is playing catch-up.

The attrition rate of employees is high due to long hours and on-the-job stress. And finally, there’s a mandatory retirement age (56) which leads to a yearly employee loss.

This shortage is pushing controllers into 60-hour workweeks, in turn leading to a higher burnout rate.

Need more data related to flying? Check Out: All the Things Americans Find Unacceptable on Planes for interesting cultural insights.